Sweden Joins the CP

needing a ally in 1914 the German Empire looked to the Swedes with the promise of Finland for the Swedes if successful what if they join the CP and only attacked Russia without declaring war on the french or British, but instead they focus on the Finnish front only and defeat the Russians heavily taking up to St Petersburg taking it over and causing mass panic in Russia how would this all go afterwards?
 
needing a ally in 1914 the German Empire looked to the Swedes with the promise of Finland for the Swedes if successful what if they join the CP and only attacked Russia without declaring war on the french or British, but instead they focus on the Finnish front only and defeat the Russians heavily taking up to St Petersburg taking it over and causing mass panic in Russia how would this all go afterwards?
Google up Admiral Essen, that is the more popular POD here.
 
Even to me as a swede this sounds asb.

Not really. Up until the Swedish change of government, the Russians feared Swedish intervention. Many Russian strategists assumed a hostile Sweden in their planning.


Google up Admiral Essen, that is the more popular POD here.

By people who don't understand how wars start. If Essen had gone ahead, the Russians would have denounced his acts and offered the Swedes compensation. Only if the Swedish government desired war, would such an act serve as a useful provocation. In that case, even if Essen is stopped, the Swedes would have found another excuse
 
Not really. Up until the Swedish change of government, the Russians feared Swedish intervention. Many Russian strategists assumed a hostile Sweden in their planning.

By people who don't understand how wars start. If Essen had gone ahead, the Russians would have denounced his acts and offered the Swedes compensation. Only if the Swedish government desired war, would such an act serve as a useful provocation. In that case, even if Essen is stopped, the Swedes would have found another excuse

I leave this obscure potentiality as a sort of side note, when I want to give Germany some added help to keep the scales balanced, and even then I tend to think Sweden becomes a hostile neutral. My thinking is that Sweden does not join the Entente nor feel particularly friendly to it, they likely do not go to war but more actively defend themselves, woe be it for a Russian flagged ship be caught by the Swedes, and they trade more readily with Germany, perhaps extend her credit. That alone is worth something when pondering a shift in the gravity of the war. But it is more fun to spin it out a bit. Having Germany undefeated and Sweden its friend opens some playful doors. I have the Swedes grow closer to Finland and reach out to the Baltics, as Germany solidifies its hold on the continent my imagination has Sweden cling to as much independence and neutrality as it can. Here I craft a Nordic Union modeled on the German customs union and inspired by SAS, the Swedes, Finns, Danes and maybe Estonia if it wiggles out of German control, all might find it better to trade as a bloc with the Customs Union and better position itself as in the German orbit but not its sphere. Wanky perhaps but I tend to like competing power blocs so nobody gets bulldozed.
 
By people who don't understand how wars start. If Essen had gone ahead, the Russians would have denounced his acts and offered the Swedes compensation. Only if the Swedish government desired war, would such an act serve as a useful provocation. In that case, even if Essen is stopped, the Swedes would have found another excuse

Well, there's always the force of public opinion if shots are actually fired, but I imagine if Essen tried anything that extreme he'd see a localized mutiny by his line officers or midshipmen. While the Swedish government certainly leaned pro-German, I think the bigger issue with the OP is the assumption that the Swedish army would be able to "crush" the Russians to the point of being able to reach Petrograd via a march through Finland. The Swedo-Finnish border is hardly the best place from which to stage a WW I level military concentration, with any Swedish offensive having to operate and supply itself through the thinly populated and built up half-wilderness that is Northern Finland, while its southern terrain is so filled with lakes and better connected to the Russian logistics network as to make it child's play to defend if the Russians put any effort into it. In all liklihood, Sweden can't contribute more to the CP cause by becoming a direct beligerant than it could as a friendly neutral; providing the Germans with raw materials and some access to the global communications network by covertly routing their messages.

Any pro-Interventionalist, like those pro-CP elements in the Greek government, recognized the futile nature of and the misery to Sweden a declaration of war would bring.
 

NoMommsen

Donor
@FillyofDelphi
No need to think about the swedish-finish landborder. Ever looked up the Âland Islands ?
Aside being an ... asset of longstanding swedish like-to-have, esp. early in 1914 they were only veery lightly fortified :
ideal region for an "island-hopping" towards southern Finland and from there relativly easy - given a not too unfriendly population (;)), possibly fed up with russian rule - towards helsinki and further.
For the then somewhere in late(er) 1914 or better early 1915 I could well see the swedes advance towards St.Petersburg, with the russians just not having enough forces to spread everywhere, esp. to another, to the others completly unrelated theatre-of-war.

However. What would be of more interest for me :
Was there a kind of "nationalistic grouping" in Sweden, that would have supported a war against Russia ? ... for nationalistic gains ?
And if so :
how "strong" actually was such a kind of pro-war-faction/movement ?
 
I doubt that Sweden would join to war without Russian provocation. But if Sweden would join to CPs best what it can get is that Sweden gains Åland and Finland becomes independent kingdom under house of Bernadotte. Annexation of Finland is totally impossible idea and even Swedish nationalists knew that. Finns never would accept that.
 

NoMommsen

Donor
Not really. Up until the Swedish change of government, the Russians feared Swedish intervention. Many Russian strategists assumed a hostile Sweden in their planning.
Which switch in swedish goverment you think of, that 'calmed' russian fears ?

Google up Admiral Essen, that is the more popular POD here.
By people who don't understand how wars start. If Essen had gone ahead, the Russians would have denounced his acts and offered the Swedes compensation. Only if the Swedish government desired war, would such an act serve as a useful provocation. In that case, even if Essen is stopped, the Swedes would have found another excuse
Prior as well as after WW 1 wars have been started on even more ... 'ridiculous' reasons.

But, as you IMO correctly state, it's the question of how much in this case the swedes 'want' a war with Russia.

However, I would agree, that the 'simple' promise of control over Finland won't be enough a PoD to get the swedes to join war - as allied partner of the CP or 'only' as a co-belligerent.
But ... maybe ... with some 'more' effort of Sven Hedin, than only writing the Courtyard Speech for the king the Peasant armament support march develops into something ... more. Might also depend on the kings attitude, but that's something I don't know enough of.
 
Last edited:
The bigger effect of Sweeden in the war is to pin Russian forces in Finalnd, more so if they can take the Aland Islands which represents a threat of Sweedish and German forces landing into Finland.

If they do nothing else but that I would see that as a major boon for the Central Powers on the Eastern Front.

Then comes the question if Russia might start to view the Finns as unreliable and not draw on them for additional troops combined with standing down Finn units.
 
The bigger effect of Sweeden in the war is to pin Russian forces in Finalnd, more so if they can take the Aland Islands which represents a threat of Sweedish and German forces landing into Finland.

If they do nothing else but that I would see that as a major boon for the Central Powers on the Eastern Front.

Then comes the question if Russia might start to view the Finns as unreliable and not draw on them for additional troops combined with standing down Finn units.

For me I cannot convincing propel Sweden into the war as a pro-German co-belligerent, but with an event like this I think the leaning is more solid, as you observe it is more about the little shifts with Sweden securing Aland, patrolling against Russian warships, cooperating to close the Baltic sea, drawing off Russian forces to protect Finland, acting more harshly to further alienate Finland and etc., etc. And if one then gives Imperial Germany a place in the post-war scheme, a Swedish led Nordic bloc is rather fascinating. Personally, as I said, I give it Sweden, Finland, Estonia and later Denmark, I believe Norway steers more neutral between UK and this bloc and Germany. Here I have Germany content to surround itself with neutrals as a buffer zone.
 
@FillyofDelphi
No need to think about the swedish-finish landborder. Ever looked up the Âland Islands ?
Aside being an ... asset of longstanding swedish like-to-have, esp. early in 1914 they were only veery lightly fortified :
ideal region for an "island-hopping" towards southern Finland and from there relativly easy - given a not too unfriendly population (;)), possibly fed up with russian rule - towards helsinki and further.
For the then somewhere in late(er) 1914 or better early 1915 I could well see the swedes advance towards St.Petersburg, with the russians just not having enough forces to spread everywhere, esp. to another, to the others completly unrelated theatre-of-war.

However. What would be of more interest for me :
Was there a kind of "nationalistic grouping" in Sweden, that would have supported a war against Russia ? ... for nationalistic gains ?
And if so :
how "strong" actually was such a kind of pro-war-faction/movement ?

Indeed I have. Because of that, I know they were in addition to being very lightly fortified very lightly peopled, developed, and overall not particularly well suited as a staging point for a large scale offensive military operation, particularly one as logsitically-intensive as an amphibious invasion against a major port (Which the Swedish army would need to seize in order to supply an army of any reasonable size). Particularly one that involves operating in and around the Gulf of Finland... where Russia's heaviest and most modern fleet, the Baltic Fleet (Having been re-fit with modern vessels following the clearing house of getting sunk during the Russo-Japanese war... burning off the dead wood, so to say) is based and have plenty of facilities to operate from for raiding, repair, mining, ect. While it may not be able to sorte out too far for fear of confronting the superior German High Sea's Fleet, they're more than capable of operating with near-impunity that close to home since there's little chance they'll get caught in the open, while Germany can't reliably send a big enough porition of its own fleet that far east to support its Swedish ally with the Royal Navy's shadow cast over the west. Any substantial Swedish force would quickly find itself cut off from its supplies of ammo, renforcements, shells, ect. from back home and overwhelmed by Russian relief forces, who could ship supplies more or less with impunity across the Gulf from Estonia.

As to the Finnish population, while its certainly more Pro-Swedish in its sentiment and are throughly angery at their Russian oppressors due to the dictorial rule imposed on their province, that dosen't nessicerily mean there would be a mass uprising of Finnish partisans. Firstly, said dictorial rule and heavy military presence left them pretty throughly cowed and at risk for retaliation: a situation that the breakout of hosilities in the region isen't exactly likely to alieviate. You'd also have to co-ordinate their actions to the extent and exactness that they'd have a practical military impact; a task made next to impossible not only due to limits in communications technology and availability to the locals (especially with wartime censorship and martial law) but political divisions among the anti-Russian groups: as the Finnish Civil War clearly shows, there's quite a bit of left-leaning among those inclined towards violent resistance in the south of Finland, who are unlikely to follow the marching orders of the conservative Swedish government. Thirdly, the importance of Petrograd; both symbolitically and practically as the capital of the Russian state, a transportation hub, industrial center, the region in which the Baltic fleet is based and maintained/built up at Kronstat, ect. means that the military brass and everybody in the government would have to have gone completely bonkers not to prioritize its defense over, say, sending more divisions to the Caucauses or Gallicia. Even assuming they lose control over broader Finland to a combination of thinly-streched Swedish forces and Finnish partisans, take a look at the south-eastern corner of the nation and you'll see how easily defensable it is against conventional military means (And unconventional ones too; push comes to shove do you really think the Czar won't just march the Finns out of any territory near the lines?), even by a much smaller force with only the most basic of static defenses... indeed, the Finns themselves would take advantage of that fact with the Mannerheim Line twenty years later, when technological advancements had diluted the advantage of trench/positional warfare to the defense. Sweden, with a much smaller army spread much thinner, dosen't have a prayer of getting through.

Russia not having enough manpower... in 1914-1915. With, in practical terms, having at least a few months to raise and organize them and only need to be trained for essentially garrison duty. I'll let that statement hang itself.
 
Which switch in swedish goverment you think of, that 'calmed' russian fears ?

Prior as well as after WW 1 wars have been started on even more ... 'ridiculous' reasons.

But, as you IMO correctly state, it's the question of how much in this case the swedes 'want' a war with Russia.

However, I would agree, that the 'simple' promise of control over Finland won't be enough a PoD to get the swedes to join war - as allied partner of the CP or 'only' as a co-belligerent.
But ... maybe ... with some 'more' effort of Sven Hedin, than only writing the Courtyard Speech for the king the Peasant armament support march develops into something ... more. Might also depend on the kings attitude, but that's something I don't know enough of.

i
the March 1914 elections eased he Russians considerably.

As to the Essen plot, yeah, its common POD like Dogger Bank. Neither makes sense.

And no, wars aren't started over less. Wars are rational decisions made by leaders who see it as in their interest.

Leets compare two incidents. The sinking of the Battleship Maine and the Iranian hostage crisis.

The Maine is sunk and leads to war. Its as flimsy as an excuse as one can find. The Americans dont even allege that the Spanish did it just that it was sunk by "persons unknown" yet this supposedly leads to the Spanish war. Horse hooey. the Americans had long settled on war- McKinley saw it as the only way to end the Cuban War and promote American interests

On the other hand, the Iranian hostage crises. probably one of the most provocative acts ever, doesn't lead to war- because neither Carter nor Reagan saw war as in their self interst
 
Swedish diplomats were helping German embassies including smuggling stuff in diplomatic bags, and passing on coded messages

I can't remember why I said that, but it is a sign of pro-German sentiment
 

NoMommsen

Donor
@Aphrodite
Sry, if I put it in a way, that might be misperceived :
with "reasons" leading to war I actually ment the direct events/happenings/excuses-used-for going to war
While I personally would argue ANY rationality for war at all, in other times/ages politicians thought (and sometimes still seem to think today), that going to war is something "rational" and "reasonable" (well, at some point in time and geography it was even thought to be existential to slaughter men and women to "sacrify" their hearts for the sun to continue to shine ...).​


Regarding the march election in Sweden 1914 ... Why did it "eased the Russians considerably", that the conservatives actually won/gained more seats compared to the former Riksdag ? The group, that was behind the pro-rearmament/armament-movement I mentioned earlier ?
The conservative, by the king installed Prime Minister Hjalmar Hammarskjöld stayed in office.

@Grey Wolf
Wiki says they allowed the germans even more important things, like using Swedish ciphers for diplomatic communications.
Knut Wallenberg, without the knowledge of Hammarskjöld, allowed the Germans to use Swedish ciphers to communicate with their embassies overseas, and these communications were carried over the telegraph cables used by Sweden to communicate with their embassies.[8] This allowed the Germans to communicate with their embassies via Stockholm without their communications being so easily censored and intercepted by the British.
 
Top