 | | European History European History Forum - Western and Eastern Europe including the British Isles, Scandinavia, Russia |
December 21st, 2011, 10:50 AM
|
#1 | | Scholar
Joined: Nov 2011 From: Texas, USA Posts: 628 | Why was Finland Different? During the Second World War, Finland was, at least temporarily, aligned with the Axis Powers. It allied itself Nazi Germany. It fought side-by-side with German soldiers and participated in some of the most brutal battles on the Eastern Front, including the Siege of Leningrad. The commander in chief of its military forces during the war, Carl Gustaf Mannerheim, met with Hitler personally during the war. At the end of the war, Finland was forced to pay war reparations to the Soviet Union for attacking it during what is termed the Continuation War. Some of the Finnish political leaders during the war were found guilty by a Finnish tribunal and sentenced to rather light punishments (but not Mannerheim). And yet, Finland emerged from the war relatively unscathed. Compare this to other German allies during the war. Croatia, for example, effectively lost its independence as a separate state and was absorbed into communist Yugoslavia. Its war time leader Ante Pavelic was condemned as a war criminal and eventually forced to flee. Romania fell under the influence of the Soviet Union and its Prime Minister, Ion Antonescu was executed as a war criminal. Similar things happened in Bulgaria and Hungary. Why did things turn out different for Finland? Why did it emerge from World War II was a democratic, independent country with strong ties to the West? Why are its wartime leaders like Mannerheim, to this day, honored as national heros? | | |
| |
December 21st, 2011, 11:00 AM
|
#2 | | Historian
Joined: Jan 2010 From: Brooklyn Posts: 2,586 |
I'm going to guess it's because they saw it as a way to break away from russian influence/dominance, even before hitler and stalin went to war. I don't base this on expert historical knowledge of finland. I know a little about the country though because I had a close friend who lived there. I even went to visit.
| | |
| |
December 21st, 2011, 11:08 AM
|
#3 | | Scholar
Joined: Nov 2011 From: Texas, USA Posts: 628 | Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert165 I'm going to guess it's because they saw it as a way to break away from russian influence/dominance, even before hitler and stalin went to war. I don't base this on expert historical knowledge of finland. I know a little about the country though because I had a close friend who lived there. I even went to visit. | I am sure they did see it as a way to break away from the Russian sphere of influence but what was stopping the Soviets toward the end of the war from simply rushing across Finland, overthrowing the government, installing a communist government and hanging the old war time leaders like occurred in the other Eastern block countries? I mean, given the fact that Finland had allied itself with the Nazis, it certainly would have given them ample justification. I’ve been to Finland as well but it has been awhile. Clean, beautiful country. | | |
| |
December 21st, 2011, 11:14 AM
|
#4 | | Historian
Joined: Nov 2010 From: Hungary Posts: 1,278 |
Finland was a democratic and remained democratic country during the whole course of the ww2 without the systematic human right abuses of other Axis regime (no race laws). there could happen some maletreatment of occupied Russians but still they were luckier under them than other Axis countries. and after the war both western and commie regimes were rather interested in keeping Finland as a neutral buffer.
And Mannerheim was really a hero, I envy the Finns to have such a great 20th century stateman.
| | |
| |
December 21st, 2011, 11:21 AM
|
#5 | | Produce of Scotland
Joined: Nov 2011 From: Thistleland Posts: 2,925 |
Would it have anything to do with the Winter War between Finland and Russia in 1939? The Russians expended a lot of manpower and material in the conflict with little reward. To renew hostilities with Finland after WW11 would have put undue stress on a war weary Russia and the outcome would have been uncertain.
| | |
| |
December 21st, 2011, 11:27 AM
|
#6 | | Lecturer
Joined: Aug 2011 Posts: 314 |
That is nothing strange, just like at Italy at the end of WW1, they were even rewarded after changing side.
| | |
| |
December 21st, 2011, 12:39 PM
|
#7 | | Creature of the Night
Joined: Nov 2007 From: Alba Posts: 7,628 |
Finland was different because it was a democratic country which had been invaded by the Soviets. "Winter War" anyone? This invasion was, for the most part unsuccessful as the Soviets lost in the region of three armies, and countless dead (not counting the leaders they shot for failing).
How could a small nation, outnumbered by the armies sent against it survive? Basically, the Finnish Border Guards (who were basically policemen) were better armed and equipped than the Soviet armies (except for tanks).
When they lost Karelia to the Soviets, they gained a reason for joining the Axis.
| | |
| |
December 21st, 2011, 12:58 PM
|
#8 | | Historian
Joined: Jan 2011 From: South of the barcodes Posts: 3,247 | Quote:
Originally Posted by dimmit During the Second World War, Finland was, at least temporarily, aligned with the Axis Powers. It allied itself Nazi Germany. It fought side-by-side with German soldiers and participated in some of the most brutal battles on the Eastern Front, including the Siege of Leningrad. The commander in chief of its military forces during the war, Carl Gustaf Mannerheim, met with Hitler personally during the war. At the end of the war, Finland was forced to pay war reparations to the Soviet Union for attacking it during what is termed the Continuation War. Some of the Finnish political leaders during the war were found guilty by a Finnish tribunal and sentenced to rather light punishments (but not Mannerheim). And yet, Finland emerged from the war relatively unscathed. Compare this to other German allies during the war. Croatia, for example, effectively lost its independence as a separate state and was absorbed into communist Yugoslavia. Its war time leader Ante Pavelic was condemned as a war criminal and eventually forced to flee. Romania fell under the influence of the Soviet Union and its Prime Minister, Ion Antonescu was executed as a war criminal. Similar things happened in Bulgaria and Hungary. Why did things turn out different for Finland? Why did it emerge from World War II was a democratic, independent country with strong ties to the West? Why are its wartime leaders like Mannerheim, to this day, honored as national heros? | Finland was attacked by the Russians in the winter war, European nations sent volunteers and some support for them, those nations including bith Britain and Germany. Admittedly those volunteers were largely useless and unused since they had no winter warfare or forest survival training.
It was generally seen that Finlands war with Russia might have had some cooperation with the Germans but it was largely independent, fought for Finnish aims and started and finished on political terms between the Finns and Russians.
Its also noted that while the Finns might have allowed the Germans onto their territory under russian political influence after their peace treaty there was armed conflict between Finns and the Germans as they withdrew so technically the Finns fought on the winning side even if their natural sypathies were with the Germans and against the Russians.
The punishment of Finnish military personnel was under the influence of Soviet/Communist/socialist sympathisers who gained influence after the end of the war.
It should also be pointed out that many of those people undergoing political repression werent severely punished, many simply left the country for several years until the political climate changed, others went to America.
Most notable is Larry Thorne/Lauri Torni Lauri Törni - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia the ex-Finnish army officer who joined the SS to keep fighting the Russians then shipped over to the US and helped in the early founding and training of US special forces before he was killed in Vietnam.
| | |
| |
December 21st, 2011, 01:22 PM
|
#9 | | Scholar
Joined: Nov 2011 From: Texas, USA Posts: 628 | Okay. Perhaps I am confused here but my understanding is that Finland’s participation in WWII occurred in three stages. The first in the early stages of WWII, the Winter War, was a war between the USSR and Finland, when the USSR was essentially an ally of Nazi Germany due to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Finland and the Soviets agreed to a separate peace under which Finland ceded certain territories to the Soviets in Eastern Finland. After the Nazis invaded Russia, Finland allied itself with Germany and attacked the USSR. My understanding is that they planned to regain the territories lost in the Winter War. In this war they were essentially one of the Axis Powers and they coordinated with Nazi offensives against the Soviets. This has been termed the Continuation War and ended, again, with a separate peace between the USSR and Finland. Following their peace with Russia, Finland then turned against German troops fighting within Finland against the USSR and pushed them out of Finland into Norway. Perhaps the reason that Finland never suffered the Soviet domination of other former allies of Germany that bordered the USSR after the war was because they pushed the remaining German troops out of Finland. Therefore, Soviet troops never were forced to fight their way across Finland to defeat the Germans (like occurred in places like Hungary, Romania, etc.). Anyway, that raises another related question; after the German forces were pushed into Norway by the Finns, what happened to them (along with the other Germans occupying Norway)? Did the allies ever make any attempt to push the Germans out of Norway? Did the Soviets (who have a land border with Norway), ever invade? | | |
| |
December 21st, 2011, 01:30 PM
|
#10 | | Historian
Joined: Jan 2011 From: South of the barcodes Posts: 3,247 |
Push them out?
We were actively encouraging them to go there!
You have to remember that priot to D-Day there were disinfomation campaigns, for example setting up FUSAG, a fake army under Pattons command who were supposedly going to invadeat Calais after the Normandy diversion distracted the German defences. The Germans fell for this one and didint defend Normandy well enough with the obvious results.
There was a second fake army up in Scotland intended to convince the Germans we were going to land in Norway and move down into Germany from the north, maybe a fantastic idea but they had to send troops there just in case.
Those troops then spent the rest of the war twiddling their thumbs, polishing their panzers and doing sweet FA of any use.
At the end of the war the entire Norway garrison was surrendered without a fight, that includes the refugee forces from Finland. The SAS and other units got sent up to supervise the disarmament before they were disbanded.
The Soviets never invaded, they had other priorities in Berlin and didnt want to be diverted wasting men, much like the Allies if the German garrison up there wasnt getting involved they could ignore it.
| | |
| | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.
|  |