Hello everyone!
I'm new to this forum so please be gentle!! Like many people here I have a fascination for WWII - especially the European, Middle Eastern and Eastern Fronts. I'm kept pretty busy with work but I collect and customise the 1/6 scale Dragon range of WWII Action figures and read/watch all I can about the above theatres of operations.
Perhaps some of you can help me with the question that led me to the forum:
I travel to Sweden a fair amount and have heard, on two occasions, that German troops marched across Sweden en-route to Norway in 1940:
Was this part of the invasion of Norway or just a troop movement after the fact? Did the Germans launch offensive ops from Swedish soil?
How many tanks/troops were involved and did the Luftwaffe enter Swedish airspace to provide air cover?
What route did they take and how long were they on Swedish soil?
Were the troops escorted or guided in any way by Swedish troops/police?
Was the consent of the Swedish Government given willingly or was it given under duress?
What effect did the affair have on Norwegian/Swedish relations at the time/postwar?
Does anyone know of any books/articles where I can read more about this?
Any help would be greatly appreciated
Slainte from Dublin
Seb
German forces march through Sweden
Sweden also leased to the Allies her merchant vessels caught away from home.during the war years Germany was to ship 2 million soldiers and 75,000 loads of arms across Sweden.
The agreement to allow the Germans trans shipment rights was put forward as a better alternative to occupation.
The Finns appealed to the Swedes to allow the transhipment of the 163rd German ID at the opening of Barbarossa. This was agreed to 25/6/41 but most of the other demands made by the Germans were resisted as far as possible. In August further demands for the passage of troops were rejected.
German transit privileges were finally terminated in 7/43.
source The Sword of Scandinavia R Tarnstrom.
I remember having read that when the Swedish military was ordered to guard the German trains it was not quite clear why the order was given. Therefore, in some railway stations the armed Swedish soldiers stood facing the German trains whereas in the next stop the Swedes might have been standing with their backs towards the Germans and facing potential saboteurs.varjag wrote:No Pegasus - they didn't march - they travelled by trains. Closely guarded and controlled by the Swedish authorities.
regards,
Tapani K.
My guess is - that in southern Sweden, where German symphaties blossomed, they would have turned towards the trains - but in northern Sweden where the CCC's were common, they would've turned the other way...Tapani K. wrote:I remember having read that when the Swedish military was ordered to guard the German trains it was not quite clear why the order was given. Therefore, in some railway stations the armed Swedish soldiers stood facing the German trains whereas in the next stop the Swedes might have been standing with their backs towards the Germans and facing potential saboteurs.varjag wrote:No Pegasus - they didn't march - they travelled by trains. Closely guarded and controlled by the Swedish authorities.
regards,
Tapani K.
CCC = Card Carrying Communists
I'm a Swede and the "collaboration" of our government with Hitler is given regular and out-of proportion attention by both news media companies active in Sweden (i.e. the state TV and the Bonnier family company). On a sidenote, I think there are political reasons for this, for instance critisism towards Swedens current neutrality and non-NATO membership policy.
Anyway, I've never heard of an entire infantry division (with arms and equipment?) moving through Sweden to Finland! Is that really true? All I've ever heard of, was German soldiers on leave, travelling without equipment through Sweden between Norway and Germany.
Anyway, I've never heard of an entire infantry division (with arms and equipment?) moving through Sweden to Finland! Is that really true? All I've ever heard of, was German soldiers on leave, travelling without equipment through Sweden between Norway and Germany.
Well Pumpkin - I think the entire Divison Engelbrecht, complete with arms, ammo, schnapps and geist - transitted through from Trelleborg to Haparanda/Tornio without a hitch. (Men många svettdroppar från regeringspannor i Stockholm). That sentence for our Swedish friends only.
Most of the intense Swedish recriminations about the 'transit traffic' does, as you say - relate to the the traffic to Norway, but that entire division for Barbarossa is the heavy 'gnaw' on the Swedish conscience.
Most of the intense Swedish recriminations about the 'transit traffic' does, as you say - relate to the the traffic to Norway, but that entire division for Barbarossa is the heavy 'gnaw' on the Swedish conscience.
OK, given division Engelbrecht running through practically the whole length of Sweden, I can better understand why Swedish neutrality has been put into question seriously. Thanks varjag! [What a coinsidence that Engelbrecht was the name of a Swedish late medieval freedom fighter against foreign oppression (or at least against feodal oppression in general)]
Why was this divisional transfer necessary? Couldn't the division have been landed in Finland by sea? Maybe the reasons were more political than logistical. So, it happened AFTER the onset of barbarossa even?
Also, did they reload on Swedish trains in Trelleborg, or did they bring their own wagons? I guess the latter would've been quite impractical given the logistics of the time. A division on rails must've been quite a circus.
(At least they brought their own schnaps, as you say, so we didn't supply them with svenskt brännvin... 'Ey, we stopped short of the critical line after all!
)
Why was this divisional transfer necessary? Couldn't the division have been landed in Finland by sea? Maybe the reasons were more political than logistical. So, it happened AFTER the onset of barbarossa even?
Also, did they reload on Swedish trains in Trelleborg, or did they bring their own wagons? I guess the latter would've been quite impractical given the logistics of the time. A division on rails must've been quite a circus.
(At least they brought their own schnaps, as you say, so we didn't supply them with svenskt brännvin... 'Ey, we stopped short of the critical line after all!
)Tapani - I apologise. Having been cradled and suckled in Yxpila, I should have been more inclusive in that statement, varjagTapani K. wrote:Försiktigt! Många av oss finnar förstår svenska.varjag wrote: (Men många svettdroppar från regeringspannor i Stockholm). That sentence for our Swedish friends only.
regards,
Tapani K.
Pumpkin - the springing point is - was it neccessary? The Swedish govt. at that time was under intense German pressure to allow it. I know that hundred or more Swedish academics, journalists and general opinionists, since have challenged that decision. I think they all - are operating with the facit in their hands, but being Johnny-come-Lately's can never understand the 'Zeitgeist' of Europe in the spring 1941.Germany ruled the roost - the transfer of the division to FINLAND might ease the pressure, both on Finland and ultimately, Sweden. Of course the division could have been sent to Finland by sea, but shipping was scarce, the Finnish railway network weak so - why not put the heavy hand on the Swedes...? The Germans did. And they succeeded. Personally, I support the Swedish govt. decision.