The Long, Cold Winter (An Alternate World War 2)

The Long, Cold Winter

"Whenever an historian discusses the Second World War it is inevitable that the word “Overestimate” appears. Nazi Germany overestimated how apathetic France and the United Kingdom would be over the invasion of Poland, the Soviet Union overestimated their own military prowess in the invasion of Finland, and the Allies overestimated the Soviet fear of a war with the West."
-A History of the Second World War

On November 30, 1939, the Soviet Union invades Finland. Even though the United Kingdom and France were at war with Germany, it was a quiet war, the Sitzkreig. All attention went to the Northern action, and the massive Soviet attack. Popular opinion was completely against the Soviets, and the Allied governments were scheming to find a way to turn it to their advantage.

“What is important to understand is that we viewed this as a preemptive action. Hardly even preemptive, really, more a reaction against the USSR and Germany. We had seen how these two countries collaborated to divide Poland in September of 1939, and we saw the invasion of Finland as the beginning of a partition of all of Scandinavia. I quietly met with representatives from Denmark, Norway, and Finland to create a plan of action. Denmark refused, of course, but we started integrating a northern defense plan. Estonia also approached us, offering intelligence information. The multinational effort was groundbreaking for its secrecy. When, on December 27th, we received the letter from the United Kingdom we already knew what our response would be.”
- Rickard Sandler, Foreign Minister 1936-1942

On January 1, 1940, the United Kingdom started sending its expeditionary force to Norway and Sweden. The first priority was to prevent further shipment of iron ore to Germany, which the Swedish government readily agreed to. Most of the soldiers would move down to the Gothenburg-Stockholm line (Lake Line) and begin fortifying. Originally it was thought among the British that the Soviet Union would withdraw from Finland rather than face a potential war with the United Kingdom and France, and thus sending troops to Finland was seen as a lower priority (Though needed weapons and supplies were sent to the Finnish Front).

Germany immediately activated Operation Weserübung, but it was immediately seen to be inadequate. The plan called for a single division to carry out the action, and in the face of the large task, it was immediately recognized as impossible to accomplish. A new plan was organized and an invasion date was set in early February.

“The British never understood the Russian mentality. Stalin’s Russia wanted to expand, yes, but the main goal was always to create a buffer in order to protect themselves from the interests of other powers. To accept the British Ultimatum, to withdraw from Finland, to surrender out of fear of a Western power was antithetical to the purpose of the operation. If they had realized this, if they had known the fear and stubbornness in Stalin, perhaps the Second World War would have been little more than a small Franco-Prussian conflict.”
-Nikita Khrushchev
 
Ive always wanted to see a world War between 3 sides.... This does seem to be the best way possible if Hitler still is crazy enough. Or it could be Russia/Nazi's vs World.... which would mean either they Win or lose horrible.
 
So a TL where everyone gangs up on the Russians? Great...
Only two great powers are fighting the Soviets so far and that's by proxy. I've had this idea for a long time and I was inspired by the Allies vs Germany and Russia in WW2 thread to do a proper timeline.

Or Russia and Germany are forced to become real allies. Would end up really weird.
It makes for some very strange bedfellows, yes :)

I think you'd have to change/kill Hitler to make that work...
For a proper alliance, you'd likely have to change/kill Stalin as well. These are not natural allies and it's important to keep in mind that the relationship between the two countries is being created through political bungling and not a conscious effort.

Ive always wanted to see a world War between 3 sides.... This does seem to be the best way possible if Hitler still is crazy enough. Or it could be Russia/Nazi's vs World.... which would mean either they Win or lose horrible.
Three sided wars are very entertaining, but not very stable. As for the rest of it, I'm going to be walking the fine line between realism and entertainment.
 
Ever since I first read about the proposed Allied intervention in the Winter War that was shot down by the Swedes, I've wanted to see a TL like this one. It seems like an opportunity to avoid having to support one dictatorial mass murderer to defeat another one. Thanks.
 
The Long, Cold Winter
“Baku is on fire.”
-Cover of TIME Magizine

On January 20th, 1940, British and Turkish air forces staged a strategic bombing raid on the oil producing city of Baku in the Caucuses. In spite of this hostile act, some in the British government hoped this would bring a close to the conflict instead of escalating it. There was no official declaration of war, merely the British ultimatum and the Soviet’s silent response. After the bombing, the USSR further mobilized their military and began planning an invasion of Turkey, Iran, and the Middle East beyond. The United Kingdom likewise planned a counter-invasion of Iran.

“We had to march all the way down there, just to be shot at while we marched all the way back up. The original plan was were going to park it somewhere by this big lake and wait for the Germans to come to us, but the Swedes didn’t like it. They wanted to meet the Germans on the beaches and push them back into the Baltic. I can’t really blame them, of course. The Brass got together and decided to work it out.”

A compromise?

“Exactly. Means nobody’s happy. A lot of us were going to stay behind and fortify the line, while the rest of us headed south with the Swedes. We were never expected to beat the Germans when they came, we were just supposed to put on a show to prove we’d fight for the towns. It was even in the plans, stage a fighting retreat from the coast back to the line, just for the sake of saying we did it.”
-An Oral History of the Second World War

On February 5th, 1940, two divisions of German infantry attacked Denmark and the country quickly capitulated. A very small number of Danish troops managed to escape to Allied Sweden, but the military consequences were painfully minor for the invading Germans. In two weeks time the invasion of Sweden would begin.

“We never had enough. In war, you will often hear soldiers say that because we hate fair fights. We want to have more material, more men, more planes, more food, more everything because that just makes our job easier. In a way we got spoiled in Poland and Denmark, we were fighting countries that we simply outclassed on every level. The invincible feeling of the soldiers continued on to the Fuhrer himself. In reality though, we were unprepared. We did not have a lot of time to train properly. We were rushed. Word is that Hitler wanted to make the invasion a practice run for an invasion of England. After the Rostock bombing, it was decided that the invasion would be comprised of two separate groups that could act independently in case the other were destroyed. This led to confusion and organization problems. I don’t know if there was anybody of higher rank than Lieutenant on the beach when we got there. We might well have failed in that invasion if it weren’t for the Fallschrimjager. They were the only group that was fully ready for the attack. For the first few days, the Luftwaffe ran the army.”
-Postwar interview with German soldier

The invasion of Sweden was hastily assembled and organized, but the Germans managed to make a beachhead and push inland. British forces staged a fighting withdraw North to the Lakeline, but the Swedish army was less eager to abandon the most industrial sector of the country. The Luftwaffe enjoyed a numerical superiority, but their aircraft were flying out of Germany and could spend less time in combat before returning to base. When the Wermacht finally did hit the Lakeline, they were unable to break through the allied fortifications and the fronts would stabilize there. Back in Berlin, Adolf Hitler demanded his generals open a new front, one to knock his enemies out of the war once and for all.
 
Invading Sweden from Denmark/Germany throu Skane? In late winter 1940? The logistical problems would be terrifying - the Swedish roads weren't up to central European standards, so to say. Narrow roads among deeeep forests filled with trees that easily could fall over the road, blocking it.

The germans would lose a lot of trucks only due to normal wear, not to mention Swedish troops that would copy the Finnish tactics (adapted to better enemies and fewer skiers). The Swedish navy could, with Royal Navy on its side, cause disaster among the german landings or later supply vessels.

I predict a very different summer offensive due to German invasion of Scandinavia. Or an almost Italian situation (1944) in Sweden with very small territorial changes.

Two questions about the TL
a) Sweden depended 1940 on German coal as much as Germany depended on Swedish iron, and wouldn't give that up. Where does the replacing coal come from? Note that Oresund will be closed to this kind of transports in a war, and rail transport from Gothenburg / Norway would be problematic.

b) What happens in Finland?

The invasion of Sweden was hastily assembled and organized, but the Germans managed to make a beachhead and push inland. British forces staged a fighting withdraw North to the Lakeline, but the Swedish army was less eager to abandon the most industrial sector of the country. The Luftwaffe enjoyed a numerical superiority, but their aircraft were flying out of Germany and could spend less time in combat before returning to base. When the Wermacht finally did hit the Lakeline, they were unable to break through the allied fortifications and the fronts would stabilize there. Back in Berlin, Adolf Hitler demanded his generals open a new front, one to knock his enemies out of the war once and for all.
 
Well, the Germans did take on Norway with terrible terrain OTL (which probably explain how the Norwegians were able to put up a good fight before they fell).
 
Well, the Germans did take on Norway with terrible terrain OTL (which probably explain how the Norwegians were able to put up a good fight before they fell).

Yes. But that was Norway, with

a) A far worse army than Sweden had (far shorter conscription time, almost no NCOs, less artillery etc)
b) Several landings along all of Norways coast, not landing in the south and marching north
c) Cutting of the people-rich capital Oslo area at once, depriving the military a lot of conscripts - while ITL only Skane was invaded.
d) Almost total suprise, while ITL Sweden and Norway have been preparing for war during several months
e) ITL Sweden has gotten aid from Great Britain which should help

One problem however, is that Sweden historically sent a lot of aid to Finland during the Winter War. Quite a large part of the swedish military equipment (and officers) was not in Sweden early 1940 but in Finland. IOTL it was seen as a learning experience, but ITL it would be very dangerous. At the same time the equipment was very important to the Finns (the soldiers were of less use, since they simply came to late). How was the material support for Finland handled in this timeline?
 
I would doubt that the Germans would have to invade Sweden as the country was far more likely to respond to German pressure without an invasion. Sweden would have responded to any attempts by the western allies to seize the rail lines with military force.

Germany would still have had to invade Norway to drive the allies out of Scandinavia.
 
Yes. But that was Norway, with

a) A far worse army than Sweden had (far shorter conscription time, almost no NCOs, less artillery etc)
b) Several landings along all of Norways coast, not landing in the south and marching north
c) Cutting of the people-rich capital Oslo area at once, depriving the military a lot of conscripts - while ITL only Skane was invaded.
d) Almost total suprise, while ITL Sweden and Norway have been preparing for war during several months
e) ITL Sweden has gotten aid from Great Britain which should help

One problem however, is that Sweden historically sent a lot of aid to Finland during the Winter War. Quite a large part of the swedish military equipment (and officers) was not in Sweden early 1940 but in Finland. IOTL it was seen as a learning experience, but ITL it would be very dangerous. At the same time the equipment was very important to the Finns (the soldiers were of less use, since they simply came to late). How was the material support for Finland handled in this timeline?
Plus the invasion of Norway was later than in this timeline, so the weather was a little better.

I did not know about the coal situation. That's going to make the winter just that much worse for Scandinavia.

As for material, the Fins are receiving more than OTL because the British are trying to resupply them, but there are obvious logistical issues. No troops in Finland yet, though there are a number protecting Sweden.

I would doubt that the Germans would have to invade Sweden as the country was far more likely to respond to German pressure without an invasion. Sweden would have responded to any attempts by the western allies to seize the rail lines with military force.

Germany would still have had to invade Norway to drive the allies out of Scandinavia.
Well, the POD for this TL is that Sweden and Norway are more anti-Nazi and anti-Communist and are willing to go to war to prevent being partitioned. If I went with the most likely outcome of Sweden continuing Swedish Neutrality, we wouldn't really have a TL at all.
 
Another possibility would be for Sweden to become an ally of Germany as a result of the Russian invasion of Finland.
 
I did not know about the coal situation. That's going to make the winter just that much worse for Scandinavia.

IOTL, with German coal transports and no preparations for war/defence, Sweden had such lack of coal that the Winter Holidays were invented to be able to close down the schools (and not keep them warm). Sweden had no big strategic reserves of coal.

ITL Sweden would have to depend on British coal transports crossing a submarine-filled sea and then reloading the coal for railroad transport, a very inefficient and risky strategy. I guess that people wouldn't freeze to death directly, but the Swedish industry and railroads would suffer greatly from lack of fuel. It would also hamper the whole war effort by having able-bodied men chopping wood or reloading railway cars with coal. I can't see Sweden preparing for war (with either Soviet, Germany or Britain) without making sure of access to coal/fuel. No coal => strict neutrality.
 
I think this TL has some merit. You will want to look at the diplomatic stages of this, especially now that the quiet war between Britain and Germany has turned hot. Will they have the French step measures? Will the BEF continue to hunker in Sweden, or try to do some damage of their own?

What's up with Italy? How will the USA look at this since it's obvious Britain began some of the escalation?

I want more!
 
Top