What if Russia launches a surprise attack on Sweden in 1914?

Deleted member 94680

So if the HSF moves into the Baltic Sea and clears out the Baltic Fleet (no Jutland as they're all too busy sinking Russian Dreadnoughts?) what implication would that have for the bolsheviks if most of the Kronstadt sailors are at the bottom of the sea?
 
So if the HSF moves into the Baltic Sea and clears out the Baltic Fleet (no Jutland as they're all too busy sinking Russian Dreadnoughts?) what implication would that have for the bolsheviks if most of the Kronstadt sailors are at the bottom of the sea?
"See what these aristotic fools have done? They dragged us into a war with a neutral nation, and for what?"
 

Deleted member 94680

"See what these aristotic fools have done? They dragged us into a war with a neutral nation, and for what?"

Come again? Russia's already at War, this is 'merely' an extension of that war.

I meant more along the lines that the Kronstadt sailors were the early vanguard of the bolshevik's forces. If they are all (or mostly all) wiped out in a series of actions against the German Navy, does that affect the bolshevik's chances of gaining power?
 
Come again? Russia's already at War, this is 'merely' an extension of that war.

I meant more along the lines that the Kronstadt sailors were the early vanguard of the bolshevik's forces. If they are all (or mostly all) wiped out in a series of actions against the German Navy, does that affect the bolshevik's chances of gaining power?
We might see a very different Russian Revolution to be sure. I suspect that, however, more troops will be present in St. Petersburg anyways and after fighting and losing everywhere they might be convinced to the Bolsheviks as the war is going worse anyways. Of course they might not. Russia will be an even larger mess, espeically since they, you know, in all likelihood still loose the war but on worse conditions.
 
Plus outrage over allying with the duplicitous Russians who violated neutrality.
American Russian relations were horrible long before the war- the anti-semetism of Nicholas, Russian ambitions in the Pacific and the Monarchy were all reasons. Wilson referred to the "wonderful things that have happened in Russia" meaing the Febuary Revolution. Without it, America's entry into the war is doubtful
 
Come again? Russia's already at War, this is 'merely' an extension of that war.

I meant more along the lines that the Kronstadt sailors were the early vanguard of the bolshevik's forces. If they are all (or mostly all) wiped out in a series of actions against the German Navy, does that affect the bolshevik's chances of gaining power?

I don't think the Russians would send their navy out to fight a clearly overpowered German fleet, to the point of getting all their capital ships sunk. Like I wrote above, von Essen was the Russian admiral with the most active strategy. If he is out of the picture, his replacement will likely opt for a more defensive plan. What is likely is that after one or two major engagements, during which the Russians realize the German advantage, the Russians would pull their fleet to the Gulf of Finland (Kronstadt, Tallinn and Helsinki) behind the minefields and coastal defences protecting the entrances to the Gulf. There they would prepare for a last stand to try and stop the Germans advancing their fleet close to the capital itself.

Certainly more losses to the Russian fleet would mean butterflies for the revolution(s), as the navy sailors were among the earliest radicalisers and rebels.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
That is a pretty big if, in my view. The very raison d'etre for the Russian defence of southern Finland was to stop an invasion towards the capital. The Russian military would not drag its feet in bolstering the defence in the Grand Duchy if an invasion appears to be underway. An amphibious invasion of Finland and supporting the invasion force by sea will not be an easy proposition in any time of the year - as long as the Russian military is able to mount a defence of the Finnish coast and mainland. The Russian Navy can make the landings difficult in the Archipelago Sea and along the southern coast, and troops can be brought easily and fast from St. Petersburg along a direct, short railway line. The invader will have to resort to shipping for its logistics, and this is only feasible for a part of the year. For supplies, etc, the environment and logistics in Finland would be much harsher for the attacker than the defender. Most of the Russian troops will be in southern Finland anyway, any Russian troops left in the north would not be a significant problem. The problem, though, is beating the main Russian defence in the south.

The OTL German landings in Finland in early 1918 should not be seen as an example, because they were made into what was essentially a military vacuum. An invasion of the Finnish mainland against a functional Russian military in 1915 or 1916 would be a bloody and risky proposition.

Yes, the Russians have the interior lines around St. Petersburg, and can stop the Swedish attack. It seems like in previous discussions we quickly go to Swedish intentions. After the attack, they Swedes get 3 basic options.

1) Sit idly by. The Germans will give them nothing in the post war settlement.
2) Send troops to the easily supplied Congress of Poland and be auxillary troops for the Germans. While this helps win the war for the Central Powers, the question becomes, "What do the Swedes get post war?" Especially since no territory in Finland may be taken.
3) Try operations in Finland for potential "large" post war games.

Then we get into internal Swedish politics, at which I do not excel.

From what I remember, I was one of those arguing that the Swedes would not move very fast. Assuming no prewar PODs, it is reasonable to expect that the political will and military ability for quick action in the fall of 1914 would not be there. I am sceptical even about the POD: I would rather see the Swedish as surprised and enraged at the Russian attack, but not immediately ready to go as far as to declare war if the Russians, on their side, take a step back and are willing to apologise for one admiral's de facto rogue actions. Like with the Dogger Bank incident, I see the Russians ready to agree to arbitration to avoid Sweden joining the war on the German side.

I can see that too. Lots of potential ATL here. What do you think the Swedes get as a concession from Russia?

If both Stockholm and St. Petersburg allow things to deteriorate to the point of actual war, though, I'd say the Russians would start reinforcing the Ålands immediately. They would at least send some token troops to occupy Mariehamn and a number of minelayers to start securing the sea lanes. Unlike IOTL, the islands would now be at the front line, so I can't see the Russian military disregarding them in the same was as IOTL when they were a backwater situated on a sea route towards a neutral power. The most likely chain of events, IMHO, is a slow Russian buildup on the islands, supported by the Russian fleet acting aggressively in the Sea of Åland. I can see the Swedish Navy making reconnaissance sorties in the fall of 1914, but no actual invasion of the islands after they see that there is Russian presence and that it is growing.

By the spring of 1915, like you said, the Russian presence on the islands would be considerable. There would be ships, troops and artillery. They would be busily building new mine barrages and coastal artillery positions to cover them as well.

Can't really argue that Russia will try this option. It is not the only choice, but it would be an easy to make choice since it would involve not transferring troops to Poland as was done IOTL. Which means after the 1st and 2nd Russian armies are mauled, the Russians pull back on the flank of the Austrians since we are missing an army in Poland in the winter of 1914. This will save at a minimum Pemberg, since the Russians have to keep forces between East Prussia and the Russian capitol. IMO, Italy will not enter the war if Pemberg holds, so WW1 rapidly butterflies into a war we don't recognize much.

The British would be pretty critical of the Scandinavians, especially Norway de facto helping the Central Powers, though. Given that the success of the Norwegian merchant fleet was for a big part at the mercy of the British, I doubt that Oslo would take the chance of making the Entente think that they are supporting the CP in any way. If anything, if Sweden is CP, I can see the British try to make Norway join the war on their side, unofficially or officially.

Also likely. And if Norway's neutrality can't be assured, it is a good argument to keep the bulk of the Swedish army at home to defend. I would also not rule out the UK trying some of their plans related to amphibious operations around Jutland. If one diverts the forces at Gallipoli, there are enough troops and ships to try a very high risk operation focused towards the Baltic Sea.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
I don't think the Russians would send their navy out to fight a clearly overpowered German fleet, to the point of getting all their capital ships sunk. Like I wrote above, von Essen was the Russian admiral with the most active strategy. If he is out of the picture, his replacement will likely opt for a more defensive plan. What is likely is that after one or two major engagements, during which the Russians realize the German advantage, the Russians would pull their fleet to the Gulf of Finland (Kronstadt, Tallinn and Helsinki) behind the minefields and coastal defences protecting the entrances to the Gulf. There they would prepare for a last stand to try and stop the Germans advancing their fleet close to the capital itself.

Certainly more losses to the Russian fleet would mean butterflies for the revolution(s), as the navy sailors were among the earliest radicalisers and rebels.

The issue may be that if the Swedes are feared to be acting too fast and the reinforcements of the Alands by the Russian army is too slow, the Russian Navy may be force to an active defense of the Alands while the land defenses are built.
 

Deleted member 94680

I don't think the Russians would send their navy out to fight a clearly overpowered German fleet, to the point of getting all their capital ships sunk. Like I wrote above, von Essen was the Russian admiral with the most active strategy. If he is out of the picture, his replacement will likely opt for a more defensive plan. What is likely is that after one or two major engagements, during which the Russians realize the German advantage, the Russians would pull their fleet to the Gulf of Finland (Kronstadt, Tallinn and Helsinki) behind the minefields and coastal defences protecting the entrances to the Gulf. There they would prepare for a last stand to try and stop the Germans advancing their fleet close to the capital itself.

The British managed to get MTBs into Kronstadt to attack capital ships, couldn't the Germans do the same?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_campaign_in_the_Baltic_(1918–19)
 
The issue may be that if the Swedes are feared to be acting too fast and the reinforcements of the Alands by the Russian army is too slow, the Russian Navy may be force to an active defense of the Alands while the land defenses are built.

Given the sources at my disposal, I'd say that in the last months of 1914, prior to the sea freezing up, the Russians would/could only send a nominal amount of troops and ships to be stationed at Åland - they would aim for that illusion of presence, rather than a strong actual presence, to deter a Swedish attack. So if the Swedish and Germans act decisively in the fall of 1914, they probably could take the main island. But then I am not entirely sanguine they would/could move that fast, due to political reasons, bureaucratic inertia and the exigencies of mobilization and logistics. On balance, I think the Russians would even rather risk losing the Ålands in 1914 than losing a number of their capital ships in a decisive battle against a superior German(-Swedish) naval detachment in the area. Those ships were first of all there for the greater goal of defending the capital, not to be lost for some wind-swept, Swedish-speaking islands in the Baltic Sea.

In the case the fleet failed to stop an enemy landing, the Russian prewar plans were made for a defensive fight on the Finnish mainland with the 22nd corps (and what ever quick reinforcements could be put together) against a projected German-Swedish invasion (of four German and possibly two Swedish divisions in the first wave, four more Swedish divisions in the next), a slow withdrawal to a line in central-eastern Finland and then a counter-attack with two additional corps from/via St. Petersburg. Prior to early 1915 IOTL, the Åland area appears to have been mostly seen as peripheral in the Russian plans - but like I pointed out, ITTL, it would be more relevant since August 1914 due to the war with Sweden.


The British managed to get MTBs into Kronstadt to attack capital ships, couldn't the Germans do the same?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_campaign_in_the_Baltic_(1918–19)

Remember that the British attack was after the Russians had already withdrawn from Finland and Estonia. The British in fact used the Koivisto area on the coast of the Karelian isthmus as a base, with the support of the Finnish government. ITTL, the German starting point would be at the Swedish coast or the Åland islands at the best - several hundred more miles away.

Any German unit trying an attack on the Gulf of Finland would face many dangers. Going as far as Kronstadt could be seen almost as a suicide mission. See the OTL fate of the 10th Torpedo Boat Flotilla in 1916 as a reference:

The loss of the Imperial German 10th Torpedo Boat Flotilla

A Story that was Almost Forgotten
Sometimes big and important events in maritime history are forgotten. The local communities that these events concerned may remember across generations, whereas the general public might be totally unaware that these events ever took place. In the Gulf of Finland, virtually unknown has been the catastrophic loss of seven out of eleven German destroyers (S57, V75, G90, S58, S59, V72 and V74) to mines in November 1916 during World War I. These 80 metre long ships were actually called torpedo boats, but were in many ways equivalent of contemporary destroyers of other navies, hence the name “destroyer”. While being the most advanced torpedo boats they were also the pride of the German Navy.

The 10th torpedo boat flotilla of the Imperial German Navy (German: Kaiserliche Marine) was detailed to conduct a bombardment raid of Baltic Port (present-day Paldiski, Estonia) during November 10-11th 1916. The operation is one of the best examples to illustrate the effectiveness of mines and one of the most catastrophic maritime operations that ever took place in the Gulf of Finland. For almost one hundred years these shipwrecks had been forgotten and missing. This summer Badewanne was able to identify first two of the lost destroyers – G90 and S59. Estonian Maritime Administration had located unknown wrecks during their hydrographic surveys from an area that was promising. We were able to combine our archive and literature research with these findings and concluded, that the anomalies at these locations could quite possibly belong to the lost 10th torpedo boat flotilla. And in fact, they were.

Bombardment of Baltic Port
The loss of the 10th torpedo boat flotilla was the biggest loss encountered by the Imperial German Navy during World War I in the Baltic Sea. The attempt to move against Russian patrols off Dagö at entrance to Gulf of Finland resulted in loss to mines of destroyers S57 and V75 during evening of 10 November and – after the bombardment of Baltic Port – the loss of the destroyers G90, S58, S59, V72, and the V76 in early hours of 11 November.

Historical records do not provide any single clear answer to question why exactly the decision to attack Baltic Port was made, and under what circumstances. However some details are known.

On the 9th of November 1916 Rear Admiral Hugo Langemak sent three light German cruisers – Augsburg, Kolberg, Strassburg – and two torpedo boat flotillas to the Baltic Sea. They were ordered to harass the Russian transport fleet that was operating in the area. This is confirmed by the memoirs of Commander Franz von Wieting – the commander of the 10th torpedo boat flotilla – who wrote that the initial plan was to attack Russian transports. Since the Germans didn’t find any enemy ships and it was already midnight, a decision was made to go and bomb Paldiski which, according to German intelligence, was full of Russian warships. One theory suggests, that the decision was made because the flotilla had agreed to meet with the Rear Admiral’s two cruisers at dawn, and they were running out of time.

The flotilla was supposed to proceed through the Hanko-Hiiumaa mine barrier and the Commander of the Flotilla von Wieting was prepared for probable (possible?) losses. On their way to Paldiski V75 hit a mine. The contemporary Russian mines were not very effective, and V75 did not sink immediately because the ship – like all other G-type vessels in the flotilla – were well built with multiple compartments. This gave the Germans a lot of time to rescue the crew of the V75 and S57 went to pick up the survivors. Shortly after, S57 hit a mine. Once again all survivors were picked up, and the flotilla continued its way to Baltic Port.

However, the German intelligence proved to be highly inaccurate and flotilla was met with an empty harbor without any Russian ships in the vicinity. According to contemporary sources, the Germans were so disappointed by the empty harbor, that they started to shell the city without anything better to do. After firing some 160 artillery shells the fleet decided to retreat back to the sea. Ten people, mostly civilians died in the raid, including a family of five, and 36 buildings were damaged. Fortunately for Baltic Port, the gunfire was not very accurate with most of the shells falling short in the water, or going too high hitting the forests behind the city.

Wietings plan was now to avoid the mine field during retreat by going further north from to point where V75 first hit the mine. Unfortunately to the Germans, the mine field was denser and larger than expected, causing five more ships to hit a mine and sink in rapid succession. The first was the V72. After her crew was rescued, the Germans torpedoed the ship in order to speed up its’ sinking. Five minutes later G90 hits a mine with eleven sailors losing their lives in the explosion. G90 was also sunk by a torpedo. Roughly 30 minutes later, S58 hit a mine. And finally, just two hours after S58, S59 hit a mine. Furthermore, some 50 minutes later, V76 hit a mine. Despite the loss of 7 destroyers, only fifteen German sailors lost their lives. After returning to Germany, Langemark along with Vice Admiral Friedrich Schultz were relieved from their duties.

Of course the minefields in the Gulf of Finland would have been less extensive in 1914 and 1915 even ITTL than they were in 1916 IOTL, on balance. But the mine barrages the Russians would have built up and the coastal artillery positions built by that time would have been a significant danger, as well as all the Russian naval assets in the Gulf.
 
Last edited:
2) Send troops to the easily supplied Congress of Poland and be auxillary troops for the Germans. While this helps win the war for the Central Powers, the question becomes, "What do the Swedes get post war?" Especially since no territory in Finland may be taken.
Aland Islands seem a given, and beyond that what would Sweden even desire in terms of territory? They don't want Finland, this is the country that just let Norway leave a political union peacefully. A friendly independent Finland as a buffer state would be the goal as well of general weakening of Russian presence in the Baltic. It's not clear that achieving any of this necessitates an early invasion of Finland, helping Germany in Poland in 1914 may actually be the best path. It's actually pretty difficult to imagine a central powers victory with Sweden in the war that doesn't involve an independent Finland and the Baltic states being free from Russia. Hell, that much happened in OTL.
 
Last edited:
The situation in the US with German-Americans prior to the start of the war lent considerable weight to remaining outside the conflict. Add Swedish-Americans to that (you're talking sizable chunks of the population of MN, WI, MI, and ND for starters) and there would be more of a driving force to remain neutral.

Swedish-Americans (including Charles Lindbergh, Sr.) were anti-war as it was (at least until after the actual declaration of war): https://bethelatwar.org/2014/07/04/a-folk-divided-swedish-americans-and-wwi/ But anyway, the US didn't enter the war until 1917, and I doubt that everything will go exactly as it did in OTL until then...
 
Aland Islands seem a given, and beyond that what would Sweden even desire in terms of territory? They don't want Finland, this is the country that just let Norway leave a political union peacefully. A friendly independent Finland as a buffer state would be the goal as well of general weakening of Russian presence in the Baltic. It's not clear that achieving any of this necessitates an early invasion of Finland, helping Germany in Poland in 1914 may actually be the best path. It's actually pretty difficult to imagine a central powers victory with Sweden in the war that doesn't involve an independent Finland and the Baltic states being free from Russia. Hell, that much happened in OTL.

Swedish annexation of Finland seems unlikely but perhaps a Bernadotte on the Finnish throne and trade agreements seems a guarantee aswell as mutual defense agreements. A Bernadotte on the "Estonian throne" might also be possible and is a very interesting idea, to me at least.
 
Since the Swedish fleet wasn't at Gotland but rather on exercises on the east coast, i wonder what would have happened. The coastal artillery at the time seems to only have been old 57mm guns from an old CDS and even older 17 cm (however this gun i can't find in my search on swedish naval guns so i have no idea, it's called an m/69 in the only reference i find of it).

Even more interesting than that is the second force won Essen was planing to send. A number of destroyers towards Stockholm to destroy lighthouses, pilotstations and lay mines in the inlets of the archipelago.

I suspect that the most likely result is that Sweden agrees on arbitation with Russia but it's interesting to speculate on what they might get. Later in the war Russia apparently managed to get a slight change in how the british considered iron ore as contraband in an attempt to keep Sweden neutral. So perhaps some small exceptions in the blockade?

Edit: I did find other mentions of a "kanon m/69" as a 16.7 cm rifled breechloading cannon. Still apparently of the six guns in the battery only one or so was manned.
 
Last edited:
Top