Effect of a United Scandinavia

Presuming Denmark, Norway, and Sweden merge into one country circa 1865, what impact could it have on Europe and the world afterwards?
 
Presuming Denmark, Norway, and Sweden merge into one country circa 1865, what impact could it have on Europe and the world afterwards?
It wouldn't be a great power by any practical means, the population just isn't there (9,784,400 in 1900). However it could have a disproportionately large impact on German policy, as it would be large enough to not be reduced to the status of de-facto German protectorate, meaning German planners will have to always consider Scandinavian Revanchism as a threat just as real as French Revanchism. Perhaps, flanked on three sides, Germany's policies are a bit more centred on the home front with less wasted on colonialism map painting ventures. Alternatively the necessity to be capable of seizing the Danish Straits, could lead to a more aggressive naval expansion, which would put Britain in the French camp quicker.

It would also likely retain the Danish West Indies at least until decolonization, barring any sort of war where they are likely to be seized.
 
They probably get the eastern half of the Gold Coast during the Scramble for Africa, as well as the Nicobar Islands, and likely never sell the Danish West Indies to the US or sell St. Barts to France. This is probably more than enough colonial empire to administer, so I doubt they'll go for much further expansion, outside of maybe a Pacific island or two.

Aside from the Scandinavian Gold Coast, all of these colonies can likely be retained even despite decolonisation in a manner similar to the Netherlands and their possessions in the Caribbean. Although Nicobar (and the Danish enclaves in British India) might join India like French India did.
 
It wouldn't be a great power by any practical means, the population just isn't there (9,784,400 in 1900). However it could have a disproportionately large impact on German policy, as it would be large enough to not be reduced to the status of de-facto German protectorate, meaning German planners will have to always consider Scandinavian Revanchism as a threat just as real as French Revanchism. Perhaps, flanked on three sides, Germany's policies are a bit more centred on the home front with less wasted on colonialism map painting ventures. Alternatively the necessity to be capable of seizing the Danish Straits, could lead to a more aggressive naval expansion, which would put Britain in the French camp quicker.

It would also likely retain the Danish West Indies at least until decolonization, barring any sort of war where they are likely to be seized.

The German government in and of itself spent piddily squat (relative to its contemporaries) on the colonization game: most of its Empire it acquired either at bargin basement prices because nobody else was interested in it or, in the case of their one moderately developed/major colony (German East Africa), because the private Society for German Colonization essentially presented Berlin with an ultimatum. Certainly, though, the security of Kiel would come into question if relations between the new Scandinavia and the German polity are sour rather than friendly (Remember, the POD is 1865; the German Empire isen't a thing yet). Personally, I think the two would feel a sense of kinship and Prussia would actually try to ally or at least work out a co-operative relationship with the new country due to economic interests and allow for free use of the Straits, negating the need to build a Kiel Canal.

A bigger impact is likely to be seen on Russia and Britain, as Scandinavia now has sufficient economic and military power potential to make trying to sway her to their side in their ongoing rivalry worth it in terms of which such an alliance/friendship could bring to regional issues and the broader balance of naval power. A British-aligned Scandinavia locks down Russia as a naval threat just as much as a Russian-aligned Scandinavia dramatically expands her power projection potential during the prime decades of Russian ascendancy
 
The German government in and of itself spent piddily squat (relative to its contemporaries) on the colonization game: most of its Empire it acquired either at bargin basement prices because nobody else was interested in it or, in the case of their one moderately developed/major colony (German East Africa), because the private Society for German Colonization essentially presented Berlin with an ultimatum.
The German government didn't spend much on the colonies themselves, but they did have to spend quite a bit on maintaining large a military presence in their colonies.

Certainly, though, the security of Kiel would come into question if relations between the new Scandinavia and the German polity are sour rather than friendly (Remember, the POD is 1865; the German Empire isen't a thing yet).
After 1865 a united German polity is inevitable, all that matters are some details regarding the whos and whens. Whatever the outcome, it's going to be a polity that occupies majority Danish territory. If the Scandinavians feel enough kinship to unify they feel enough kinship to openly bear a grudge.

Personally, I think the two would feel a sense of kinship
Yeah they both have Danish majority areas within their borders, that's something in common. Unless the Germans cede South Jutland the two probably won't get along.

and Prussia would actually try to ally or at least work out a co-operative relationship with the new country due to economic interests and allow for free use of the Straits, negating the need to build a Kiel Canal.
As I mentioned in my post, OTL's Denmark was already a de-facto protectorate of Germany. They built the canal anyways.

A bigger impact is likely to be seen on Russia and Britain, as Scandinavia now has sufficient economic and military power potential to make trying to sway her to their side in their ongoing rivalry worth it in terms of which such an alliance/friendship could bring to regional issues and the broader balance of naval power. A British-aligned Scandinavia locks down Russia as a naval threat just as much as a Russian-aligned Scandinavia dramatically expands her power projection potential during the prime decades of Russian ascendancy
That's an interesting aspect. Could a Russia aligned Scandinavia drive Britain to the German party? (assuming the Dreikaiserbund still breaks down as per OTL)
 
They probably get the eastern half of the Gold Coast during the Scramble for Africa, as well as the Nicobar Islands, and likely never sell the Danish West Indies to the US or sell St. Barts to France. This is probably more than enough colonial empire to administer, so I doubt they'll go for much further expansion, outside of maybe a Pacific island or two.

Aside from the Scandinavian Gold Coast, all of these colonies can likely be retained even despite decolonisation in a manner similar to the Netherlands and their possessions in the Caribbean. Although Nicobar (and the Danish enclaves in British India) might join India like French India did.
I believe that Denmark already sold Danish India and the Danish Golcoast before 1856. I think they might still sell the Nicobar islands, but I agree that they probably would keep the Danish and Swedish Carribean colonies.
 
If United Scandinavia got into the colonization game in any way at all, this is likely to redirect the rather large emigrant flow that OTL went to the US. The Gold Coast is not a good fit on climate though. Any idea on how they could end up with something they are more fit for?
 
If Scandinavia fights Russia in a Great War and wins, then how much might Scandinavia gain? Finland is a given (although at that point the Finns won't actually want that since it's just reimposing Swedish rule), but would they go for Estonia and Latvia too? It is former Danish/Swedish land, after all, and IIRC there actually were people as late as the 20th century who wanted to reinstate Swedish rule there. Estonia also has a Swedish minority too.

I believe that Denmark already sold Danish India and the Danish Golcoast before 1856. I think they might still sell the Nicobar islands, but I agree that they probably would keep the Danish and Swedish Carribean colonies.

I misread the OP if our POD is 1865.
 
Making the Baltic a Scandinavian lake and shutting Russia out of ice-free ports north of the black sea would be interesting too. Might see something on the shores of the White Sea as well.
 
1865 is too late. The Second Schleswig War had effectively ended the Scandinavianist movement as the Swedes opted out of helping Denmark in a clearly lost cause against the Prussians and Austrians. Consequently, there was a certain degree of animosity towards Stockholm in Denmark after the war.

Apparently Charles XV of Sweden and Frederick VII of Denmark had reached an agreement shortly before the latter's death about Charles succeeding to the Danish throne in place of the designated heir Christian of Glücksburg (who had been chosen in 1852 through the mediation of the great powers). Christian was to made king of Holstein as a sort of consolation prize. However, it didn't come to pass since the Swedish government was divided on the issue.

Let's say Stockholm agrees to letting Charles XV become union king of Denmark, Holstein is made an independent kingdom under the Glücksburgs and the southern border of Denmark/Scandinavia is fixed on the Eider. This might still lead to war with the German states, as any division of the two duchies would be a break of the London Protocol of 1852, but it would mean a restored dynastic union of the Scandinavian countries. I have no idea how plausible a Swedish succession would be, given the domestic political situation in Denmark at the time, but it's my best bet for a united Scandinavia with a ca. 1865 POD.
 
I would have assumed an 1865 merging of Denmark and Sweden-Norway would have been based around a POD in the Second Schleswig War. Christian XV had made promises regarding Sweden's aid. Not smart, but even a failed attempt to aid Denmark could have an effect. Or maybe the POD was actually like 1859, in that Christian XV started preparing the Swedish military for the Second Schleswig War from the beginning of his reign. However that would both affect the German Confederacy's views regarding the war if Sweden looked to be preparing to reinforce Denmark, but also likely force concessions on Denmark's side. Sweden would probably demand any buildup they undergo to be proportionally matched by Denmark, but Sweden also didn't want to get involved in a conflict with Germany in trying to keep Danish control of Holstein and the German parts of Schleswig. I'd assume any Swedish commitments to war would be accompanied by demands for Denmark to willingly give up Holstein alongside the German majority parts of Schleswig. Something like 'Sweden will fight for Scandinavia. Not Denmark's German fiefs.' This would be important as the Germans took even the ethnically Danish parts of Schleswig while promising to have plebiscites on whether they wanted to be part of Germany or Denmark, but never did it as the Austro-Prussian War really rewrote German policy. If Sweden either reinforced the Dannevirk or simply bailed Denmark out of trouble later while offering a peace that Holstein goes to Germany while plebiscites are held throughout Schleswig afterwards to decide the border between Denmark and Germany, it could have ended the war earlier or more amiably for nationals on both sides.

I didn't actually know there was any talk of Charles succeeding Frederick. Although not so sure how that would have turned out. Denmark and Sweden still followed Salic Law, and Charles only had a single surviving daughter. Meanwhile his brother, Oscar II, had married a German lady, not exactly a great marriage for the sole monarch of a united Scandinavia in this time of nationalism and scandinavianism. However Charles' daughter, Louise, had married Christian IX's heir, Frederick. They become King and Queen of the United Kingdom of Scandinavia, Christian IX willingly demotes to Grand Duke of Denmark, Oscar II becomes Grand Duke of Sweden, and Louise and Frederick's second son is to be named Grand Duke of Denmark while their first becomes king. Their third could then one day become Grand Duke of Norway.

Ah, who cares about that. Monarchs didn't exactly matter by that time anyways. Plus, I don't know enough about their succession laws, public opinion on pan-Scandinavianism, nor how even those supporters of Scandinavianism likely envisioned a political union playing out to make an accurate guess.

The devil is in the details, regarding the exact POD, the Second Schleswig War, and the exact political specifics of a united Scandinavia. Some general thoughts though. If Germany still claimed all of Schleswig, so a POD that doesn't alter the Second Schleswig War (maybe Christian IX's offer to join the German Confederacy if it could keep Schleswig and Holstein is leaked, and the people overthrow him and offer the throne to Charles XV) a united Scandinvia would be in a much better position to 'convince' Gemany to hold the plebiscites or Germany might face a revanchist Scandinavia for those areas of Schleswig dominated by Danes. You'd likely see a lot more militarization of the border with Germany. Denmark didn't want to serve as the southern watchdog of Scandinavia, for good reason, but a united Scandinavia would as a matter of course feel it necessary to build up their land border with the continent with soldiers from all over. Maybe their own Maginot Line as the new Dannevirk on the border. Otherwise I'd imagine such a state would adopt Sweden's armed neutrality, as it is right in the middle of three Great Powers in Germany, Russia, and Britain. I'd say it might lean a bit towards Britain though. Germany could at least be perceived as being manageable if they build up the land border enough. Meanwhile Scandinavia would have a better chance of matching Russia or Germany in naval matters in the Baltic than they would of matching Britain anywhere else. So a friendly relationship with Britain would hopefully allow them to use the high seas, considering the size of the Norwegian merchant navy by WWII a united Scandinavia could do even better. A neutral Scandinavia with its resources and a massive merchant navy could start to serve as the resource rich region it later became much earlier.

I don't think it could achieve much in colonization though. Too late. There's really no where it could get that would be nice enough allow it to redirect the flow of emigrants from America, so its efforts would be better spent on solving the problems at home that are the direct cause of the emigration.

As for any alt-World Wars. Scandinavia wouldn't be a Great Power, even if it followed a policy of Armed Neutrality, but it would probably be far more likely for Great Powers to try to entice it. Its strategic position and even limited strength could make a difference. An alliance with Germany would weaken any blockade of Germany, and their combined fleets would be better placed to challenge the Royal Navy. An alliance with Britain or Russia would tighten any blockade, and also create an extra front against Germany...Though actually a revanchist Scandinavia biting at the bit against Germany would actually be interesting, since most later Scandinavian Alliance stuff almost always have them adopt the neutrality they generally displayed by this point. A union greatly changing that would be an interesting divergence., if an unlikely one.
 
(maybe Christian IX's offer to join the German Confederacy if it could keep Schleswig and Holstein is leaked, and the people overthrow him and offer the throne to Charles XV)

This might just as well lead to a republican revolt

Otherwise I'd imagine such a state would adopt Sweden's armed neutrality, as it is right in the middle of three Great Powers in Germany, Russia, and Britain. I'd say it might lean a bit towards Britain though.

There are few (if any) outstanding issues between Scandinavia and Britain, while they dislike (... although that kinda covers it as a g-string on a hippo) Prussia and Russia considering land they conquered to be core territory. No contest, specially if Britain believes that they have to give more than empty platitudes

considering the size of the Norwegian merchant navy by WWII a united Scandinavia could do even better. A neutral Scandinavia with its resources and a massive merchant navy could start to serve as the resource rich region it later became much earlier.

Scandinavia have, since the Viking ages petered out, (collectively) been one of the strongest naval nations, with the main reason why they weren't considered top tier, was that they simply didn't have enough population to support a bigger navy than what they did. It could easily be argued that they were the best of the rest, only behind the great naval powers (and maybe even able to fight some of the great powers to a draw, specially if in shallow waters (such as Baltics)
 
I don't think even a united Scandinavia would force the issue of northern Schleswig. Going to war over it seems really unlikely.
 
This might just as well lead to a republican revolt
Maybe a federal government then. Denmark is ruled by a republican government, with Charles simply becoming King of Scandinavia. Didn't the German Empire have both monarchial and republican governments under the Emperor?
I don't think even a united Scandinavia would force the issue of northern Schleswig. Going to war over it seems really unlikely.
Maybe not. Very likely not by themselves, especially if Sweden did become the unofficial hegemon. However especially later there are times when Germany really wouldn't want Scandinavia having even a pretext of nationalistic pretext to start a war. Like when Germany is right on the edge of war with France, Britain, Austria, and/or Russia. Or if a World War I scenario still develops, Germany really doesn't want a northern front being opened. Even if Scandinavia requires all that to come in, it is still a risk. Arguably safer to just have the Emperor of the time play at benevolence, a move to 'foster friendship with our northern neighbors'.

After all, they did promise to hold the plebiscite throughout Schleswig at the end of the Second Schleswig War. They just never did. Those plebiscite over half a century later resulted in Northern Schleswig voting 75% to rejoin Denmark. Doesn't cost Germany a lot to do it when it is going through a nationalistic unification itself. It just never had enough push to bother with Denmark all but demilitarizing and Sweden-Norway unconcerned. Here there might be.
 
Top