PC/AH Challenge: Red or "Finlandized" Norway after WWI

With a POD no earlier than 1 September 1939, how plausible is it that Norway could end WWII as either a satellite state or de facto vassal of the USSR? What would be the most likely way that this would come about, and how might such a change shape Norway, and Scandinavia during the Cold War?

A few points of reference:
• The Soviets occupied much of the Finnmark province of Norway in late 1944, while the Western Allies did not set foot in that country until the surrender of Germany in May 1945.
• Roughly 10% of the population supported the Norwegian Communist Party in the first election after WWII.

I would assume that any aggressive Soviet designs on Norway would only be carried out in the event of an earlier breakdown in relations between the Allies. Such a move would antagonize the UK to no end, and put the Swedes in a terrible strategic situation. On the plus side, for the Soviets, would be that it would of great strategic value their navy and air force to have Atlantic bases outside of the Arctic Circle, and located so close the the British Isles.
 
The problem for the soviets is power projection. The Soviets at the end of WWII had the whole of Eastern Europe to worry about, let alone Norway. That is ignoring that any action by the Soviets to push into Norway any further would have been treated as an undisguised threat to the Allies. Stalin had barley been able to hold onto his country, the war had exhausted the Russian population and the longer it went on the more likely someone would have decided to stop him.

Finland was a special case. They surrendered before the Soviets came and remained independent.
 
Finland was a special case. They surrendered before the Soviets came and remained independent.

A nitpick: there was no surrender, in 1940 or 1944. The end to both the Winter War and the Continuation War was a negotiated ceasefire. They were made very much on Soviet terms, but the point still stands as the Finnish military kept its weapons and officers, and the Finnish system of government, law enforcement and justice remained in force. In fact that Finland did not surrender was what made it possible for the nation to be that special case IOTL - had there been surrender and occupation, Finland would have been just another Warsaw Pact people's republic (if not a SSR).
 
OTL Finland after WWII served a useful purpose for the Soviets - it provided a non-threatening buffer zone against NATO, whereas had Finland formally become part of the Warsaw Pact, that would have meant one more Cold War border to worry about (and likely a militarised Sweden).

With Norway, there's nothing really to buffer against - if the Soviets have got that far, they've got Denmark and Germany too. So you're pretty much talking the Soviets overrunning continental Europe. Under those circumstances, you're not dealing with the Cold War as we know it.
 
While it would no doubt be easier to occupy Norway from the south, what about an overland invasion of the country from the north during the last days of WWII. A Stalin who devoted more thought to an upcoming conflict with the UK would see the value of a neutral or occupied Norway. With Norway hostile, or allied to a major power, it becomes nearly impossible for a surface fleet based in Murmansk/Archangel to operate effectively.

Faced with a situation akin to say, Czechoslovakia after the war, with Soviet troops occupying their country after liberation, and propping up the local communists, how likely would the Norwegian government be to become another buffer state of the USSR?
 
Top