United Scandinavia in WW2

OK then what is the difference between the top 4 and bottom 4 lines - I think the top 4 show the position in OTL but what are the bottom 4?
Denmark, Finland and Norway have roughly 20% each of the population of Scandinavia. Sweden has roughly 40% of Scandinavia's population.

As you wrote the top 4 lines show the position IOTL. The bottom 4 lines show the position ITTL if the Scandinavian Armed Forces were on the:
  • Danish Model = Scandinavian State with Armed Forces five times the size of Denmark IOTL.
  • Finnish Model = Scandinavian State with Armed Forces five time the size of Finland IOTL.
  • Norwegian Model = Scandinavian State with Armed Forces five times the size of Norway IOTL.
  • Swedish Model = Scandinavian State with Armed Forces two-and-a-half times the size of Sweden IOTL.
 

Driftless

Donor
You have to find a way to get around Norwegian reluctance for a union after 1905 in some way. Personally I don't see it happening.

A riff on Orcbusters thought: each of the countries had unique commercial and diplomatic goals that were based on physical geography. The POD that brings them together and keeps them together has to be pretty compelling.

Grossly oversimplified:
  • Norway - the merchant fleet was an economic engine and long cordial relations with Britain were key
  • Sweden - industry and agriculture and long cordial relations with German states across the Baltic
  • Denmark - carefully trading with everyone while carefully patting the German wolf on their doorstep while trying to keep him outside.
  • Finland - just trying to keep the Russian bear out of their house.
Some commonality of language helps Norway, Sweden and Denmark. Long histories of nose-to-nose warfare and layers of economic and diplomatic cross-purposes doesn't help cohesion. Still, there were direct threats from historically aggressive neighbors that could have spurred foresighted co-operation.
 
You also have to take into account the Internal narrative perspective in Norway at this point regarding Sweden which is that 99.99% of the population voted to cut Union ties completely. How do you sell a reversal of that that to the population? German agression wasn't convincing and even after the occupation any talks about even a defensive union was stonewalled. Economically its suicidal to tie any ties to any of the other Nordic nations as history has shown that Norwegian concerns are a secondary issue which was the main trigger for the dissolution with sweden, Norway also had a seperate military from sweden even under the union so you're actually asking for a tighter union than the one nearly 100% of the population voted against.
 
Last edited:
A riff on Orcbusters thought: each of the countries had unique commercial and diplomatic goals that were based on physical geography. The POD that brings them together and keeps them together has to be pretty compelling.

Grossly oversimplified:
  • Norway - the merchant fleet was an economic engine and long cordial relations with Britain were key
  • Sweden - industry and agriculture and long cordial relations with German states across the Baltic
  • Denmark - carefully trading with everyone while carefully patting the German wolf on their doorstep while trying to keep him outside.
  • Finland - just trying to keep the Russian bear out of their house.
Some commonality of language helps Norway, Sweden and Denmark. Long histories of nose-to-nose warfare and layers of economic and diplomatic cross-purposes doesn't help cohesion. Still, there were direct threats from historically aggressive neighbors that could have spurred foresighted co-operation.
I guess in a very simplifyed manner each of the countries had a country they critically needed to be on good terms with. If united, those countries needed to (not critically, but still) be on good terms with Scandinavia. Otherwise Scandinavia might align with the other big country and now it might matter.
 

Devvy

Donor
You also have to take into account the Internal narrative perspective in Norway at this point regarding Sweden which is that 99.99% of the population voted to cut Union ties completely. How do you sell a reversal of that that to the population?

As I mentioned - not only Norway (1905), but Finland (1917) has only just wrangled itself out of the Russian Empire, and Iceland (1918) has just become a sovereign kingdom in personal union with Denmark.
 
Top