No winter invasion of Finland, knock ons for Denmark & Norway?

Without a “winter war” Norwegian campaign would still match OTL?

  • Yes

    Votes: 7 53.8%
  • No, because Britain would change its approach to Nowayr

    Votes: 2 15.4%
  • No, because Germany would change its plan toward Norway

    Votes: 4 30.8%

  • Total voters
    13

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
What if Stalin’s gut tells him to take Finland seriously as a military factor, at least in wintertime?

At least given deficiencies in execution of the occupation of eastern Poland, Stalin just sort of leads with the idea of: “invading a Scandinavian country in winter...that’s dumb”

Consequently he plans to press the Finns for concessions only in spring-summer 1940, and military back-up plans for a multi axis land and naval campaign for June 1. Delaying the demands and pressure campaign prevents the Soviets from getting into a position where they need to fight the Finns hastily to save face.

Well in OTL, there were a lot of other players making moves between Movember 1939 and 1 June 1940.

Will the lack of a Soviet-Finnish “Winter War” influence the substance or timing of German or British actions regarding Norway?
 

Driftless

Donor
Off hand, I'd think the Germans have less concern about the ultimate security of the Swedish ore. The British don't have the Winter War fig leaf to hide behind in order to seize Narvik and eventually the mining area around Kiruna. So that might lessen the time pressure somewhat.

Still, with events like the Altmark Incident showing how limited the Norwegians were in enforcing their neutrality, both sides probably continue operational planning; with the Germans launching an equivalent of Weserubung sometime after the Fall of France. Of course, that plan might easily get tossed aside between the failure on the Battle of Britain and the preparation for Barbarossa.
 
Well in OTL, there were a lot of other players making moves between Movember 1939 and 1 June 1940.

Will the lack of a Soviet-Finnish “Winter War” influence the substance or timing of German or British actions regarding Norway?

Now, a Movember with Hitler and Stalin sounds an interesting concept...

On Soviet summer attack plans against Finland it must be remembered that Finland was engaged in a military build-up as well. There would be more forces with better training available for Summer of 1940 than for November 1940. Especially many critical items such as anti-tank weapons and artillery munitons would have better availability.

Then again, in June Finland would not have any hope of a Franco-British intervention.

As for Soviet naval operations, they proved to be historically inept during Winter War and beginning of Continuation War when they could have had an important effect, so I don't think they would be of more importance in a Summer War scenario. As I have written many times, more active Soviet naval operations with even fairly small risks could have had a decisive effect during OTL Winter War, it was an opportunity totally lost for Soviets.
 
As for Soviet naval operations, they proved to be historically inept during Winter War and beginning of Continuation War when they could have had an important effect, so I don't think they would be of more importance in a Summer War scenario. As I have written many times, more active Soviet naval operations with even fairly small risks could have had a decisive effect during OTL Winter War, it was an opportunity totally lost for Soviets.

According to recent Russian studies about Soviet naval plans in the Baltic in the late 30s, they essentially did not have standing offensive plans for an invasion of Finland: generally, the plans on file were defensive, predicating a war against against stronger Western powers. In the event when the Winter War started, this then explains why the Soviet naval campaign was so inept: they were practically improvising something to do with the navy.

Now, should the war be pushed to the summer of 1940, and some real thought given to planning the invasion, with the (unlikely) expectation that Finland is seen as a serious opponent (like @raharris1973 does posit), then I believe that they would put together some more competent naval plans as well. Maybe a serious attempt to draw the Finnish navy out to fight, to take out the armored coastal ships, or maybe something that looks like that, but is a feint to mask a serious attempt to mount a landing in the Ålands, or somewhere else on the Finnish coast to support the attack in Karelia? At the very least, we could expect that the bigger ships of Red Banner Baltic Fleet would posture aggressively all through the war, shelling coastal forts and port towns to make its presence known and to intimidate the Finns, and its submarines, lighter units and aircraft would try to implement a naval blockade of Finland, as IOTL, including attempts at offensive mining of the shipping lanes. Due to the lack of ice, such an attempt might even be more successful than during the OTL Winter War.
 
Last edited:
Now, should the war be pushed to the summer of 1940, and some real thought given to planning the invasion, with the (unlikely) expectation that Finland is seen as a serious opponent (like @raharris1973 does posit), then I believe that they would put together some more competent naval plans as well. Maybe a serious attempt to draw the Finnish navy out to fight, to take out the armored coastal ships, or maybe something that looks like that, but is a feint to mask a serious attempt to mount a landing in the Ålands, or somewhere else on the Finnish coast to support the attack in Karelia? At the very least, we could expect that the bigger ships of Red Banner Baltic Fleet would posture aggressively all through the war, shelling coastal forts and port towns to make its presence known and to intimidate the Finns, and its submarines, lighter units and aircraft would try to implement a naval blockade of Finland, as IOTL, including attempts at offensive mining of the shipping lanes. Due to the lack of ice, such an attempt might even be more successful than during the OTL Winter War.

Taking Åland with a coup would have been the knight's move in OTL Winter War or this ATL Summer War, naturally. Actually, this would be a knight's move against Finland until late 1980's when RBS-15 became available...

Barring this, I don't think anything of ultimate importance could be done by the Soviet Navy. With naval aviation they could attack shipping and perform airborne minelaying, but in summer conditions this would be more difficult as there would be more avenues of approach available for the Finns. Additonally, any attempts to attack Finnish SLOC's via air would have to pass through Finnish air defences, which would be primitive, but even primitive fighters could take a heavy toll on DB-3's and SB-2's. Submarines could enter Bay of Bothnia, but in summer conditions they would be vulnerable to (very primitive) Finnish ASW.

Granted, losses for Finnish shipping would be more severe but due to critical importance the movemets would continue. Without need for icebreaking all the ports in the West Coast could be used to distribute shipping.

The bold move with Soviet Fleet might be positioning, say, a destroyer squadron and submarines in Bay of Bothnia just before the war to provoke the Finns and to implement a blockade after eruption of hostilities. But would Soviet Navy have imagination and risk-taking ability to do this? With risk of this formation getting stranded if operation was not a lightning success?

As for shelling of coastal forts I don't think this would be enough to tempt out the Finnish Navy. With an amphibious feint they could hinder use of Finnish reserve forces, though. But with more forces available for Summer of 1940 this might not be of critical importance.

As for the Finnish Navy, the track record from the Winter War is bad. Submarines might be used as singular units for hopeless intercepts. Use of the few MTB's might bring some minor successes or not. Coastal battleships might be used to screen Åland. I think more mines might be available than for the Winter War, though.
 
Wouldn't FDR, Churchill, Mussolini and Mao be better candidates for a Movember than Hitler, Stalin, Franco, Chiang Kai-shek, Tojo, DeGaulle and Mannerheim, since the latter all had mustaches on a regular basis already, whereas the the clean-shaven former ones would be making a statement by growing one?

I am utterly incapable of picturing Churchill with facial hair.
 

Driftless

Donor
I am utterly incapable of picturing Churchill with facial hair.

Here's his father with a very admirable mustache:
randolph-churchill-a258baae-60ab-474d-95ae-7178f94900f-resize-750.jpeg
 
Top