Red Army reaching Denmark?

[juanml82]

WI the USSR manages to reaching Denmark and, say, the areas surrounding Hamburg and Wilhelmshaven in Germany and keeping them in their sphere of influence after WWII? How far would the Western Allies go to prevent a Red Denmark? I guess we would need PODs both allowing faster and better Soviet's offensives (Stalin beliving Germany was to attack in 1941 - hence a slower Barbarrossa to begin with?) and a slower Allied advance: Hitler doesn't declare war after PH, so the USA enters later to the war? Worse outcomes for the Allies in D-Day and the Bulge, slowing them down?

And how much would that change the Cold War? The Soviet Navy would have a better, yet still restricted, access to the North Atlantic, and a firmer control of the Baltic - but they would still have the GUIK gap from there.

 

[CalBear]

Not an inch. Stalin would have withdrawn to the Yalta frontiers.

 

[RGB]

Not an inch. Stalin would have withdrawn to the Yalta frontiers.

Yes, they followed the agreements pretty tightly.

I doubt they'd even try.

 

[juanml82]

Sure, the PODs would have to be before Yalta, so we would have an ATL Yalta were Denmark status would have changed

 

[MerryPrankster]

Even if Stalin withdrew back to the Yalta Line, what would he take with him?

Things or people might be taken back to Soviet-held territory--nuclear and/or rocket scientists, people Stalin didn't like, artwork or other resources, etc.

Plus, given the Red Army's human rights record (not just against Germans, but against Poles and even concentration camp victims), they might commit some atrocious behavior against the civilians before they go home.

 

[Chris S]

Even if Stalin withdrew back to the Yalta Line, what would he take with him?

Things or people might be taken back to Soviet-held territory--nuclear and/or rocket scientists, people Stalin didn't like, artwork or other resources, etc.

Plus, given the Red Army's human rights record (not just against Germans, but against Poles and even concentration camp victims), they might commit some atrocious behavior against the civilians before they go home.

But that doesn't really change much does it? So a few pieces of art end up in the USSR. I doubt they would take back scientists since this is Denmark and not Germany. They may take back some of the research, but I doubt they would take the scientists themselves (unless those scientists were German and in the employ of the Nazis previously).

WRT the human rights records - I hear a lot about the behaviour in Germany but I've never heard of that behaviour on a similar scale anywhere else (even with the Poles and concentration camps - though I was under the impression that the camp prisoners were released and their former captors and former collaborators became the new inmates in those camps). I doubt the Red Army's behaviour in Denmark would be all that different from how it was in Norway, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria....

 

[CanadianGoose]

Even if Stalin withdrew back to the Yalta Line, what would he take with him?

Nothing. IOTL Soviets did occupy Danish island of Bornholm but withdrew without making any damage. It did not prevent Wikipedia from accusing Soviets of misconduct against civilians, as some houses were destroyed in fight between Red Army and Germans during Soviet invasion.

 

[MerryPrankster]

But that doesn't really change much does it? So a few pieces of art end up in the USSR. I doubt they would take back scientists since this is Denmark and not Germany. They may take back some of the research, but I doubt they would take the scientists themselves (unless those scientists were German and in the employ of the Nazis previously).

WRT the human rights records - I hear a lot about the behaviour in Germany but I've never heard of that behaviour on a similar scale anywhere else (even with the Poles and concentration camps - though I was under the impression that the camp prisoners were released and their former captors and former collaborators became the new inmates in those camps). I doubt the Red Army's behaviour in Denmark would be all that different from how it was in Norway, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria....

I was referring to German scientists and other valuable personnel who might have fled into those areas expecting to be collected by the Western Allies or to be able to go to ground.

About the human-rights issue, I read an article more recently that said Red Army troops victimized Poles and concentration-camp inmates as well as Germans when they set to rampaging, which indicated that the army's behavior was not solely driven by anti-German revenge.

One particularly notorious episode could enrage the Danes against the Russians, which could affect politics and culture in years to come.

 

[MerryPrankster]

Nothing. IOTL Soviets did occupy Danish island of Bornholm but withdrew without making any damage. It did not prevent Wikipedia from accusing Soviets of misconduct against civilians, as some houses were destroyed in fight between Red Army and Germans during Soviet invasion.

There might not have been anything or anyone worth taking on Bornholm. Or perhaps the Soviet commander did a better job keeping up discipline among those troops.

I think your position is a bit simplistic.

 

[RGB]

I doubt the Red Army's behaviour in Denmark would be all that different from how it was in Norway, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria....

Oh, you're giving MP the opening of bringing out the 8-to-80 speech. in 3....2....1....

 

[MerryPrankster]

Oh, you're giving MP the opening of bringing out the 8-to-80 speech. in 3....2....1....

What's the 8-to-80 speech?

 

[Chris S]

Oh, you're giving MP the opening of bringing out the 8-to-80 speech. in 3....2....1....

Well, whatever; the fact is I've never heard any reports on the behaviour of the Red Army in those areas that indicated that every woman in the area was running in fear for her life and chastity and that large groups of (non-collaborating) men were being shot at random. If MP or anybody else can provide credible links showing that the Red Army committed the same human rights atrocities across the whole of eastern Europe on the same scale then that's good since it will only increase our knowledge. Otherwise I just have to remain sceptical because even with regards to concentration camp prisoners and the Poles, the incidence of such behaviour is likely to have been far less than what happened in Germany and I would expect some bad behaviour anyway; armies are basically armed mobs and when you have a really large army like that with 11 million people in it, well it would be naive to think they were all refined, cultured men who drank tea and never had a stray thought when it comes to women or stealing or were educated not to be prejudiced. What's worse is that they had guns and guns have a way of giving people power over those who don't have them - making it all the easier for those with the guns to give in to the temptation to use them or to threaten to use them for their own gain. I would be surprised if there were no incidents of bad behaviour since that would smell of a cover-up.

Even with the other Allied armies there were most certainly cases of behaviour which would have required the MPs (otherwise ASBs changed human behaviour back in the 1940s) although I'm sure the incidence was less in those armies because, well, those armies weren't really armies of peasants (or at least if they were, then their peasants got a better deal in life than those in the Soviet Union and were less likely to resort to that kind of behaviour). Then of course we don't even need to start on the Axis armies...

Overall, I would expect not so nice behaviour to have been exhibited towards the Germans, Poles and concentration camp prisoners in that order of severity. The Germans because of the war as well as the opportunities provided by their defeat to loot and rape; the Poles because of historical prejudice (and I doubt the Poles helped themselves either by not displaying similar historical prejudice - so they only fed each others prejudices) and the concentration camp survivors because they were vulnerable and could thus be easily exploited.

The thing is, it seems like it is cliche now to apply what happened in one area or at one point to everything that could have happened. So when discussing a possibly prolonged war in the Pacific, someone will inevitably mention the possibility of a "Democratic People's Republic of Japan" being formed in Hokkaido when the fact is that not every Soviet occupation lead to the division of a country with a communist puppet regime in the Soviet occupied area - Bornholm, Finnmark, bits of Finland, more than half of the Soviet occupied area of Iran and most obvious of all Austria are all evidence that a "DPRJ" was not destined or even likely. Likewise, it is now cliche to assume that what happened in Germany mainly is going to happen anywhere else that the Soviets could have reached but didn't in OTL. That I believe is far too simplistic.

 

[RGB]

What's the 8-to-80 speech?

The original source of the "The Red Army is made of rapists" narrative.

 

[Chris S]

I was referring to German scientists and other valuable personnel who might have fled into those areas expecting to be collected by the Western Allies or to be able to go to ground.

In which case it wouldn't really have anything to do with Denmark since those scientists could not possibly have expected to stay in Denmark and would have to have been on some really strong opiates to believe they would be collected by Americans in an area occupied by the Soviets.

About the human-rights issue, I read an article more recently that said Red Army troops victimized Poles and concentration-camp inmates as well as Germans when they set to rampaging, which indicated that the army's behavior was not solely driven by anti-German revenge.

Interesting. Which article was this?

The article though wouldn't seem that surprising. After all we are talking about an army that had over 30 million people enter and leave it at some point and had about 10-11 million in it at the end of the war. All from a country where Poland was not thought of by it's leaders as their best buddy, but more like an irritating and potential dangerous neighbour which not 25 years earlier had even taken Kiev.

What I've never understood is why people (especially on Wikipedia) seem to make such a fuss as though they expected the Soviet army of 11 million to behave the same way as the US army of 7 million when the experience of just about every soldier in those two forces would have been entirely different up to the point where some of them met up around the Elbe - their education, upbringing (the US not experiencing World War I and a Civil War followed by repression as happened in the USSR and all just before World War II) and their World War II experience (massive dislocations, large losses, lots of destruction, a kind of free-for-all warfare on the eastern front compared to the western front)...

Of course it all comes down to the specific situation - Red Army behaviour in Denmark is more likely to be like that in Bornholm and northern Norway as well as Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and Bulgaria than anything like happened in Germany.

There might not have been anything or anyone worth taking on Bornholm. Or perhaps the Soviet commander did a better job keeping up discipline among those troops.

I think your position is a bit simplistic.

Or it could be that the idea that the Soviets troops would be massively indisciplined in every area is overly simplistic.

As was already pointed out, they won't be taking anyone who is actually Danish (as fleeing German scientists don't qualify in that regard), so they naturally they had nobody to take from Bornholm and I find it difficult to believe that in Bornholm there would have been nothing worth taking. It's not that tiny and didn't have so few people that there weren't some possessions there.

Overall, the Soviet commanders in general are more likely to maintain discipline in Denmark as they did elsewhere as opposed to being inclined to let discipline slip as was likely in Germany and to a lesser extent Poland. It wouldn't be in their interest to let discipline slip all the time (sooner or later they might get punished on a whim for it and plus, it would be rather difficult to maintain an army if the army itself wasn't at least forced to follow orders sometimes).

 

[MerryPrankster]

Fair points.

In any event, my argument was that the Red Army occupying more of Denmark could have an impact on history even if they ultimately withdraw.

For example, are there any German scientists who went to Denmark in OTL who were picked up by the Allies who in TTL might be taken by the Soviets instead?

It's true that it would be stupid of them to go knowingly into a Soviet-held area, but what if they went into Denmark expecting the Western Allies to get there first and they didn't?

Here's an article about Soviet troops misbehaving outside of Germany. I don't think it was the original one I found--the one I remember was more magaziney than academic--but this one does have similar info:

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/past_and_present/v188/188.1mark.html

 

[MerryPrankster]

I think here's the one I found earlier:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...sian-women-as-they-freed-them-from-camps.html

 

[juanml82]

But WI Stalin manages - due a different outcome of the war - to get Denmark into the USSR's sphere of influence in an ATL Yalta? And therefore, they don't withdraw

 

[gougeaway]

WI Red Army got to DK....

Well, they did take part of Denmark, Bornholm, and island in the Baltic, East of Sweden. They almost didn't give it back either. That would have been interesting if they hadn't.

 

[Chris S]

Fair points.

In any event, my argument was that the Red Army occupying more of Denmark could have an impact on history even if they ultimately withdraw.

For example, are there any German scientists who went to Denmark in OTL who were picked up by the Allies who in TTL might be taken by the Soviets instead?

It's true that it would be stupid of them to go knowingly into a Soviet-held area, but what if they went into Denmark expecting the Western Allies to get there first and they didn't?

Here's an article about Soviet troops misbehaving outside of Germany. I don't think it was the original one I found--the one I remember was more magaziney than academic--but this one does have similar info:

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/past_and_present/v188/188.1mark.html

Thanks for the link.

It's true that it would be stupid of them to go knowingly into a Soviet-held area, but what if they went into Denmark expecting the Western Allies to get there first and they didn't?

I rather doubt it. I think any German scientists picked up in Denmark would be the ones who were already in Denmark for whatever reason (research, or whatever). Can't imagine why they would flee to Denmark in hopes of being captured by the western allies when they could simply have gone into western Germany instead. The only ones who may have found it easier to flee to Denmark would have been those in northeastern Germany and Hamburg, but even then it would be kind of daft to go north when one could go west.

At most, I could see the USSR maybe picking up a bit more atomic research, but given how much Soviet spies already knew about the American project, this might only make a difference in having the Soviets get a bomb maybe a few days earlier than they did in OTL or even a few minutes (at most a few months I would think). Can't see that having major ripples, since the western powers were unprepared for the Soviet atomic bomb when it did come into being in OTL - there just comes a point when one can't be any more unprepared.

EDIT: Outside of that, maybe the USSR would attempt to Finlandize Denmark but I think even that would be a stretch since they would be unlikely to stay in Denmark for any real length of time. Firstly they would have to supply their troops through the British zone in Germany and at that point it isn't worth it since the troops aren't on active combat duty and Denmark isn't a defeated Axis power and there is really no point in keeping the troops there. Unlike Czechoslovakia or Poland, Denmark would not be a vital transit route to occupation zones in Austria and Germany and troops would still need to be withdrawn for the war in the Pacific. Since the Soviets wouldn't expect that the war would be over come September, they would probably withdraw their forces in Denmark since those would be the most readily available as they would not be needed to occupy defeated Axis powers such as Germany-Austria, Hungary, Romania or Bulgaria nor would they be needed in transit areas like Poland or Czechoslovakia.

Most likely they come in, defeat the Germans in the southern Jutland peninsula and by then Germany surrenders anyway and from there they move into the rest of Denmark to disarm the Germans (who won't be holding out to surrender to Brits or Americans as in this scenario they would probably be told just to surrender to any Allied forces they meet in Denmark) and then leave within a year (with some forces probably pulled out early for the Pacific). Some Soviet troops would probably have misbehaved (especially in the border region where they would be a mix of Danes and Germans) during any campaigning, but by the end of the war the incidence of misbehaviour would probably decrease greatly and probably consist more of soldiers helping themselves to foodstuff now and again and maybe some goods (watches, etc) that they couldn't get back home - of course, in the rest of Denmark proper this may all be obviated by the Danes greeting the soldiers with candy, flowers and gifts anyway (think Prague) which is not what would happen in Germany or Hungary. Denmark will probably face a bit of early pressure to remain forevermore neutral by the Soviets, but I'm sure they had that pressure in OTL anyway due to Bornholm. Denmark probably still joins NATO though - can't see that Scandinavian defence union getting off the ground.

 

[arctic warrior]

Bornholm had its two major town bombed by the Soviets as the German commander would only surrender to Western Allies troops. 10 civilians were killed and 23 wounded as most had been evacuated into the countryside. But many houses were destroyed or at least had the roofs damaged.
The Germans then surrendered to the Soviets who occupied the island for a year.
One of the outcomes of the Soviet withdrawal was the agreement that only Danish troops would be on the island, which was observed!

A lot have been discussed about the race for Denmark but the British actually had a para-brigade on call for deployment into Copenhagen which anyway would beat the Soviets to the capital.
Probably the paras would be flown in should the Soviets advance across the agreement line and things would be resolved as in the case of Czechoslovakia, i.e. the Soviets pulling out.

The worst would be a temporary Soviet occupation like in Bornholm for reasons already given but with the Danish popular attitude towards the Red Army it would generally be seen as liberators - even if the Socialdemocrats and everybody else right of them disliking it. But things would be worked out and we could see an agreement like in the case of Bornholm that Denmark would not become Finlandized but would not for a prolonged period allow allied troops on its soil at least not without Soviet protest!
Which in itself will have some Butterflies!