I started on this yesterday but some part ahve already been answered by others but I keep it as one text.
ThomasG wrote:
I wonder what is the basis of the scenario that Germany would have invaded Finland if Finland had chosen to be strictly neutral and rejected all German demands for military access etc.
Invasion to Finland was politically and strategically impossible for the Germans before June 22 1941 because Finland belonged to the Soviet sphere of influence according to the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. An invasion would have wasted the lives of many German troops, ruined the element of surprise in Barbarossa and would in general only cause harm to Germany.
The problem spells P E T S A M O
If Finland had had the border of today so Norway had direct border with USSR then I find the "Neutral Finland" option possible.
But as it was in 1941 with Finland as a buffer between German and Soviet forces in an area where the finns had very little population and really the Nickel mines where more useful for Finland as a bargain chips than they needed the metal itself.
So you have to find a way to persuade the Germans not to attack towards Murmansk and the Soviets not to push forward to deny Germany of the Nickel ore. and Thats the problem.
If Germany moves in, USSR would most probable expect Finland to join the allies and we goes directly to the Lapland war, but with a much more potent Germany.
If USSR moves first and invades only the Petsamo area, Germany could accept a "rentier" operation alone to safeguard the nickel mines but it would cause much pedagogical capacity to explain to the Finnish people why they should keep out of the fight and in the short perspective accept to first lost Karelia and then Petsamo area without a fight.
The only posible solution I have seen is totaly out of scope wiht Finnish mentality. If FInland gives the area to USSR early June 1941 then they could technically concider it a pure Soviet -German issue and stay out of the fray.
And still tell the Germans that "we did this only since we belive in your capacity to kick the russkies out of Petsamo faster than they came.."
ThomasG wrote:
Germany could only hope that success in Barbarossa would lead the Finns to declare war against the Soviet Union to reclaim the lost territory. A more practical attitude for the Finnish leadership would have been to wait and see whether Germany will occupy Moscow and will win the war. In that case there would be an opportunity for Finnish offensive.
That would cost a lot of Finnish selfesteem to act like a Hyena.
and if Germany knew they would win why should they give anything to the Finns?
No pain no gain, sounds like a proverb of Adolf.
ThomasG wrote:
I doubt that the Soviet Union would start the Continuation war bombing Finnish targets if there were no German troops in Finland and Hitler could not boast that the Finns stood "together with the Germans".
Agree.
ThomasG wrote:
The only real argument to defend the Finnish agreement of military passage with the Germans is perhaps the fact that the Germans had seized some Finnish war materials in Norway and Finland needed these materials to defend itself against a possible Soviet attack in August 1940. Then again, was this Soviet attack really coming?
Extremely secondary reason as equipment still in Norway was mostly old crap, The emotional feeling of some sort of German interest was much more important. And the arms deal contained modern German and captured equipment too.
ThomasG wrote:
...and the optimistic view Finnish leaders had of the German military capabilities was mistaken.
With hindsight Yes, and who disagree?
cheers
/John T
