Finnish Winter War

I've always been fascinated by the Finnish winter War, and the fantastic defense put up by the Finns.

Would Stalin have stopped at the exchange of territory that he wanted [to move the border 25 kilometres back from Leningrad, and lease of the Hanko Peninsula to the USSR for 30 years in exchange the Soviets offered to cede to Finland about 8,800 square kilometers of Karelia along the Finnish border, or about twice the amount of land to be ceded by Finland.] Or would he have invaded any way, especially as it left Finland without it's main defences in Karelia?

In other words, would it have been better for Finland in the long run to have agreed to the exchange of territory or was there definitely no alternative to fighting?

The Finnish defense certainly impressed the Soviets as some later commented.......

Timoshenko said, "The Russians have learned much in this hard war in which the Finns fought with Heroism." Admiral Kuznetsov concluded, "We had received a severe lesson. We had to profit by it." Khrushchev summed it up, "All of us—and Stalin first and foremost—sensed in our victory a defeat by the Finns. It was a dangerous defeat because it encouraged our enemies' conviction that the Soviet Union was a colossus with feet of clay . . . We had to draw some lessons for the immediate future from what had happened."

 

In the Aug 1939 Ribbentrop Molotov pact Finland was given to the USSR as well as eastern Poland and the Baltic countries. What happened to eastern Poland and the Baltic countries? Stalin would have invaded the whole country...sooner or later...

 

Just read a book on Finnish and German relations during Winter war that von Weiszäcker (State Secretary in the German Foreign Office) informed the Finns in October 1939 that Finland was in the influence area of the USSR and Germany would agree to anything the USSR would demand from Finland. So no help from Adolf there...

 

Stalin's external politics was more opportunistic than imperialist. The border 'adjustments' that occurred had more to do with recovery of territory perceived as having belonged to Russia in the more or less recent past (please, I don't want to discuss this in detail for now), and in the case of Finland we see demand for some stretchs of territory to be ceded by Finland in exchange for other stretches (possibly worthless...) further north, as well as the famous Hango fortress lease. The justification in this case was acquisition of more depth for the Leningrad defenses, FWIW.

I have no inkling at all of a plan to take over Finland militarily (the "All Your Marbles Belong To Us" option), as in the case of the Baltic Republics, but then Molotov did not tell me all, and besides all plans would be liable to switch at a bat of an eyelid.

Possibly off-topic, Kai, after 1945 what exactly happened so that Finland managed to deflect an occuation like Poland, Czechoslovakia, etc, and not entering the Warsaw Pact?

 

That´s hard to say Za!

I know we have lived all the way until the USSR crumbled under the fear the Red Army will come for us.However I think the worst was over straight after the war in 1948 when we signed a separate treaty, the Agreement of Friendship, Cooperation, and Mutual Assistance with the USSR.
That at least gave us a position next to the USSR which I guess was rather unique. Like said I think the Soviet leaders were rather proud to say ( for some reason ) that " There´s a capitalistic country next to us and we can live in total peace!" a bit like in the zoo, you know...

Anyway, Stalin did try to trick us with the 1948 pact. One of the lines was that the USSR could decide whether Finland needed help. Paasikivi, who was the president, refused to sign such a deal, and finally the line was that Finland would ask for help if the Red Army was needed....If you wonder did Stalin ever give up on any "final" requirements, this was one of those! Oops!

 

I would guess there was alot of behind the scenes talks between Finland and Germany in the late 30's. The Germans and Finns would have had agents in Russia and could estimate the poor condition of the Russian armed forces and the Germans would have been planning for it's attack of Russia in the late 30's. The poor Finns had to choose who was the bigger threat, Hitler or Stalin.

I suppose Stalin could have attacked Finland after the end of WWII and no one would have done anything to help but for some reason he choose not to. Perhaps he was happy with all the land he gained in eastern Europe.

 

Quote
____________________________________________________________________________________
So no help from Adolf there...
____________________________________________________________________________________

Or from Sweden, Britain or France or anyone else.

It must have been a hard decision to make, Finland alone, taking on a power like the Soviet Union with virtually no chance of winning.

By all accounts the casualties suffered by Finland, if on a per head of population compared to the U.S. would have been several million.

After the Soviets had finally succeeded in breaking through the Mannerheim Line,
how long do you think Finland could have held out, a few weeks, a couple of months?


Quote
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Possibly off-topic, Kai, after 1945 what exactly happened so that Finland managed to deflect an occuation like Poland, Czechoslovakia, etc, and not entering the Warsaw Pact?
_____________________________________________________________________________________

That gives you food for thought that Stalin would have been satisfied with the exchange of territory in '39 and not invaded Finland.

He had the perfect excuse to over run and occupy Finland as a Ally of the Nazis in the continuation war, but stayed pretty much to the Winter war borders.

 

The Finnish losses were 22,000 dead 1,400 missing and 44,000 wounded.We had a population of 3,7 million. The Soviet losses in men are supposed to be 300,000 dead and all losses (incl the dead) some 1 million men. Population of 200 million.
(Not discussing the material losts in the miniature roads in the middle of the Karelian forests).

After summer 1944 Stalin had tried to invade Finland during Winter war and the major offensive in summer 1944.Huge losses. So the situation after 1945 was not the same as in 1939 when Stalin believed it would be a piece of cake. Just like Germans underestimated Soviets , Stalin underestimated the Finnish soldiers. Definitely Stalin could take Finland but would he like to see the stats after that...don´t know about that. You know the Tali-Ihantala battle in summer 1944 was bigger than El Alamein (!), with Soviet losses of 600-800 modern tanks in one battle alone.

Spies in the USSR? Must say that due to the language barrier as well as the controlled nation not many people could just infiltrate and be a spy there. Anyone "not from here" would be easy to spot and ended in a gulag -guilty or not. For instance thousands of Finns went to the USSR in the 1930s with their families to the "dreamland" to work for communism and 90% were sent to gulags as spies or for other reasons.

 

What sort of numbers did the Soviets put against Finland in '44?

Just about everything the Russians had was needed for the push towards Berlin at about that time wasn't it?

 

The majority of the 450,000 troops (41 divisions), 1,000 tanks, over 1,000 airplanes and 11,500 artillery pieces the Soviets allocated for the operation belonged to the Leningrad Front attacking on Karelian isthmus.

http://www.rajajoki.com/torjunta.htm

On paper the end result is clear. The Red Army would be in Helsinki within a week....

 

This site has some maps and great pictures and the history of the battles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuation_War as a complement

Great site, Kai. Marvelous terrain, if you're not in the middle of a forest it's because you're sitting on a lake!

How do the land cessions to the Soviets compare to the initial demands before the Winter War? IMHO, Finland did get off lightly after WWII, thankfully Stalin had his hands full already otherwise we would see a Soviet Republic of Finland same as Lithuania

At the time I was in Finland the only jokes I managed to have those cool herrings of Finns laugh at were Russian jokes. Boy, did they hate thr Russians guts! (I suppose they still do, right?)

 

Actually a lot of Finns travel to Russia on a regular basis and vise versa. In fact if im not mistaken the relations between the 2 countries has gone up in the last decade. Also I dont think that Stalin wanted to actually capture Finland. Finland border was at the time about 40 miles from St. Petersburg, Russias second largest city. Stalin wanted to push the border back and he did, from 40 miles to 400 as a buffer zone for protection. This ofcourse can be desputed. But after the war the soviets liberated Finland for Nazis and never took it over nor did it become communist same thing with Austria.

 

sorry from not for the nazis

 

As it says it looks as though the war against the Finns had become too costly for Stalin who needed the men elsewhere, to fight the Germans. He could not fully achieve his objectives with the amount of troops he could afford to spend against the Finns and in the time he had to do it, so he had to drop the request for unconditional surrender.

It looks as though Stalin could never learn from past mistake's in the Winter war when he got a bloody nose with twice that many men.

 

I would not consider Stalin as loosing the war in Finland by any means or "getting a bloody nose" like I said Staling just wanted to push the border back for the safety of St. Petersburg. Whether it was the right thing to do can be desputed. If Stalin really wanted to take Finland he would off after the war when the Soviets liberated it from the Nazis.

Sorry Anzac I dont agree.

 

Though I would agree with the point that Russia had lost more men then it initially anticipated.

 

Soviet casualties of up to 1 million in the Winter war and about 300,000 in the continuation wars if not a bloody nose was pretty close to it.

By all accounts Finland lost 65,000 men killed and 145,000 wounded between '41 and '44
and adding the 22,000 dead 1,400 missing and 44,000 wounded in the Winter war, is a staggering number of casualties for such a small country.

 

May I ask where you got those figures for the Soviet losses?

 

Kai-Petri
Quote _____________________________________________________________________________________

The Finnish losses were 22,000 dead 1,400 missing and 44,000 wounded.We had a population of 3,7 million. The Soviet losses in men are supposed to be 300,000 dead and all losses (incl the dead) some 1 million men. Population of 200 million.
______________________________________________________________________________________