WI Finland cuts the Murmansk railway in spring 1942 at Belomorsk?

This is one of the best-known what-ifs of Finnish military history, but I haven't seen a thread about it around here yet.

The background:

The Finnish Army was one of the last Axis forces to conduct offensive operations in Soviet territory in winter 1941 - in fact the Finnish forces halted after capturing Povenets on 6th of December, 1941 - coincidentally on the same day when United Kingdom officially declared war to Finland, Hungary and Romania.

On the same time Finnish HQ was considering their future options. Despite the relatively heavy casualties of the offensive phase of late summer and autumn of 1941, Finnish troops had achieved their immediate operational goals: all territories lost in the Winter War had been recaptured, and the frontlines had been pushed deep to Eastern Karelia to isthmuses between Ladoga, Onega and to Medvezegorsk and Povenets.

Initially Finnish CnC, Mannerheim, seemed rather eager for joint German-Finnish offensive operations against Murmansk Railroad. "According to his view, Murmansk, Kandalaksha, and Sorokka (Belomorsk) must be taken during the present winter - the sooner, the better. He advocated the beginning of January as the best time to launch a winter offensive."

"On 14th of December, following a staff conference at Finnish Army Headquarters, Mannerheim and Falkenhorst met at Falkenhorst's headquarters in Rovaniemi. By then, because of the railroad situation, which he described as catastrophic, Mannerheim was taking a dim view of the Kandalaksha operation--so dim, according to Falkenhorst, that he was unwilling to risk involving Finnish troops in it.


On the other hand, he maintained that the British declaration of war on Finland and the United States' entry into the war had given the Murmansk Railroad greatly increased significance, and it would have to be cut. He believed Belomorsk was the key point and proposed converging attacks from the west and southwest by combined German and Finnish forces. The OKW promptly accepted the change in the operation and offered him the 7th Mountain Division, then still expected to arrive in Finland during the winter.

Before long, however, as the Soviet winter offensive developed, Mannerheim's determination flagged again. On 20 January, General der Infanterie Waldemar Erfurth, chief of the OKW liaison staff at Finnish Army Headquarters, reported that the question of a Belomorsk operation was completely up in the air and Mannerheim would not make a positive decision unless the situation on the German front, particularly around Leningrad, improved. Erfurth could only recommend that all possible means of persuasion be brought to bear on Mannerheim. The other Finnish officers he thought were less pessimistic, but none of them had any influence.


During the following months ~27300 Finns, veterans from the fighting of Winter War and previous summer were busily preparing for the operation, along with the already famous Armored Brigade of the Finnish Army. These same units had advanced accross the lightly fortified new Soviet-Finnish border region in summer 1941 and then moved forth hundreds of kilometers in a similar terrain. They were poised to strike against these troops (Operational strength of the Soviet troops in Kotskoma Group was apprx. 12 000) - effectively giving them a force ratio of 2,3 against 1. They were planning to advance apprx. 60 kilometers to the shores of the White Sea, thus severing the northern line of the Murmansk Railway.

German units in Lappland were willing to participate with a paraller offensive against Kandalakasha to tie down Soviet troops, that were otherwisely committed to battles further south in any case. The chances to capture Belomorsk and severe the Murmansk Railway were better than ever, and greater part of the troops were already in readiness.

On March, however, the US began to exert diplomatic pressure on the Finns to have them reach an agreement with the Soviets or at least refrain from attacking the Murmansk Railroad. In late October and early November 1941 the American embassy in Helsinki had passed on a peace feeler from the Soviet Union, accompanied by a warning of the dire consequences for US-Finnish relations if the Murmansk Railroad was attacked from territories under Finnish control.

The pressure on Finland came at a time when the Finns and Germans were deeply involved in discussions about the offensive against the Soviets in Kandalaksha (Kantalahti) and Sorokka (Belomorsk), and undoubtedly influenced the outcome of these negotiations. Most likely the discussions may have been leaked to Swedish intelligence, that in turn informed the US.

The US basically told Finnish government that if Finland moved against the Murmansk Railway, an official DOW would follow. This information divided the Finnish leadership: Some, like Mannerheim, considered Western goodwill vital for the survival of Finland. Others felt that it would in effect only bring another name to the already long list of countries in the upcoming peace conference.

POD: On late December, Mannerheim nearly sufocates on a fish bone after eating zander, his favourite dish. While his life is saved he is bedridden and unconscious, and chances of recovery are dim, but the matter is hidden from public knowledge due the huge symbolic importance that the old Marshal has for the morale of Finnish war effort.

General Aalto, the Chief of the Operational Department of Finnish HQ, takes over the leadership of the war he has in effect planned and led from the beginning, even though Mannerheim has had the final say to all strategic decisions.

As in OTL, the matter of attacking towards Belomorsk is presented to President Ryti, who leaves the issue to be decided by the military.
The OTL plan was to seize Belomorsk and give the task of defending the area to the recently reorganized German
XXXVI Gebirgskorps. Aalto decides to give it a go, and the offensive begins in first days of March 1942.

Now, what happens next?


Given that the Finns had numbers that had enabled them to conduct more difficult offensives in equal terrain against equally strong Red Army opposition, the actual chances for success were good, especially since Germans were eager to support by a feint against Kandalaksha. So, let's for the sake of argument assume that by late March 1942, the Murmansk Railway is severed.

What are the short- and long-term effects to the amount of Lend-Lease Aid reaching Soviet lines, the Soviet strategic planning and late-war operations in Eastern Karelia and Finland proper?


* http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/USA-EF-Decision/USA-EF-Decision-11.html#fn10
 
Last edited:
Winter Convoys go through Persia while the Soviets struggle to reopen the link, or the Supplies going to Murmansk actually get used to reopen it.
 
Arkhangelsk is another option for the Allies to get supplies to the Soviets via the Northern route.
 
Arkhangelsk was the summer port of call, Murmansk was the winter one, so this probably doesn't make a whole lot of difference to nearing September/October anyway.
 
The port of Arkhangelsk didin't really have similar facilities and cargo capacity until about a year later, when the war-era expansions were completed.
 
I am assuming that if the rail line is cut, that Murmansk will fall soon because supply is difficult, especially in Winter. Unsure if the Allies would try Lend Lease in the summer to Archangel if Murmansk was German controlled. I would think not in 1942 anyway.

The German lap land army would thus be free to move south making any attempt at the Soviets reopening the rail line and port difficult.

In any case:
The Battle of the Barents Sea is avoided in December of 42, thus Hitler's scrap the fleet order never happens.

The Battle of North Cape in December 1943 resulting in the loss of the Sharnhorst is avoided.

Lend_lease impact is minimal since it was stop and go in 1942 anyway and the PQ17 loss would be avoided, it would be a small percentage loss only, mostly in the later years anyway.

So Finland will be forced to change sides as in OTL but maybe a month or two later, perhaps with loss of American diplomatic support offset by a better military situation up north meaning the Finns have about as much leverage OTL to secure a reasonable peace.
 
Uh, since Murmansk was one of the port Lend-Lease came through (and the winter one at that), it isn't going to be that hard to keep going, albeit it will be keeping going mostly with Western supplies.
 
Uh, since Murmansk was one of the port Lend-Lease came through (and the winter one at that), it isn't going to be that hard to keep going, albeit it will be keeping going mostly with Western supplies.

Yeah I was wondering about that too (if the Allies could just supply the port directly). But that supply was pretty irregular in 1942 (PQ17 disaster and the stoppages because of that) and would what gets through be able to supply a whole army like that????

Also wondering if you could sled / ice road across a certain amount of supplies across a frozen white sea.

Also wondering if all this could trigger an Operation Jupiter Allied Invasion of Northern Norway to try and restore the situation and intimidate the Finns into taking a more proper tact.
 
Yeah I was wondering about that too (if the Allies could just supply the port directly). But that supply was pretty irregular in 1942 (PQ17 disaster and the stoppages because of that) and would what gets through be able to supply a whole army like that????

Also wondering if you could sled / ice road across a certain amount of supplies across a frozen white sea.

Naval ice is treacherous - the Road of Life accross Laatokka was another case, as the latter is a lake. Would the Soviet White Sea Fleet be able to ferry enough supplies to keep the now-encircled defenders of Kola Peninsula fully supplied is an interesting question - they did have ships in international waters and even ferrying and accompanying parts of the L&L stuff, so by using all available vessels that might be doable - the area is really sparely populated, and usable civilians could be ferried out, Sevastopol-style. But on a short-term effect the Germans might be able to push to Kandalaksha as well during the the time when the White Sea ice hampers possible supply convoys.

It is unlikely that the Finns would push for new offensives after capturing Belomorsk - the army was tired and in a need of reorganization as the men of the oldest age classes were desperately needed in the service of struggling Finnish economy. Now they have, however, essentially secured the "Three Isthmuses" borders from White Sea to Onega, from Onega along the Svir to Ladoga and from Ladoga to Gulf of Finland. It's the most narrow and geographically optimal line in Fennoscandia to defend.

Meanwhile Stavka will certainly launch counterattacks against Belomorsk - or would they? If Kandalaksha falls as well in the winter time and Fall Blau draws their reserves to Ukraine and Caucasus, Germans will have ample time to either prepare solid defensive lines or keep pushing towards Murmansk. My money is on the latter option.
 
Also wondering if all this could trigger an Operation Jupiter Allied Invasion of Northern Norway to try and restore the situation and intimidate the Finns into taking a more proper tact.

They would have to go through neutral Sweden. This would threaten to gray the war so badly, it would be like driving at Germany from Italy through Switzerland.

Do you really want students at VMI-VTI, Clemson, The Citadel, Alabama Polytechnic Institute, and Texas A&M to put on bedsheets, hold hands, and sing, "give peace a chance (in Europe)?"
 
They would have to go through neutral Sweden. This would threaten to gray the war so badly, it would be like driving at Germany from Italy through Switzerland.

Do you really want students at VMI-VTI, Clemson, The Citadel, Alabama Polytechnic Institute, and Texas A&M to put on bedsheets, hold hands, and sing, "give peace a chance (in Europe)?"

This isn't 1967. The country was thirsting for blood and was under an extremely effect propaganda program, with the media fully participating. If Sweden has to have its neutrality violated, then so be it. As far people would be concerned, they brought it on themselves for supplying Hitler with iron ore and and not supporting the Allies.
 
Given the Murmansk supplies to the USSR were more of a symbolic gesture than actually vital to the Soviet war effort this would not be as bad on a strictly logistical basis as it seems. The real bases for Soviet supplies were the Pacific and Iran in that order. And in the Pacific that was due to Japanese neutrality which is not going to alter no matter what Germany or Finland do.
 

Daffy Duck

Banned
Comment

If the Finns just cut the railway in 1942, not too much is going to happen, in my opinion.

The most impact from cutting the railway would be felt in 1941, not 1942.

Had the Finns gone balls-to-wall (along with Sweden possibly) from the get-go, Leningrad, Murmansk and Arhangelsk fall without a doubt. If that happens, the Germans have a much better chance of getting into Moscow before Winter.

Will it be a war-winner...no
 
If the Finns just cut the railway in 1942, not too much is going to happen, in my opinion.

The most impact from cutting the railway would be felt in 1941, not 1942.
Will it be a war-winner...no

So no major butterflies from an operation that is conducted just when the US has really begun to ferry supplies to USSR, and the route that is used to bring in one-fifth of them is partially cut off in spring 1942, before Fall Blau has begun? Ok.

Well, the purpose of this thread is merely to debate the impacts of this POD. No one is claiming it would win the war in the East for the Nazis, that is for sure.

Given the Murmansk supplies to the USSR were more of a symbolic gesture than actually vital to the Soviet war effort this would not be as bad on a strictly logistical basis as it seems. The real bases for Soviet supplies were the Pacific and Iran in that order. And in the Pacific that was due to Japanese neutrality which is not going to alter no matter what Germany or Finland do.

Well, considering the scale of the Eastern Front, the 22.7 percent of the total supplies of whole Lend-Lease aid to USSR that was received via the Artic convoys were indeed merely a "symbolic gesture" - albeit one weighting 4.43 million tons. :rolleyes:

It is true that the routes you mentioned can more than make up the loss of Murmansk route - in time. But what would happen before that, during the summer 1942?
 
So no major butterflies from an operation that is conducted just when the US has really begun to ferry supplies to USSR, and the route that is used to bring in one-fifth of them is partially cut off in spring 1942, before Fall Blau has begun? Ok.

Well, the purpose of this thread is merely to debate the impacts of this POD. No one is claiming it would win the war in the East for the Nazis, that is for sure.

Yes, as the Soviets won their battles in 1942 before Lend-Lease affected it one way or the other. Thus my point *is* about the impact of the OP: there isn't one.

Well, considering the scale of the Eastern Front, the 22.7 percent of the total supplies of whole Lend-Lease aid to USSR that was received via the Artic convoys were indeed merely a "symbolic gesture" - albeit one weighting 4.43 million tons. :rolleyes:

It is true that the routes you mentioned can more than make up the loss of Murmansk route - in time. But what would happen before that, during the summer 1942?

Again, actually, yes it is.

Nothing, as Operation Blue was doomed before it started for the same reasons Barbarossa was: too few troops taking too much territory pitted against too many troops.
 
Yes, as the Soviets won their battles in 1942 before Lend-Lease affected it one way or the other. Thus my point *is* about the impact of the OP: there isn't one.

So the German armies in Lappland will just sit along idly even if they finally now have wider area and better roads (even a railway line) to use for advance against Murmansk? The Soviets won't divert troops from other operations conducted in OTL to reopen the railway? Finns will still fortify their positions and position their troops with same faulty priourities as in OTL (most efforts to Eastern Karelia, only neglible fortifications to Karelian Isthmus?)

For better or worse, I'd still argue that it would certainly have a noticeable local impact at least. And for the record: the sole area where Lend-Lease Aid really had a noticeable impact in Eastern Front was the operational mobility of late-war RKKA, and this POD would do nothing to change that.
 
So the German armies in Lappland will just sit along idly even if they finally now have wider area and better roads (even a railway line) to use for advance against Murmansk? The Soviets won't divert troops from other operations conducted in OTL to reopen the railway? Finns will still fortify their positions and position their troops with same faulty priourities as in OTL (most efforts to Eastern Karelia, only neglible fortifications to Karelian Isthmus?)

For better or worse, I'd still argue that it would certainly have a noticeable local impact at least. And for the record: the sole area where Lend-Lease Aid really had a noticeable impact in Eastern Front was the operational mobility of late-war RKKA, and this POD would do nothing to change that.

Yes, they will sit idly because they didn't do anything IOTL, and they won't here, either. I agree with you on the last point, but I'm noting that the question of impact of Lend-Lease that barely even made it onto Soviet territory to start with is that there isn't any. PQ-17 was the standard order of the day in 1942 in the Arctic as it is.
 
Yes, they will sit idly because they didn't do anything IOTL, and they won't here, either.

Considering how disappointed Hitler was on the attitude of Finnish HQ after 1941 on OTL, I'd imagine he would consider the changed situation in Kola Peninsula as a chance to at least try something - Jodl, who is the local commander here, would certainly agree with him, being a proper Nazi that he was. It would almost certainly leave Germans even worse off and sap their Lappland troops of the strength that they conserved by staying on static defensive in OTL, but a negative change is a change nevertheless.

Then again I'm completely fine if you remain adamant in your opinion that nothing would change even locally - in that case I happily agree to disagree without further comment :D
 
Considering how disappointed Hitler was on the attitude of Finnish HQ after 1941 on OTL, I'd imagine he would consider the changed situation in Kola Peninsula as a chance to at least try something - Jodl, who is the local commander here, would certainly agree with him, being a proper Nazi that he was. It would almost certainly leave Germans even worse off and sap their Lappland troops of the strength that they conserved by staying on static defensive in OTL, but a negative change is a change nevertheless.

Then again I'm completely fine if you remain adamant in your opinion that nothing would change even locally - in that case I happily agree to disagree without further comment :D

Which I disagree with because Germany in 1942 hasn't the manpower to spend that far north while simultaneously planning Nordlicht and Blau.
 
Which I disagree with because Germany in 1942 hasn't the manpower to spend that far north while simultaneously planning Nordlicht and Blau.

Another possibility that comes to mind is that the Soviets might react to the loss of their northern rail link by allowing the encircled 2nd Shock Army to break out from encirclement earlier than May. Would Vlasov still defect in such circumstances?
 
Top