What if Finland stayed apart of russia

This is basically the same as the Reds winning the Finnish Civil War, right?

It's my understanding that the Whites won the war pretty handily, largely due to German intervention. So let's say that Germany is too busy to help for some reason, the Reds win, and Finland joins the USSR, though presumably as the Finnish SSR and not part of Russia.

Some thoughts:
-Finland's economy probably stays reliant on forestry-based raw resource exploitation and industry; no Nokia for us!
-Divorced from the free market, some of Finland's mining and heavy industry might stay open for longer (I'm picturing Valtra tractors in Cuba :D )
-Sweden probably stays neutral as OTL, but might be more "Finlandized" rather than openly NATO-leaning
-Norway is probably smart enough to stick with NATO. Rather than Norway having a relatively short, not super passable border with the USSR, we now have almost 1,000km of border, some of it very nearly traversable! Finnmark is going to host tens of thousands of NATO troops, completely changing the local landscape and economy. In Finland, northern Lappi will likely see something similar.

That's all of the top of my head; I'm trying to figure out how badly the Russians will abuse the Finnish SSR
 
This is basically the same as the Reds winning the Finnish Civil War, right?

It's my understanding that the Whites won the war pretty handily, largely due to German intervention. So let's say that Germany is too busy to help for some reason, the Reds win, and Finland joins the USSR, though presumably as the Finnish SSR and not part of Russia.

Some thoughts:
-Finland's economy probably stays reliant on forestry-based raw resource exploitation and industry; no Nokia for us!
-Divorced from the free market, some of Finland's mining and heavy industry might stay open for longer (I'm picturing Valtra tractors in Cuba :D )
-Sweden probably stays neutral as OTL, but might be more "Finlandized" rather than openly NATO-leaning
-Norway is probably smart enough to stick with NATO. Rather than Norway having a relatively short, not super passable border with the USSR, we now have almost 1,000km of border, some of it very nearly traversable! Finnmark is going to host tens of thousands of NATO troops, completely changing the local landscape and economy. In Finland, northern Lappi will likely see something similar.

That's all of the top of my head; I'm trying to figure out how badly the Russians will abuse the Finnish SSR

Whites would win FCW even without Germans, altough bit later than in OTL. Reds weren't very good in military issues.

Best ways keeping Finland as part of Finland are these:
- Russia wins WW1.
- No October Revolution so then right-wing government probably doesn't declare independence.
- Finland has socialist government during October Revolution so then Finland doesn't declare independence.
 
This is basically the same as the Reds winning the Finnish Civil War, right?

It's my understanding that the Whites won the war pretty handily, largely due to German intervention. So let's say that Germany is too busy to help for some reason, the Reds win, and Finland joins the USSR, though presumably as the Finnish SSR and not part of Russia.

Like Lalli said above, the Whites would have won without the German intervention as well, all other things staying the same. It would have taken longer and been a lot bloodier, and probably destroyed Finland's chances to become a functional bourgeois republic in the interwar.* For the Reds winning the civil war, we'd need both no German intervention and a lot stronger Russian support for the Red side than IOTL. Adding some good luck for the Reds and bad for the Whites (like key White personalities getting caught by the Reds or killed in the early stages, say Svinhufvud and Mannerheim) would help the Red cause as well.


-Finland's economy probably stays reliant on forestry-based raw resource exploitation and industry; no Nokia for us!
-Divorced from the free market, some of Finland's mining and heavy industry might stay open for longer (I'm picturing Valtra tractors in Cuba :D )
-Sweden probably stays neutral as OTL, but might be more "Finlandized" rather than openly NATO-leaning

How the Finnish economy develops would be massively dependent on what kind of a government Russia has, and what its policies on Finland are. The OP gives us a lot of leeway, and there is a huge difference between a (unlikely) Tsarist Russia that goes the path of constitutional monarchy that upholds the Finnish autonomy and cultural rights and a *Stalinist *Soviet state that decimates the Finnish society and population in different ways. In the first case, Finland might have several very successful industries and companies, mostly on the Russian market but known also abroad, and they could make sophisticated products. The wood industry would be the obvious base, but WWI era Finland had the beginnings of many industries, so there are many things the Finns could be plausibly making. In the second option, the *Soviets might kill an indigenous Finnish economy pretty much entirely, making what is Finland today a part of an economy run from Moscow that would look like the systems USSR had IOTL. That Finland would be a lot poorer and would most likely not make internationally known products. There is a great variety of options between these two extremes.

*That is to say that without the landing by the German Baltic Sea Division, Finland might have seen a right-wing dictatorship of the more radicalized Whites by the 30s, one that might have well been amenable to join Nazi Germany in an all out attack on the USSR in the early 40s, taken on Leningrad and helped the Nazis beat the USSR. This would have been unlikely, due to all the knock-on effects and butterflies in the first place, but it is something that I find an interesting (and horrifying) idea - that by their intervention in Finland, the imperial Germans might have lost Hitler his war against the USSR.
 
Another interesting aspect of an autonomous Grand Duchy within surviving Czarist Russia would eventually turn into a trilingual state, with Swedish- and Russian-speaking elites competing for influence.

Population- and economy-wise the orientation towards St. Petersburg would benefit the development of eastern Finland quite a bit compared to OTL - and if Petsamo is ceded for Finnish use as it had been promised before WW1, Lappland will also have much better economic prospects than OTL.
 
Hmm, WI depends heavily on how it happens

-Romanovs flee by train to Helsinki. Entente powers offer Finns economic and military aid in return of tolerating them. Massive butterflies for Russian civil war.
or
-Kolchack promises Finns independence in return for supporting Yudenich offensive on Petrograd, but betrays them later.
or
-Lenin intervenes militarily in Finnish Civil war
 
Hmm, WI depends heavily on how it happens

-Romanovs flee by train to Helsinki. Entente powers offer Finns economic and military aid in return of tolerating them. Massive butterflies for Russian civil war.
or
-Kolchack promises Finns independence in return for supporting Yudenich offensive on Petrograd, but betrays them later.
or
-Lenin intervenes militarily in Finnish Civil war

-There not be way that Romanovs could flee to Helsinki. They weren't very beloved anymore in Finland.
- Possible but is Kolchak smart enough for this?
- Possible if there wouldn't be Russian Civil War.
 
-There not be way that Romanovs could flee to Helsinki. They weren't very beloved anymore in Finland.

By summer of 1917 Finland was experiencing critical shortage of food. Finnish government may not love the Romanov’s, but may tolerate them in exchange for food through Murmansk.
 
As a part of a Soviet Union that is pretty much like in OTL - well, not very promising prospects: you would probably find a deeply divided society devastated by Stalinism and forced collectivization and influx of maybe 2-3 million immigrants from the other parts of the USSR (mainly Russia). In a surving Romanov or White Russia, hard to say, depends rather totally on how tolerant that state would be of very independent minded and Western oriented Finland. A constitutional and federal monarchy and we might be doing famously but how likely would such an enlightened system be?
 
Just few thoughts concerning the Red victory and Finland becoming a part of Soviet Union:

One major problem with the Red victory in the Civil War is the fact that the Reds were significantly less organized than the Whites. Unlike the Whites, they also lacked experienced and trained soldiers and officers.

It’s also worth-noting that many Reds weren’t prepared for the full-scale war. They understood that there will be fighting, but it seems that they overestimated their support and Finnish population would just flock to them after they have made their declaration. You probably wouldn’t have had early rebellions in places like Oulu, Kemi and Tornio in Northern Finland, if the Reds had realized how things would go.

By early 1918 the White Guards have been also able to gather more weapons and other equipment than the Reds. The situation in this regard had been more equal earlier, but especially after the declaration of independence the gap had been increasing for the benefit of Whites.

Above mentioned reasons meant that the Reds, apart from some very early attempts, were unable to mount any significant offensives during the war.

DrakonFin has already mentioned things which might solve some of these issues. If some key personnel in the White leadership had died/been captured, it might have helped the Reds. It’s important to note though that the Whites did have a quite large number of capable leaders so they can probably lose some and still have enough good leaders to win the war. Somehow getting more jägers who had served in the German Army and former Imperial Army officers to defect to the Red side would help them very significantly, even if numbers were limited.

The Reds need to move quicker than they did in our history’s civil war. Taking Mikkeli and Sortavala in Eastern Finland might have been doable even IOTL Civil War, but the Whites moved just little too quickly and the Reds little too slowly for that to happen. Better preparations and planning might solve these issues, especially if the Reds have slightly better officers and the Whites worse as I proposed above. If Germany doesn’t do its intervention and Lenin gives more help to the Reds, that might help.

I must add though that even with all this happening, I would probably still put my money on the Whites winning. The Reds could probably win a civil war with an earlier POD, but the civil war seems somewhat unlikely, though not impossible.

Regarding the effects of the Red victory, you would probably see the Finnish Socialist Workers' Republic being one of the states signing the treaty to establish the USSR besides Russia, Ukraine, Byelorussia and Transcaucasia. Most Reds weren’t aiming towards the dictatorship like there developed in Soviet Russia but the international situation would eventually force them to get closer to Moscow, especially if the Soviets had helped them during the war.

The Soviet control of Finnish southern coast (especially places where they did have bases IOTL, like Hanko and Porkkala) and Gogland and other Islands in the Gulf of Finland would significantly increase the geopolitical position of the Soviet Union and help to ensure the safety of Leningrad. Having Åland would be also very important, but it’s quite possible that Swedes take it in a scenario like this.

One interesting effect of the Red victory in Finland are its spillover effects elsewhere. The Estonian Independence War was a close-run thing and the lack of Finnish support might be just enough to turn the tides. This will also help the Soviets in Latvia too, though the effect probably lessens further south you go. Lithuania and Poland might go actually pretty much as IOTL, though I might be wrong.

Soviet Finland would probably get a Russian minority significantly larger than we have now. On the other hand, Swedish-speaking minority will probably suffer, especially if we get a leader like Stalin even ITTL. In the best-case scenario, you might get something like what happened to Karelians and Finns in Karelo-Finnish SSR during the 1940’s though; Stalin somewhat lessened oppression because he realized that it might have a negative influence on the Soviet reputation in Finland*. That depends how Soviet-Swedish relations develop of course.

*There were originally plans to move all Karelians and Finns in Karelia to Central Asia following the WW2 similarly how for example Crimean Tatars and Chechens had been moved moved but Stalin dropped them off from his eventual plans.
 
Last edited:
There is no armistice in 1940 and Stalin just keeps going. Finnish army was close to its breaking point at the time anyway.
 
Soviet Finland would change WW2 much. Hitler probably still rise to power. It is too possible that Sweden shift even closer to Axis camp as in OTL. Perhaps Sweden joins to Nato after WW2.

And if USSR still collapses, Finland might be even more pro-Nato.
 
Let's assume Finland becomes an SSR. This could affect the Soviets Nazi deal to split up Poland and the Baltic states. The Soviet Union having Finland could cause Hitler to demand Poland west of the Curzon Line, per OTL but also Lithuania.

Let's say WWII goes pretty much the same other wise, with the exception that there's no Winter War. Which it would go pretty much the same because "he spent more time reading a newspaper article" or "twitched the wrong way" is babbling nonsense and AH equivalent to the flat earth or creationism.

So between 1945 and 1989-1991 collapse of Communism occurs and we see real the real butterflies that are of any concern people's history (to people outside Finland that is). Just as Crimea was (wrongly) transferred to Ukraine SSR so to, most likely will Karelia ASSR be transferred to Finland SSR. So when the USSR breaks up, Finland is closer to Leningrad/St Petersburg. President Putin, along with annexing Crimea, will make moves to take Karel IA. Whereas Ukraine is a nation of Russians who feel they are different, Karelia is a totally different story. This will upset NATO, Sweden, and the Baltic nations (especially Estonia and Latvia due to their demographics of Russian minorities as well as Estonians being Finnish cousins).

And please don't go off rails with discussing whether my views on Ukraine are accurate according to YOUR world view. Dont care about your views. This is an extrapolation of the most likely scenario to occur as history unfolds. If you want to present your opinion do so without bothering me about mine.
 
Just few thoughts concerning the Red victory and Finland becoming a part of Soviet Union:

One major problem with the Red victory in the Civil War is the fact that the Reds were significantly less organized than the Whites. Unlike the Whites, they also lacked experienced and trained soldiers and officers.

It’s also worth-noting that many Reds weren’t prepared for the full-scale war. They understood that there will be fighting, but it seems that they overestimated their support and Finnish population would just flock to them after they have made their declaration. You probably wouldn’t have had early rebellions in places like Oulu, Kemi and Tornio in Northern Finland, if the Reds had realized how things would go.

By early 1918 the White Guards have been also able to gather more weapons and other equipment than the Reds. The situation in this regard had been more equal earlier, but especially after the declaration of independence the gap had been increasing for the benefit of Whites.

Above mentioned reasons meant that the Reds, apart from some very early attempts, were unable to mount any significant offensives during the war.

DrakonFin has already mentioned things which might solve some of these issues. If some key personnel in the White leadership had died/been captured, it might have helped the Reds. It’s important to note though that the Whites did have a quite large number of capable leaders so they can probably lose some and still have enough good leaders to win the war. Somehow getting more jägers who had served in the German Army and former Imperial Army officers to defect to the Red side would help them very significantly, even if numbers were limited.

The Reds need to move quicker than they did in our history’s civil war. Taking Mikkeli and Sortavala in Eastern Finland might have been doable even IOTL Civil War, but the Whites moved just little too quickly and the Reds little too slowly for that to happen. Better preparations and planning might solve these issues, especially if the Reds have slightly better officers and the Whites worse as I proposed above. If Germany doesn’t do its intervention and Lenin gives more help to the Reds, that might help.

I must add though that even with all this happening, I would probably still put my money on the Whites winning. The Reds could probably win a civil war with an earlier POD, but the civil war seems somewhat unlikely, though not impossible.

I pretty much agree with this. Any realistic changes we can make into the OTL civil war after it is underway would most likely not be enough to avert a White victory. The military skill and ability on the White side was so much better that it was a decisive factor.

However, several bumps in the road could be created by seemingly minor changes and flukes. Consider, for example, that during the first night of the Red takeover of Helsinki, the revolutionaries manage to catch the entire Svinhufvud senate through a massive stroke of luck. Let's say Mannerheim suffers a fatal accident during roughly the same time - an attempt to disarm Russians in Ostrobothnia goes awry, and he gets shot.

This alone would mean that the Whites would be decapitated and without such a strong claim to legitimacy at a crucial time. As a result, building the White military and the bureacratic apparatus of the White political leadership would take longer and be wrought with disagreement over who is in overall control. In the meanwhile, the Reds would have more time to shore up their hold on to southern Finland. Let's say that the Reds go on a general offensive a few weeks into the war, while the White side is still in a comparative disarray, and that due to (handwave), the Bolsheviks are able to send them real help in the form of actual battle-hardened soldiers and revolutionary officers. In such a scenario, essentially a White-screw and comparative Red-wank, a skilled writer could probably cobble together a seemingly realistic Red victory scenario, provided that all gods of war are continually on the Red side and that the Whites meet setback after setback.;)

More realistically, though, I am also of the opinion that pre-war PODs would be needed for a non-contrived, truly plausible Red victory in a Finnish civil war.


Regarding the effects of the Red victory, you would probably see the Finnish Socialist Workers' Republic being one of the states signing the treaty to establish the USSR besides Russia, Ukraine, Byelorussia and Transcaucasia. Most Reds weren’t aiming towards the dictatorship like there developed in Soviet Russia but the international situation would eventually force them to get closer to Moscow, especially if the Soviets had helped them during the war.

The Soviet control of Finnish southern coast (especially places where they did have bases IOTL, like Hanko and Porkkala) and Gogland and other Islands in the Gulf of Finland would significantly increase the geopolitical position of the Soviet Union and help to ensure the safety of Leningrad. Having Åland would be also very important, but it’s quite possible that Swedes take it in a scenario like this.

One interesting effect of the Red victory in Finland are its spillover effects elsewhere. The Estonian Independence War was a close-run thing and the lack of Finnish support might be just enough to turn the tides. This will also help the Soviets in Latvia too, though the effect probably lessens further south you go. Lithuania and Poland might go actually pretty much as IOTL, though I might be wrong.

Soviet Finland would probably get a Russian minority significantly larger than we have now. On the other hand, Swedish-speaking minority will probably suffer, especially if we get a leader like Stalin even ITTL. In the best-case scenario, you might get something like what happened to Karelians and Finns in Karelo-Finnish SSR during the 1940’s though; Stalin somewhat lessened oppression because he realized that it might have a negative influence on the Soviet reputation in Finland*. That depends how Soviet-Swedish relations develop of course.

*There were originally plans to move all Karelians and Finns in Karelia to Central Asia following the WW2 similarly how for example Crimean Tatars and Chechens had been moved moved but Stalin dropped them off from his eventual plans.

Like I have commented before, a Red victory in Finland could have significant knock-on effects in the Baltics (we could posit, say, a domino theory beginning in Estonia, where instead of White Finnish help there would be some Red Finnish help), maybe Poland and then in the Soviet state itself. We might see a *USSR that has comparatively effortlessly taken Finland and the Baltics, and is going strong in Poland, deciding that exporting the Revolution is something that will work, based on these early successes. A Soviet Union that stays internationalist and avoids "Socialism in one country" might make the 20s and 30s really different from the OTL. Also the different wars and events of 1918-21 would mean that different Soviet leaders would live or die. We could plausibly bump off Trotsky or Stalin this early, say, and keep alive men who died in this time IOTL, perhaps making some of them future leaders of the Soviet state, reformers even.

The Red Finnish/*Soviet control of Finland would mean changes in Sweden's politics, and seeing something like the OTL Åland Crisis between Sweden and the Finnish Workers' Republic or the *USSR might be quite interesting. Sweden might well get the islands, but then Red revanchism towards Sweden might well be inevitable, too.

The point about a Russian minority in Finland is a good one (also like @Karelian said above), and like always, we need to remember that these Russians coming to Finland would not only change Finland - they would also change Russia, even if in smaller ways. Maybe the *Finnish SSR will get Bolshevik administrators that survive due to this posting, using it as a stepstone towards (comparative) greatness, or maybe people who became prominent IOTL go to Finland to get buried in bureaucratic mediocrity. On the other hand, Finnish Communists might have better careers in the *USSR due to the Red victory in Finland, some of them being seen as early heroes of Communism, and especially if this *USSR does not go Stalinist or involve similar purges of minorities, we might see more and even more successful careers for Finns in the vein of O.W. Kuusinen.
 
For the purposes of comments below, I assume that in this scenario things are pretty much OTL in the wider world until the WW2.

Let's assume Finland becomes an SSR. This could affect the Soviets Nazi deal to split up Poland and the Baltic states. The Soviet Union having Finland could cause Hitler to demand Poland west of the Curzon Line, per OTL but also Lithuania.

Let's say WWII goes pretty much the same other wise, with the exception that there's no Winter War. Which it would go pretty much the same because "he spent more time reading a newspaper article" or "twitched the wrong way" is babbling nonsense and AH equivalent to the flat earth or creationism.

The Winter War (besides clashes with the Japanese) was one of the main motivators of reforms in the Soviet armed forces. I freely admit that there are people who probably have significantly better knowledge about these reforms, but nevertheless they seem to have affected the Red Army greatly. I would also assume that the defence of Leningrad would have been affected by the lack of northern front to worry about. The Finnish front also tied something between 10-20 Soviet divisions for most of the time between 1941-44, some of which would have been probably used elsewhere.

I would also add that in France, the main reason for Prime Minister Daladier’s resignation was the result of his government’s inability to help Finland during the war. I don’t know enough about France during this period though to comment about changes his non-resignation could have caused.

I would also note that St. Petersburg, a city where Putin spend his youth and were he created his career, would have had a vastly different history in this scenario. One of the most defining moments of the city’s history, the siege, never happened here, but the city either stayed in the Soviet hands or was overrun by the Germans. We have people interested in military history here who can probably say which one is more likely but nevertheless it’s quite clear that both scenarios would have resulted a very different city.

I find the idea of Lithuania going to Nazi Germany instead of Soviet Union interesting one, in a sense how the Lithuanian experience of WW2 would then much more correspond with those of Central European states which the Soviet Union occupied later in the war.

So between 1945 and 1989-1991 collapse of Communism occurs and we see real the real butterflies that are of any concern people's history (to people outside Finland that is). Just as Crimea was (wrongly) transferred to Ukraine SSR so to, most likely will Karelia ASSR be transferred to Finland SSR.

Would there even be Karelian ASSR? IOTL one of the main reasons it was established was to help the Soviets in peace negotiations in Tartu in 1921 and generally to influence Finnish opinion of Soviet Communism. It very well might be still created and eventually added to Finland but it is also possible that the Soviet Union decided different way to manage the area.

The Red Finnish/*Soviet control of Finland would mean changes in Sweden's politics, and seeing something like the OTL Åland Crisis between Sweden and the Finnish Workers' Republic or the *USSR might be quite interesting. Sweden might well get the islands, but then Red revanchism towards Sweden might well be inevitable, too.

I could see the government of Soviet Finland using this issue to the full extent in its propaganda when the need arises to raise hate/fears towards Sweden.

Thinking about Karelian ASSR, I wonder if there could be some sort Finno-Swedish Autonomous Oblast in Ostrobothnia. I think I have also earlier proposed the Sami Autonomous Oblast in Northern Lapland as possibly the closest thing we could get as a Sami state with a relatively late POD in threads discussing the topic.
 
Last edited:
A Soviet Finland will also have a impact on the shipping industry in the Baltic. If Finland is on the eastern side of the iron curtain ther will be no incentive for cruise ships between Sweden and Finland and thus no Viking and Silja line. Sweden and Finland will distance themselves even more and after 1991 Finland if they break free will have Sweden on one side that cares wery little about Finland and Russia with troubles of their own
 
For the purposes of comments answers below, I assume that in this scenario things are pretty much OTL in the wider world until the WW2.



The Winter War (besides clashes with the Japanese) was one of the main motivators of reforms in the Soviet armed forces. I freely admit that there are people who probably have significantly better knowledge about these reforms, but nevertheless they seem to have affected the Red Army greatly. I would also assume that the defence of Leningrad would have been affected by the lack of northern front to worry about. The Finnish front also tied something between 10-20 Soviet divisions for most of the time between 1941-44, some of which would have been probably used elsewhere.

I would also add that in France, the main reason for Prime Minister Daladier’s resignation was the result of his government’s inability to help Finland during the war. I don’t know enough about France during this period though to comment about changes his non-resignation could have caused.

I would also note that St. Petersburg, a city where Putin spend his youth and were he created his career, would have had a vastly different history in this scenario. One of the most defining moments of the city’s history, the siege, never happened here, but the city either stayed in the Soviet hands or was overrun by the Germans. We have people interested in military history here who can probably say which one is more likely but nevertheless it’s quite clear that both scenarios would have resulted a very different city.

I find the idea of Lithuania going to Nazi Germany instead of Soviet Union interesting one, in a sense how the Lithuanian experience of WW2 would then much more correspond with those of Central European states which the Soviet Union occupied later in the war.



Would there even be Karelian ASSR? IOTL one of the main reasons it was established was to help the Soviets in peace negotiations in Tartu in 1921 and generally to influence Finnish opinion of Soviet Communism. It very well might be still created and eventually added to Finland but it is also possible that the Soviet Union decided different way to manage the area.



I could see the government of Soviet Finland using this issue to the full extent in its propaganda when the need arises to raise hate/fears towards Sweden.

Thinking about Karelian ASSR, I wonder if there could be some sort Finno-Swedish Autonomous Oblast in Ostrobothnia. I think I have also earlier proposed the Sami Autonomous Oblast in Northern Lapland as possibly the closest thing we could get as a Sami state with a relatively late POD in threads discussing the topic.
Obviously you subscribe to the outdated and laughable big man theory of history. I stopped reading halfway through. It wasn't worth my time
 
Thinking about Karelian ASSR, I wonder if there could be some sort Finno-Swedish Autonomous Oblast in Ostrobothnia. I think I have also earlier proposed the Sami Autonomous Oblast in Northern Lapland as possibly the closest thing we could get as a Sami state with a relatively late POD in threads discussing the topic.

Well, they need some place to put all the Ålanders in after the main island is emptied to make it wholesale into a restricted military area with several naval and air installations, including a major naval infantry base, and later various radar stations and missile units.;)

Seriously, though, special "reservations" for both the Swedish-speakers and the Sami would be conceivable, to pay lip service to the idea that the *USSR respects these minorities' rights.

Of course after these minorities are concentrated in administratively and geographically defined areas, they would be easier to move elsewhere should the interests of the Soviet state absolutely demand it.


Obviously you subscribe to the outdated and laughable big man theory of history. I stopped reading halfway through. It wasn't worth my time

I hope you are not being serious...
 
Last edited:
Assuming that Finland gets conquered in 1940:

Finland cedes most of the Karelian Isthmus and recives Eastern Karelia instead

Soviets do the usual repressions and deportations similar to what they did in the Baltic states (about 3-4% of the population), though in the last weeks of the war you might see a mass exodus of people trying to flee for sweden, combined with war deaths, Finland could lose even 8% of it's population.

The Swedish population might be entirely deported to Central Asia or Siberia, given the Stalinist states paranoi towards ethnic groups with connections abroad (IOTL see deportation of Koreans or Greeks)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Suomen-kansantasavalta.png
The new finish leadership would be dominated by red exiles (like O. W. Kuusinen) and Karelians, however given Finlands strategic position, I would not discount Finland having leaders named from the centre (see IOTL Brezhnev in Moldavia)

Soviets would build huge industrial combines, taking advantage of Finland specific characteristics, huge paper plants, wood processing factories, chemical industry, mining in the northern part. These combines would be large all-union entreprizes and would need a very large workforce, you would migration from the rest of the Union to Finland (especially from Russia).

Finland would probably have the highest standard of living of republics, but of course it would poor than OTL (30-40% maybe even more)
 
Top