Why there was not a Soviet summer invasion in 1940?

[JTV]

Failed in his second attempt??, yes he wanted the troops for other fronts, but he had reached Viipuri and there was nothing Finland could have done to prevent any more advancing.

I would suggest reading a honest book about the subject because the Soviet offensive did not end to Viipuri/Wiborg/Viburg - in fact the heaviest battles of summer 1944 in Finnish - Soviet front were fought after it. After the Soviets had captured Viipuri 20th of June 1944 they first continued their offensive by attacking from Viipuri towards area of Tienhaara - and their attacks were repulsed with heavy casualities. Once they noticed that gaining success of that direction was highly unlikely their launched attacks towards Tali and across Viipurinlahti Gulf - both of which first gained ground, but got repulsed with heavy casualities in Tali-Ihantala (largest land battle ever fought in Nordic Countries) and west-bank of Viipurinlahti Gulf. In addition in the Soviet offensive continued also elsewhere, with Finnish troops stopping its advance in battles of Äyräpää-Vuosalmi (central parts of Karelian Isthmus) - and on north side of Lake Ladoga in battles of Nietjärvi and Ilomantsi. The last of these battles - Ilomantsi battle, ended manner resembling days of Winter War - with two Soviet divisions surrounded by Finnish troops - remains of those two Soviet divisions only survived the battle by fleeing through forests and leaving all their heavy weapons behind.

Jarkko

[Aleksander P]

Read what Jarkko said. It's wise to know about the most essential battles of the entire war, before drawing any conclusions.

[ljadw]

Failed in his second attempt??, yes he wanted the troops for other fronts, but he had reached Viipuri and there was nothing Finland could have done to prevent any more advancing.

I would suggest reading a honest book about the subject because the Soviet offensive did not end to Viipuri/Wiborg/Viburg - in fact the heaviest battles of summer 1944 in Finnish - Soviet front were fought after it. After the Soviets had captured Viipuri 20th of June 1944 they first continued their offensive by attacking from Viipuri towards area of Tienhaara - and their attacks were repulsed with heavy casualities. Once they noticed that gaining success of that direction was highly unlikely their launched attacks towards Tali and across Viipurinlahti Gulf - both of which first gained ground, but got repulsed with heavy casualities in Tali-Ihantala (largest land battle ever fought in Nordic Countries) and west-bank of Viipurinlahti Gulf. In addition in the Soviet offensive continued also elsewhere, with Finnish troops stopping its advance in battles of Äyräpää-Vuosalmi (central parts of Karelian Isthmus) - and on north side of Lake Ladoga in battles of Nietjärvi and Ilomantsi. The last of these battles - Ilomantsi battle, ended manner resembling days of Winter War - with two Soviet divisions surrounded by Finnish troops - remains of those two Soviet divisions only survived the battle by fleeing through forests and leaving all their heavy weapons behind.

Jarkko

If it was true,why were the Fins giving up ?

[Karelia]

Hitler started the war???, Stalin contributed because he wanted Germany and the allies to exhaust each other.

Hitler AND Stalin started the war in 1939. WIthout the alliance with Stalin Hitler wouldn't have dared to attack on Poland on his own.

Failed in his second attempt??, yes he wanted the troops for other fronts, but he had reached Viipuri and there was nothing Finland could have done to prevent any more advancing.

Finland had already stopped ALL soviet attacks on ALL parts of the front in summer 1944. The soviet troops and supplies allocated to this campaign had been exhausted, used and worn out by August 1944. The Finnish army on the other hand was at it's all time strongest - much stronger than in June 1944. No soviet advance was possible, but the Finnish commanders were requesting for the permits for attacks.

To be able to attack again the soviets would have needed new troops and new supplies - which by then were needed elsewhere. Stalin made peacewith Finland in 1944 not because he achieved his goals, but because he was not able to do so.

Stalin was willing to sign a treaty with the allies, but when they sent a delegation by boat and upon arrival he learned that no one in the delegation had any authority to negotiate a treaty, they had no plans on how they would fight Germany, could give only vague information on troops and only asked what Stalin would do. This convinced Stalin the west would not fight Germany with any motivation and simply wanted Stalin to take all the risks.

The West was not willing to give Stalin what he wanted: Poland, Finland, the Baltic and so on. Hitler was, and because he offered the better bargain he got the deal.

[Karelia]

If it was true,why were the Fins giving up ?

"If it was true"?! All the information can be easily found. If you knew anything about the events you would't have to doubt.

Naturally a country of 3,7 million people could not fight the country of 170 million - massively supplied by the USA - for ever, despite the many victories in summer 1944. To make a peace, even with harsh conditions, was the only option. But without those defensive victories in summer 1944 there wouldn't have been any peace - but a soviet occupation for the next 45 years like in Eastern Europe.

[JTV]

If it was true,why were the Fins giving up ?

The Finns did not give up - but as the cheesy slogan says it was time to "give peace a chance" by re-starting peace negotiations. The Finns had been aware that Germany was about to lose the war already quite some time and by that time it had also become clear that Soviet Union was not about to collapse either. Hence Finland could have delayed the situation and continued to fight, but not indefinitely. Being left behind alone to fight Soviet Union after Germany collapse would not have promise exactly peachy future either. So why not end the already unpopular war and stop the bloodshed & destruction with negotiated peace?

Maybe the question should be what made these peace negotiations different than the earlier ones? The answer would have to include at least two following facts:
1. By September of 1944 Germany was in much weaker position to retaliate for Finland exiting the war.
2. This time Soviet demands were more reasonable (as mentioned).

After the Armistice Treaty was signed and battles in Finnish - Soviet front ended Finnish troops retreated to new Finnish - Soviet border in organized manner. Many of the Finnish units also got transferred to northern Finland to prepare for possible military clash with German troops (some 213,000 men) stationed there.

Jarkko

[steverodgers801]

You are delusional, Stalin very easily could have forced the issue and gone after Helsinki, but for him the benefits were not worth the price since Finland had agreed to surrender. It is not diminishing Finish resistance since Finland was the only country to avoid Soviet occupation, but there is simply no way Finland could have survived if Stalin had really wanted to occupy the country.

[Vaeltaja]

You are delusional, Stalin very easily could have forced the issue and gone after Helsinki, but for him the benefits were not worth the price since Finland had agreed to surrender.

He did go after Helsinki. Or didn't you bother reading what was replied to you? On 21 June 1944 - note the date - Stavka ordered Leningrad Front to advance (by 28 June 1944) to line Imatra-Lappeenranta-Virojoki (slightly inside post-Winter War borders) and prepare to continue the advance to Kotka, Kouvola & Kymi river line - meaning through the Finnish defensive lines. That didn't happen despite that the Leningrad Front kept feeding more troops to the fight. So that didn't happen easily when the Finns were at the weakest and certainly would not have happened easily after the offensive had already failed. Finland only agreed to a peace deal when the Soviet terms were such that Finland could accept them - keep in mind that the sole result in this respect of the Soviet summer offensive of 1944 was that the Soviet terms were softened, rather strange result assuming what you said was true.

It is not diminishing Finish resistance since Finland was the only country to avoid Soviet occupation, but there is simply no way Finland could have survived if Stalin had really wanted to occupy the country.

No one said it would have. If Soviets had fed enough troops to the grinder then eventually Finns would have succumbed. That is not a secret. But for the reasons mentioned earlier that didn't happen - the failure of overtly capturing Finland didn't stop Soviets from trying to capture Finland covertly but even that dried up by 1948.

[ljadw]

2. This time Soviet demands were more reasonable (as mentioned).

Were they ? Was it not so that the Soviet demands were harsher in 1944 than in 1940 ?

[Vaeltaja]

Were they ? Was it not so that the Soviet demands were harsher in 1944 than in 1940 ?

It was reference to the Soviet demands made in June 1944 as well as in the spring of 1944. Not to those of 1940.

[JTV]

Were they ? Was it not so that the Soviet demands were harsher in 1944 than in 1940 ?

It was reference to the Soviet demands made in June 1944 as well as in the spring of 1944. Not to those of 1940.

Correct, except were the earlier harsher Soviet peace terms not offered already in March of 1944?

In this matter comparing Soviet demands in 1944 to those of 1940 would make about as much as sense as comparing them to Soviet peace terms of year 1920. The international political situation was not what it had been in 1920 or 1940. While such comparison might be interesting for other purposes, the whole thing I was referring were Finnish intensions for exiting from Continuation War with reasonable negotiated terms - in 1943 - 1944 time frame.

Jarkko

[steverodgers801]

The main difference between 1940 and 1944 were the addition of the Petsamo region and the amount of indemnity to be paid.

[ljadw]

In 1940 as in 1944,Finland was on its own,without allies .

[John T]

Could anyone help me explain the difference between the different Soviet terms in 1944 ?

1. the Soviet terms in February 1944 during talks about starting negotiations between Kolontay - Pasikivi , fairly well described by my source.

2. The one actually presented in Moscow in March (claimed to be much harsher than the later )

3. The Soviet demands when the "final" peace negotiations started.(Does June differs from September?)

4. The actual agreement.


The way I get it, based mostly on the Swedish "semi official" source "Svensk utrikespolitik under andra världskriget" is

During
1.
Finland to be Neutral.
Germans in Finland should be "isolated",
the matter of Hanko and Petsamo could be negotiated, otherwise March 1940 borders.
War repatriation to be discussed later..


2.
Germans in Finland should be "interned".
Soviet union considered to leave Hanko, but Petsamo area would have to be Soviet.
The War repatriation was set to 600 M USD to be paid during 5 years


3.
(As Swedish FO were not part of the negotiations so I have almost no info)


4.
The War repatriation was set to 300 M USD during 6 years
Porkkala instead of Hanko.
(Source wiki article)

----

And then I like to remind everybody that finding the motivation why something was not done in history is probably one of the hardest tasks as a historian.

But I also find it an interesting that SU id not attack FInland in the summer of 1940,
My bet would be German strength rather than Finnish strength.

--
When it comes to Finnish motives in 1944 I 'm with Jarkkos post of Sat Apr 25, 2015 1:53 pm .


Cheers
/John T.

[peeved]

3. The Soviet demands when the "final" peace negotiations started.(Does June differs from September?)

There was quite a difference between the overt Soviet ambitions in June and September 1944 as best described by this excerpt from the opening of the Soviet peacy treaty draft in June (from http://seura.fi/historia/sotahistoria/e ... autuminen/ ) ”Suomen hallitus ja puolustusvoimain ylipäällystö tunnustavat Suomen asevoimien täydellisen häviön sodassa SNTL:ää vastaan ja ilmoittavat Suomen ehdottomasta antautumisesta pyytäen lopettamaan sotatoimet. SNTL:n Hallitus suostuu laatimaan ehdot, joilla se on valmis pysäyttämään sotatoimet Suomea vastaan…”. "The Finnish government and Defense Forces' High Command admit to the total defeat of Finnish armed forces in the war against the USSR and announce the unconditional surrender of Finland asking for cessation of military operations. The USSR government agrees to draw up the terms under which it is ready to stop military operations against Finland..."

Markus