Is it possible for Sweden to join WWII?

Heya, I've ben stalking here for a long while and just decided to make an account.
One of the things I am wondering is if Sweden could somehow join, wither on the Axis or Allies?
 
Sure, lots of ways. Here are some possibilites with a PoD after 1939, but if you go back earlier there's obviously more.

If Finland is more completely defeated in the Winter War, then Sweden is more likely to drift to the Axis.

If Sweden had denied Germany access to Norway, or even delayed giving them it, they would likely invade.

If Britain's intervention in Norway had gone better they would have tried to seize Sweden's mines in the north, which surely would prompt a German counter-invasion, at that point Sweden would have to pick a side.

The Lappland war could have spilled over into Sweden, prompting them to declare war on the collapsing third reich.

If we go back even longer, then it would be totally possible for Sweden to have a revolution, civil war, or both around the end of WW1, it came closer than most people give credit for in otl. If so, then Sweden may emerge as a socialist state, or an unstable republic vulnerable to coups of exteme ideologies, which could set Sweden up for entrance into the war. Also, if the Reds win the Finnish civil war, then Sweden will either border the USSR or a client state of it, and may be dragged into the war that way.
 
Sure, lots of ways. Here are some possibilites with a PoD after 1939, but if you go back earlier there's obviously more.

If Finland is more completely defeated in the Winter War, then Sweden is more likely to drift to the Axis.

If Sweden had denied Germany access to Norway, or even delayed giving them it, they would likely invade.

If Britain's intervention in Norway had gone better they would have tried to seize Sweden's mines in the north, which surely would prompt a German counter-invasion, at that point Sweden would have to pick a side.

The Lappland war could have spilled over into Sweden, prompting them to declare war on the collapsing third reich.

If we go back even longer, then it would be totally possible for Sweden to have a revolution, civil war, or both around the end of WW1, it came closer than most people give credit for in otl. If so, then Sweden may emerge as a socialist state, or an unstable republic vulnerable to coups of exteme ideologies, which could set Sweden up for entrance into the war. Also, if the Reds win the Finnish civil war, then Sweden will either border the USSR or a client state of it, and may be dragged into the war that way.
I didn't know they where close, kinda wanna read more about it.
 
The Lappland war could have spilled over into Sweden, prompting them to declare war on the collapsing third reich.

This is unlikely. The Germans were executing a planned withdrawal. Neither the Germans nor the Finns have a reason to drag Sweden into it.

Also, if the Reds win the Finnish civil war, then Sweden will either border the USSR or a client state of it, and may be dragged into the war that way.

If the Reds win the Finnish civil war, it is quite likely that we won't see WWII as we know it due to the butterflies.
 
if they did and Germany invaded, it wouldn't turn out well for the Danish Jews who were evacuated there :(
 

Coulsdon Eagle

Monthly Donor
Sweden was thought to have a plan to invade / liberate Norway & Denmark if the Germans visited atrocities on the locals during a scorched-earth retreat in 1945.
 
If Churchill had gotten his way with a major invasion of Norway (after the US enters the war) and this had been successful and driven the German out then Sweden might have joined the Allies.
 
my understanding the quick failure of Iraqi coup and the subsequent eviction of the Vichy regime from Syria-Lebanon made a big impression on Turkey insofar as joining the war.

certainly the seesaw fortunes in the Winter War and later invasion of Denmark-Norway convinced Sweden to remain neutral in virtually any circumstance?

recall a quote from von Rundstedt, advocating seizing Odessa-Lake Illmen-Leningrad line, to "eliminate the Red fleet from the Baltic and enhance their political influence over Scandinavia" (cannot locate a written source for that? was featured in a documentary)

until Germany invades East, any Allied actions to relieve Finland, defend Norway could bring in their putative partner the USSR? and after the invasion Germany never "secured" the Northern Front, so joining the Axis side looks dubious too?
 
The only thing I could see is a timeline where Germany does not invade Norway so Sweden ends up supporting Finland in their fight against the USSR.

The problem for Sweden in our timeline was that both the Axis and the allies were against their interests. Russia invaded their soulmate Finland and Germany invaded Denmark and Norway.
 
Why would they? By remaining neutral they could trade with both sides. As long as they maintained the balancing act they were better off. What benefit would they gain by joining either side?
 
Heya, I've ben stalking here for a long while and just decided to make an account.
One of the things I am wondering is if Sweden could somehow join, wither on the Axis or Allies?
Of course they could, in exactly the same way as Norway, Denmark, Iceland, the Faroe Islands, Greenland, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Belgium and probably a bunch more neutral countries joined WW2.

Namely another country with a bigger military decides that them being neutral is an inconvenience and attacks them.

Come to think of it Poland, Greece, Yugoslavia, China and IIRC Thailand were all attacked so they were presumably neutral up until that point? Albania not sure if it counts as an Italian vassal or not? USSR is sort of blurry depending on whether you count it’s WW2 from attacking neutral. Finland/Poland or being a “neutral” attacked by Germany. USA likes to claim it was neutral until it was dragged in by Japan, Icelanders and Greenlanders may disagree (as would the kriegsmarine, but fuck those guys). Czechoslovakia was chopped up before WW2 even started.

So certainly the swedes could end up being forced to “join” a side, if they were unlucky.
 
Of course they could, in exactly the same way as Norway, Denmark, Iceland, the Faroe Islands, Greenland, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Belgium and probably a bunch more neutral countries joined WW2.

Namely another country with a bigger military decides that them being neutral is an inconvenience and attacks them.

Come to think of it Poland, Greece, Yugoslavia, China and IIRC Thailand were all attacked so they were presumably neutral up until that point? Albania not sure if it counts as an Italian vassal or not? USSR is sort of blurry depending on whether you count it’s WW2 from attacking neutral. Finland/Poland or being a “neutral” attacked by Germany. USA likes to claim it was neutral until it was dragged in by Japan, Icelanders and Greenlanders may disagree (as would the kriegsmarine, but fuck those guys). Czechoslovakia was chopped up before WW2 even started.

So certainly the swedes could end up being forced to “join” a side, if they were unlucky.
Which side would be more likely
 
Which side would be more likely
Flip a coin? It’s an extension of the (lack of) thinking that led to the Norway situation. The western allies were keen to send troops into Sweden to fight the invading Germans, that would be invading to prevent the allies seizing the place. The Germans were pondering sending troops in to prevent the allies seizing the place to deny them iron ore and/or access to Norway.
So whoever jumps in first, likely Sweden ends up at least notionally on the opposite side. Given a choice I suspect their preference would have been for the western allies but if the FrancoPoloBritish forces had started forcing their way across the Norwegian border I’m sure they would have received a hostile welcome. How much help the Germans would have been asked for then would depend on circumstances, I guess.
 
Maybe have the Ango/French landing at Narvik go better with the Allies holding onto Narvik and much of Northern Norway with the German ability to land troops in the North sea being heavily winnowed. With the Germans being unable to use Narvik's ice free port to import Swedish Iron in the winter when the Swedish Baltic ports are closed they desperately need for their full year access to said Iron imports to be restored. In OTL the Swedes allowed the Germans to use Swedish railways to transport troops to fight the Soviets but in that case I think the troops were first entering German occupied Northern Norway or Finland before directly attacking the Soviets. What if in desperation the Germans demand outright that the Swedes allow the Germans use their country to stage direct ground attacks across the Norweigan border to attack the chunk of "Free Norway" occupied by British (and perhaps French depending on how well the French campaign goes). So the Swedes are put in a conundrum. They can refuse the Germans and almost undoubtedly be invaded by the Germans. On the other hand they can allow the Germans the usage of Sweden to stage outright attacks on the British and what is nominally still an independent Norway (even if said "Free Norway is reduced to Narvik and some of the North). If they allow that then they have effectively automatically become a full combatant and the Allies will undoubtedly try and attack German forces within Sweden which at least at first will mean bombing.

So they can either say yes the Germans and get without a doubt bombed by air to some degree by the Allies an have property held oversee and their merchant marine outside of the Baltic seize or sunk by the allies and potentially eventually get invaded by the Allies. If they refuse the Germans they get bombed by the Germans and in all likelihood get invaded by the Germans either through Southern Norway or via sea (with potential paratrooper landings being possible). In either case their trade and economy is heavily disrupted and portions of their country are most likely going to get occupied at some point.

So in this scenario do they say yes to the Germans and de facto join the Axis or refuse?
 
By late April 1945 there was direct pressure from the Norwegian Government-in-Exile for Swedish military intervention in Norway.

This would presumably have taken the form of Swedish troops supporting the Norwegian forces exiled in Sweden to invade the country. I expect there were plans and to be fair it isn't that far from the Swedish frontier to Oslo via one of two obvious routes to the north and south. There were only 12,000 or so of these Norwegian "Police" troops and the 20th Mountain Army had a paper strength of 350,000 men so the Swedes would have had to have provided quite a significant additional force.

The Norwegian Resistance Group, Milorg, claimed 40,000 fighters but beyond sabotage and small-scale acts of resistance, I'm not sure how they would have added to brigade-style battles. By all accounts, the 20th Mountain Army wasn't at peak strength or fighting spirit so the question is whether, had the combined Norwegian and Swedish force attacked on April 30th, what kind of resistance would have been put up.

I think it's possible the fighting would have been more between the Wehrmacht and SS (as happened in Denmark) than with the invading forces and you might well have seen street fighting in Oslo with the invading forces and Wehrmacht on one side and the SS (presumably in Akershus) on the other side.

The formal declaration of war had been handed to the German Ambassador in Stockholm on April 30th but there was little he could do as he had lost almost all contact with Berlin at this time.

48 hours after the initial incursion, Swedish forces cross into Norway heading for both Trondheim and Narvik as Wehrmacht resistance begins to collapse.

In the Baltic, Swedish naval activity in the Baltic intensified with German patrol boats coming under fire close to Bornholm and naval skirmishes off the Danish coast. Refugee ships and planes were left undisturbed and some in distress were allowed to land in Sweden.

The same afternoon, a Swedish representative arrived at Montgomery's HQ on Luneburg Heath to insist Norway be part of the capitulation of German forces currently being negotiated. This caused a 24-hour pause as the German delegation, led by von Friedeburg, sought advice from Doenitz.

On the morning of May 5th 1945, after two sharp engagements, both Trondheim and Narvik fell to Swedish forces while by that time Terboven and an SS rearguard were surrounded at Akershus with General Boehme having withdrawn to Stavanger. Doenitz decided to include Norway in the surrender which was signed at 3pm to come into effect the following day.

On May 6th 1945, German forces in North-West Europe, including Denmark and Norway, capitulated to Britain, America and Sweden. As agreed, a Swedish military delegation crossed the Kattegat to Copenhagen and took the surrender of Blumentritt and his command. In Norway, a joint Anglo-Swedish delegation took the surrender of Boehme at Stavanger. In Oslo, Terboven took his own life at Akershus and Vidkun Quisling handed himself to Swedish forces on May 9th hoping for a degree of clemency from Stockholm which would not be forthcoming.
 
Top