In the 1970's Sweden was pursuing a nuclear deterrent, but decided to buy a new fighter plane instead. What if the decision goes the opposite way?
In the 1970's Sweden was pursuing a nuclear deterrent, but decided to buy a new fighter plane instead. What if the decision goes the opposite way?
So, what if Sweden actually decides to develop nukes.
The PoD is 1963 with Sweden actually deciding to build the nukes, following the Cuban Missile Crisis. Work is continued on the programme, although the entire work is to be undertake secretly, in order not to make the Soviets aware of the progress.
By 1969 a lot of work has been finished, then however parts of the ongoing project are leaked and Moscow is surprised and shocked by the findings.
NATO and partly the US are shocked by news, although the CIA already knew about the project, but failed to report so to the Administration.
It's 1969 and the Soviets see a chance rising.
A massive attack is initiated against Sweden by the Soviet Airforce with the use of chemical weapons against military installations. No nukes are fired.
Finnland is asked to stand down and allow passage/overflight of Soviet forces. The Finnish government is split, but in the end the military decides to make a stand contrary to the government's policy. Finnland+Sweden are invaded, while the Soviet Union make it perfectly clear to NATO, that no interference will be tolerated.
Fighting is heavy with Soviet forces taking heavy casualties. NATO material aid is being supplied through Norway, but the Baltic is closed by the Soviet Navy.
After 3 weeks of fighting Finnland and then after 6 weeks Sweden surrender.
What happens next? The Soviet Union just strengthened its position and NATO lost face.
Or do you think NATO would interfere?
So, what if Sweden actually decides to develop nukes.
The PoD is 1963 with Sweden actually deciding to build the nukes, following the Cuban Missile Crisis. Work is continued on the programme, although the entire work is to be undertake secretly, in order not to make the Soviets aware of the progress.
By 1969 a lot of work has been finished, then however parts of the ongoing project are leaked and Moscow is surprised and shocked by the findings.
NATO and partly the US are shocked by news, although the CIA already knew about the project, but failed to report so to the Administration.
It's 1969 and the Soviets see a chance rising.
A massive attack is initiated against Sweden by the Soviet Airforce with the use of chemical weapons against military installations. No nukes are fired.
Finnland is asked to stand down and allow passage/overflight of Soviet forces. The Finnish government is split, but in the end the military decides to make a stand contrary to the government's policy. Finnland+Sweden are invaded, while the Soviet Union make it perfectly clear to NATO, that no interference will be tolerated.
Fighting is heavy with Soviet forces taking heavy casualties. NATO material aid is being supplied through Norway, but the Baltic is closed by the Soviet Navy.
After 3 weeks of fighting Finnland and then after 6 weeks Sweden surrender.
What happens next? The Soviet Union just strengthened its position and NATO lost face.
Or do you think NATO would interfere?
There are people who claim the US would not escalate to nukes in the European battlefield on its own, if the USSR marched into West Germany. After all why gamble to lose New York, for defending Hamburg?
Ok I didn't know that...a) Sweden would never try to develop nukes in secret. It would simply be impossible, both political and technical. The Swedish Freedom of Information Act was introduced 1766 and the Swedish budget has no part for "black projects". A nuke program would begin with an open vote in Parlament and yearly written reports after that.
That nuclear war is a very real possibility.b) What should the Swedish government learn from the Cuba crisis that motivated a Swedish nuclear program? That the US wouldn't back down?
In this ATL, in order to stop the Swedes from getting the bomb.c) Why should the Soviets invade 1969? Directly after Prague, when the Soviet - China border conflict was at maximum?
In this ATL, it was supposed not to know about it. That's the only way probably to let the Swedes get nukes after all. I presume the US would try to persuade the Swedes to drop their programme otherwise, so that the Soviets are not pissed off.d) The US had left very clear (but secret) guarantees to defend Sweden in case of Soviet invasion. The whole Swedish Air Force and airbase system was adapted to serve NATO aircraft. And the US would know about a nuclear program very early.
The problem is HOW to interfere.e) With Soviet access to Norway the Atlantic was far more difficult to defend. So yes, at least the US would interfere. And the Soviet knew that.
A conflict erupted between the US and the ISSR over a non-NATO member being attacked by the USSR could indeed be the USSR's only card in order to allow for a split inside NATO. With the rest of Europe getting pissed off at the USA for risking war all over Europe because of a non-NATO member (which was building nukes in secret!), we do have a reason for France to drop out and Germany ask for appeasment.No, the described POD is extremly unlikely. I doubt that Swedish nukes would affect the Soviet Union at all. West German nukes, thats a different matter ...