What if German WW2 occupation forces in Scandinavia bombed the resistance camps Sweden was hosting?

What if German WW2 occupation forces in Scandinavia bombed the training camps Sweden was hosting in its country for Norwegian and Danish resistance forces?

This would have been quite possible, as the Swedes let German forces in Norway move through its territory toward the Eastern Front when it looked like Nazi Germany was winning in the early stages of the war, and when Soviet advances in Eastern Europe were menacing. Undoubtedly, German spies must have been very aware of these operations.

If this did happen, Sweden would have to make a choice. 1) Either close down the camps, and at best let the resistance forces "relocate" to another country (which would have been difficult) or declare disarmed refugee status, 2) continue to keep the camps open, or relocate them so they were less obvious to air attack and face continued German pressure, up to and including some sort of hostile contact with German land forces, or 3) completely sequester the Norwegian and Danish resistance forces hiding inside Sweden.

Sweden would have to consider the long term benefits of its official image as a politically neutral state, and the consequences of losing that traditional position. It would also have to consider the long term consequences of its actions in a post WW2 environment, with the goal of trying to alienate as few people as it can. if it moved against the Scandinavian resistance forces, at the very least Sweden would look weak. At the very worst, it would look traitorous. This is probably one of the reasons why Sweden permitted sanctuary training camps for Scandinavian resistance forces in its territory.

If, on the other hand, it decided to jump into war against Germany after such an attack on the resistance training camps in its country, the allies may have welcomed it, and it may have been able to pull it off without serious damage toward the end of the war. At best however, Sweden would have been a tie down of German military resources, which may have sped up the war. Which front would benefit the most if Sweden stepped is a matter of conjecture. If it benefitted the Soviets more than the armies fighting on the western front, it would not have benefitted Sweden's interests. Also, it would cost Sweden its neutrality label, which it probably saw as more politically valuable in the long run.

In conclusion, if German forces did bomb Scandinavian resistance forces training inside its country, I would guess Sweden would most likely publicly state that they were "unaware" of these facilities, and would have closed them down, offering the resistance forces a safe passage to England if they did not chose to "disarm" and declare refugee status. Getting them to England would have been the tricky part; it would most likely involve a risky submarine or even riskier airlift operation.

This article based on the following Wikipedia source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_police_troops_in_Sweden_during_World_War_II

Brian Ghilliotti
 
Last edited:
What if German WW2 occupation forces in Scandinavia bombed the training camps its was hosting in its country for Norwegian and Danish resistance forces? ...

Exactly when does this occur? How large a bomber force is committed? Are additional ground combat units sent to Norway or Denmark?
 
IIRC, the Germans were critically dependent on Swedish minerals, eg tungsten ore for machine tool bits, perhaps less so for iron ore...

They certainly didn't want to make *too* many waves by interfering overtly...
 
I wonder... If in the summer of 1944 the Swedish army was capable of forcing the road open to Narviks port were the Allies able to make a hasty landing there?
 
What if German WW2 occupation forces in Scandinavia bombed the training camps Sweden was hosting in its country for Norwegian and Danish resistance forces? (Thread title correction)
Thread title correction....

What if German WW2 occupation forces in Scandinavia bombed the training camps Sweden was hosting in its country for Norwegian and Danish resistance forces?

This would have been quite possible, as the Swedes let German forces in Norway move through its territory toward the Eastern Front when it looked like Nazi Germany was winning in the early stages of the war, and when Soviet advances in Eastern Europe were menacing. Undoubtedly, German spies must have been very aware of these operations.

If this did happen, Sweden would have to make a choice. 1) Either close down the camps, and at best let the resistance forces "relocate" to another country (which would have been difficult) or declare disarmed refugee status, 2) continue to keep the camps open, or relocate them so they were less obvious to air attack and face continued German pressure, up to and including some sort of hostile contact with German land forces, or 3) completely sequester the Norwegian and Danish resistance forces hiding inside Sweden.

Sweden would have to consider the long term benefits of its official image as a politically neutral state, and the consequences of losing that traditional position. It would also have to consider the long term consequences of its actions in a post WW2 environment, with the goal of trying to alienate as few people as it can. if it moved against the Scandinavian resistance forces, at the very least Sweden would look weak. At the very worst, it would look traitorous. This is probably one of the reasons why Sweden permitted sanctuary training camps for Scandinavian resistance forces in its territory.

If, on the other hand, it decided to jump into war against Germany after such an attack on the resistance training camps in its country, the allies may have welcomed it, and it may have been able to pull it off without serious damage toward the end of the war. At best however, Sweden would have been a tie down of German military resources, which may have sped up the war. Which front would benefit the most if Sweden stepped is a matter of conjecture. If it benefitted the Soviets more than the armies fighting on the western front, it would not have benefitted Sweden's interests. Also, it would cost Sweden its neutrality label, which it probably saw as more politically valuable in the long run.

In conclusion, if German forces did bomb Scandinavian resistance forces training inside its country, I would guess Sweden would most likely publicly state that they were "unaware" of these facilities, and would have closed them down, offering the resistance forces a safe passage to England if they did not chose to "disarm" and declare refugee status. Getting them to England would have been the tricky part; it would most likely involve a risky submarine or even riskier airlift operation.

This article based on the following Wikipedia source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_police_troops_in_Sweden_during_World_War_II

Brian Ghilliotti
L
 
The resistance was a minor problem compared to the shitstorm german industry would face in 44 with even a temporary cutoff of swedish iron ore. No chance in hell of this happening with this basis.
 
The Germans wasn't willing to take the hardline in Denmark, a country they occupied. So why would they be willing to piss off the Swedes, a unoccupied country?
 
If the Nazis had a collective sudden rush of shit to the brain, (thank you Jingles), bombed the camps then followed it up with a Declaration of War, I wonder if Finland would switch sides PDQ?
With Sweden actively involved, would they offer assistance should the USSR get pushy, (or pushier), in order to have Finland flip?
That then leaves Germany with only Norway and MILORG is likely to gain in confidence too. That makes Norway near ungovernable. A quick "friendship and peace" treaty between Hitler and Quisling and the Wehrmacht hot foot it to Denmark.
Quisling "slips" in the bathroom onto multiple 9mmP bullets, (natural causes), and Norway is back in the Allied/Swedish camp.

The downside for the allies is that there are now about 400k fresh troops in Europe, although more unfortunately for those troops, they're more likely to be sent to the eastern front as another bump in the road.
End result, WWII ends a week later, Finland retains territory it would have lost after the Continuation War, but doesn't regain anything lost after the Winter War, the USSR loses a a few hundred thousand more soldiers for no real difference from OTL apart from Finland who are a bit better off.
 
If the Nazis had a collective sudden rush of shit to the brain, (thank you Jingles), bombed the camps then followed it up with a Declaration of War, I wonder if Finland would switch sides PDQ?
With Sweden actively involved, would they offer assistance should the USSR get pushy, (or pushier), in order to have Finland flip?
That then leaves Germany with only Norway and MILORG is likely to gain in confidence too. That makes Norway near ungovernable. A quick "friendship and peace" treaty between Hitler and Quisling and the Wehrmacht hot foot it to Denmark.
Quisling "slips" in the bathroom onto multiple 9mmP bullets, (natural causes), and Norway is back in the Allied/Swedish camp.

The downside for the allies is that there are now about 400k fresh troops in Europe, although more unfortunately for those troops, they're more likely to be sent to the eastern front as another bump in the road.
End result, WWII ends a week later, Finland retains territory it would have lost after the Continuation War, but doesn't regain anything lost after the Winter War, the USSR loses a a few hundred thousand more soldiers for no real difference from OTL apart from Finland who are a bit better off.

If war is declared against sweden then quitting isn't an option as sweden would become THE most strategically important front for the germans as they loose 40% of their iron ore without it. MILORG in the whole picture is rather irrelevant. Keeping Norway and sweden for the Iron is paramount above anything else so result would probably be to direct forces to the new scandinavian front if needed.
 
If the Nazis had a collective sudden rush of shit to the brain, (thank you Jingles), bombed the camps then followed it up with a Declaration of War, I wonder if Finland would switch sides PDQ?
With Sweden actively involved, would they offer assistance should the USSR get pushy, (or pushier), in order to have Finland flip?
That then leaves Germany with only Norway and MILORG is likely to gain in confidence too. That makes Norway near ungovernable. A quick "friendship and peace" treaty between Hitler and Quisling and the Wehrmacht hot foot it to Denmark.
Quisling "slips" in the bathroom onto multiple 9mmP bullets, (natural causes), and Norway is back in the Allied/Swedish camp.

The downside for the allies is that there are now about 400k fresh troops in Europe, although more unfortunately for those troops, they're more likely to be sent to the eastern front as another bump in the road.
End result, WWII ends a week later, Finland retains territory it would have lost after the Continuation War, but doesn't regain anything lost after the Winter War, the USSR loses a a few hundred thousand more soldiers for no real difference from OTL apart from Finland who are a bit better off.

Changing sides is very difficult for Finland as long as they are at war against the USSR, there are over 200 000 German soldiers in Finland and the Finns are dependent on Germany for foreign trade. The most likely option in case of Germany attacking Sweden is thus Finland protesting it and refusing to take part in any military action against Sweden, but still not breaking its de facto alliance with Germany. Now, only if Finland could quickly negotiate a beneficial ceasefire with the USSR could it change sides in short order. But as Stalin will not be giving Finland back the 1920 borders, which would be the minimum Finnish demand as long as they occupy Eastern Karelia, a quick ceasefire is off the table.

If Finland did declare war on Germany in 43 or early 44, after for some reason accepting a Soviet deal about a peace with 1940 borders, the fighting that would ensue on Finnish soil and in the Finnish waters would definitely cause more death and destruction in Finland than the War of Lapland did IOTL, and as a result Finland would without a doubt leave the war in a worse condition than IOTL, even if it could keep Petsamo as a result (which is debatable).

Under the circumstances, with a war in Sweden, the best thing Stalin could do in terms of Finland would be a major attack on the Karelian isthmus as soon as possible to bring the Finns to the negotiating table. But then this is not possible before the siege of Leningrad is lifted in the first place.

The bottom line: how Finland chose its allies was never really about who Helsinki "liked", it was about which foreign nation to deal with to best serve Finnish national interests and keep the country independent at that particular moment and in the near future. As long as the Germans have such big leverage in Finland as they did in 1943 and still in early 1944, as long as both Eastern Karelia and the Karelian Isthmus are secure and as long as Finland is not getting a "fair peace", Finland is not going to flip.
 
Last edited:
The total German forces in Norway 43-44 were closer to 300,000. Of that a bit over 100,000 were field combat units, some were coastal defense, the balance were naval & air force support, or service units. Operational air strength was slightly over 300 aircraft & a high portion of those were bombers configured for maritime strike.

So, lets assume there is a attempt to intimidate the Swedes into cessation of the underground support. This sort of was attempted OTL, but was dropped. ATL the Germans try harder & don't like the results, a series of airstrikes, and maybe a Brandengerger raid are made. The Swedes get nervous and the Brits play on this. OTL Churchill had made a long running try at getting the Swedes to join the Allies. For fairly obvious reasons this went nowhere.

So when does the tipping point occur? If before Op NEPTUNE is executed it places Eisenhower in a awkward position. He'd committed to a maximum effort, a colossal crack if you will in Op Neptune, & resisted Churchills ideas for other adventures. But, this is potentially a major strategic reversal for Germany. So, does Ike make a reduction in Op NEPTUNE, or postpone it yet again to organize a hasty attack to support the Swedes?

The Allies don't have many good options here. Narvik may be the best line of communication to open to Sweden. There is a fair port, a rail and automotive road, and the German garrison is dispersed and relatively weak in strategic and operational terms. Unfortunatly This location is at the extreme limits of USAAF air coverage & a landing will be dependent on whatever carriers are at hand. But, if the Swedes can make good progress towards the port it can be worth the risk.

If the decision is forced post D Day then Ikes choices are slightly easier, tho finding a expeditionary force is still problematic. Even landing a single understrength corps will draw down support for either Op OVERLORD or DRAGOON. The latter may be postponed yet again. For experienced amphib soldiers Ike would have to either withdraw a experienced unit from Normandy, the US 1st or 4th Inf Div are two candidates. Or, it would have to be a Commonwealth ID. In the US the remaining ID had very little or no amphib training as it was thought there were enough set for this task. Further down the line would be a experienced ID from the Med, with all the transportation and time constraints that implies. last would be some of the US marine units on the east coast that were forming up the 5th & 6th Marine Div. Aside from marshals objection there would be longer ranging consequences elsewhere.

But, were the Swedes able to link with a Allied Corps in the Narvik region, and Allied aircraft building up in Norway/Sweden what are the German options?
 
Top