Twilight of the Red Tsar

Status
Not open for further replies.
I do think you lot are seriously underestimating the fact that Finland fought on Hitler's side.

Stalin is hated too, but millions of Americans, Britons, Frenchmen etc didn't spend months or years being shot at, ensuring unpleasant conditions and watching their friends die at the hands of Russians. That was the Germans. The people who won the war against Germany and its allies aren't going to forget that in a hurry.

Finland fought by Hitler, so what? They still had the balls to tell him off, refused to deal the killing blow to Leningrad, and didn't even invade territory they didn't claim as theirs. As far as the WAllies were concerned, they were a neutral. Sure, you had one raid by the British. Where Germans were. Hell, the US, who is going to be calling the shots, didn't even declare war on them. What you're arguing would be like saying that the US would hate Croatia for being apart of Austro-Hungary during WWI.

NATO might let Finland get it's border territories back to pre Winter-War boundaries. But any attempts at a greater Finland will get stomped hard.
I have seen literally nobody say that Finland would go for Greater Finland and get it.
 
So Finland might get back its 1938 borders; given the chaos in the rest of the Soviet Union, and the beforehand Stalinist repression, some Russian inhabitants might even be delighted to be under Finnish rule.
Are the 1938 borders maximum? In other words, is there anywhere that would have considered itself to have Helsinki as its "center" within the last 500 years that the 1938 borders don't cover?
 
The USSR's bad reputation has come from things it has done to "faraway people of whom we know nothing". Do you seriously have such an idealistic view of human nature that you think Westerners of the generation that fought National Socialist Germany will care as much about that as about the enemy that sent bullets and bombs at then, waged war upon their country, killed their friends? And Finland allied itself with that power. Not under German occupation, like France. On purpose, for revenge and revanchism against the Russians.

By the time those people are dead and their children and grandchildren are making decisions...? Sure. But not when it's them.
Show me evidence of Finnish atrocities.
 

Ryan

Donor
Show me evidence of Finnish atrocities.
odds2.jpg
 
They fought for the people who did.

Alongside people who did, against an opponent whom everyone now reviles.


Dead but still remembered by those who lost friends to them, and thus still hated far more than those who hurt "a faraway people of whom we know nothing".

I think you massively underestimate how much hatred is aroused by not merely hearing of a war on the news (a comparatively ignorable experience) but actually experiencing a war first-hand, struggling to survive and knowing many who don't.

Because obviously there was so much hate for Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria among the western Allies OTL after WW2.
 
Show me evidence of Finnish atrocities.

On 19 July 1941, the Finns set up the military administration in occupied East Karelia. The goal of the administration was to prepare the region for eventual incorporation into Finland. In the early stage, the Finns aimed at ethnic cleansing where the Russian population would be expelled from the area once the war was over.[94] They would be replaced with Finnic peoples such as Karelians, Finns, Estonians, Ingrians, and Vepsians. The Russian population was deemed "non-national".[95] Most of the East Karelian population had been evacuated before the Finnish forces arrived. About 85,000 people—mostly the elderly, women, and children—were left behind, and less than half of them were Karelians. A significant number of civilians—almost 30% of the remaining Russians—were interned in concentration camps.[95]

The winter of 1941–42 was an ordeal for the Finnish urban population, due to poor harvests and a shortage of agricultural laborers.[95] However, for the Russians captured in Finnish concentration camps it was disastrous; more than 3,500 people died, mostly from starvation. This figure amounted to 13.8% of the inmates, while the corresponding figure for the free population of the occupied territories was 2.6%, and for Finland proper 1.4%.[96] Conditions gradually improved; ethnic discrimination in wage levels and food rations was terminated the following year after the Red Cross commission from Switzerland inspected the camps, and new schools were established for the Russian-speaking population.[97] By the end of the occupation, mortality rates dropped to the same levels as in Finland proper.[96]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuation_War#Finnish_occupation_policy

I hope one of our trusted contributors on Finland will show up and go into further detail, especially concerning the debates in Finland this discovery caused but as far as the history of the EK Finland goes, here's what Oula Silvennoinen, the PhD student, discovered:

Silvennoinen shows that the Finnish secret police Valtiollinen Poliisi (Valpo) worked in close cooperation with the German Reich Security Main Office and its predecessor organizations. While he describes several phases of cooperation, in general, the two organizations worked closely together. This was due not only through personal connections such as those of Wenrer Best and Heinrich Müller of Gestapo fame and the second in command of Valpo, Bruno Aaltonen, but also due to ideological affinities. What unite Valpo and the Nazis was anti-Communism.

The anti-communist bend of Valpo contributed according to Silvennoinen majorly to the close cooperation of Valpo and the RSHA, especially in the interrogation, selection, and execution of Soviet POWs in Finnish POW camps. Silvennoinen explains that Finland and with it, Valpo, had due to their own experience first with attempted communist revolution after WWI and after that with Soviet designs on expansion and the declaration of the Winter War, slid more and more towards, what he terms "anti-Communist democracy". Valpo was especially affected due to its institutional nature as a secret police engaged in fighting communist and agitators. Due to this ideological affinity Valpo also started more and more to warm towards Nazi anti-Semitism, which saw Jews as responsible for Bolshevism and thus participate in anti-Semitic campaigns of the Nazis.

Silvennoinen's main point concerning Valpo is that at some point the institution started to operate, especially in its collaboration with the RSHA, with only minimal or no knowledge of the democratic government as far as can be told, though he makes the point that further studies would be necessary to illuminate this particular point. Over all however, he draws a picture of a democratic state collborating with the Nazis not because of occupation but because of geopolitical and security political considerations.

Concerning the EK Finland, he shows that the unit, founded in Summer 1941 and dissolved in autumn 1942, did indeed participate in Nazi crimes by selecting up to 3000 people who had been captured by Finnish forces during the continuation war and kept in Finnish POW camps top be shot by the Nazis. He not only shows that "Jew" was a specific category for selection but also that the EK Finland did in fact participate in anti-Partisan operations of the Germans, meaning that they were involved in the killing of civilians and Jews, in the Northern Soviet Union.

The project during the course of which Silvennoinen researched his dissertation shows that although Finnish courts did indeed sentence people responsible for the unlawful killing of Soviet POWs, EK Finland did not play a role during these proceedings, which deaths with only 56 cases of unlawful deaths of POWs – a number he terms to be too small.

Silvennoinen's contribution to this volume is especially fascinating since it deals with another of Valpo's tasks: Handing over civilians to the German authorities for either deportation or killing, including political adversaries of Nazi Germany who had fled to Finland. Though this concerned "only" 135 cases it still is a chapter in Finish history that has been neglected so far and where one of the most important factors was that this happened in accordance with existing legislation.

Basically, this gives a quick summary of Silvennoinen's points as far as I am familiar with them. His thesis has been published in German but not in English as far as I am aware. I really hope someone might illuminate further on the discussions that arose from his findings within Finnish public discourse.

Edit: I also highly recommend this article going into further detail. It' title is Antero Holmila: Finland and the Holocaust: A Reassessment. from: Holocaust and Genocide Studies.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistori..._2008_it_was_believed_finland_had_no/dd3of7n/

A reconsideration of Finland's relationship with the Holocaust is needed for two reasons. First, the country has recently witnessed a debate over its role in the Holocaust, stimulating new academic research. Second, the standard reference work on the subject, an article published in this journal in 1995 and subsequently condensed in Walter Laqueur and Judith Baumel's Holocaust Encyclopedia, is outdated. By shedding light on a well-known episode in which Finland transferred eight foreign Jews to German control, the following article reframes the question of whether Finland was victim, bystander, or perpetrator during the Nazis' genocide.

https://academic.oup.com/hgs/articl...ocaust-A-Reassessment?redirectedFrom=fulltext
 

Zachanassian

Gone Fishin'
They fought for the people who did.

Dead but still remembered by those who lost friends to them, and thus still hated far more than those who hurt "a faraway people of whom we know nothing".

I think you massively underestimate how much hatred is aroused by not merely hearing of a war on the news (a comparatively ignorable experience) but actually experiencing a war first-hand, struggling to survive and knowing many who don't.
The US never declared war on Finland during WW2, and only broke off diplomatic relations due to heavy lobbying from the Soviet government. The US government reopened diplomatic relations pretty much immediately after Finland stopped overtly cooperating with the Nazis.

Probably only a few people would actually remember that the Finns were technically an ally of Nazi Germany, and whatever the Finnish military did during WW2, that's more in the past than the numerous and blatant Soviet atrocities. If Finland tries to regain their pre-1938 borders, US public opinion will probably be on the side of the Finns, if US public opinion notices Finland at all.
 
Did Perfidious Albion or MERRICA even read about the Sino-Soviet War or the Second Holocaust!?!?!

Stalin used bio-chemical weapons and nuclear weapons on the Chinese all because Mao refused to bow down to Stalin!!!!!

The Soviet MGB rounded up countless Soviet Jews and sent them all on a one way train to the Gulags or shot them in cold blood!!!
 
Did Perfidious Albion or MERRICA even read about the Sino-Soviet War or the Second Holocaust!?!?!

Stalin used bio-chemical weapons and nuclear weapons on the Chinese all because Mao refused to bow down to Stalin!!!!!

The Soviet MGB rounded up countless Soviet Jews and sent them all on a one way train to the Gulags or shot them in cold blood!!!
Yeah, but they're "faraway people of whom we know nothing" so it doesn't matter.:rolleyes:
 
Yeah, but they're "faraway people of whom we know nothing" so it doesn't matter.:rolleyes:
True but would the West really care that much about Helsinki annexing former-Finnish territory? I think not.

ITTL Stalin is far worse than Hitler and OTL Stalin.

How has the West treated the Finns OTL? I've never heard about Nazi hunters going after Finns. Have you?
 

MERRICA

Banned
Did Perfidious Albion or MERRICA even read about the Sino-Soviet War or the Second Holocaust!?!?!

Stalin used bio-chemical weapons and nuclear weapons on the Chinese all because Mao refused to bow down to Stalin!!!!!

The Soviet MGB rounded up countless Soviet Jews and sent them all on a one way train to the Gulags or shot them in cold blood!!!

Chill, stop acting hysterical. The west doesn't care about the Carnage wrought by the Sino-Soviet war. In fact, the only people who seem to care is SE Asians who hate the Chinese Refugees fleeing into Vietnam, Laos, and Burma. And if not for the shock of the Holocaust, the genocide of the Jews in the USSR would have been received by a shrug.
 
Chill, stop acting hysterical. The west doesn't care about the Carnage wrought by the Sino-Soviet war. In fact, the only people who seem to care is SE Asians who hate the Chinese Refugees fleeing into Vietnam, Laos, and Burma. And if not for the shock of the Holocaust, the genocide of the Jews in the USSR would have been received by a shrug.
Alright.

I still don't see the West giving one shit about Finland wanting to reclaim Finnish territory lost to Stalin.

Last I checked Finland OTL got off easy for being an ally of the Nazis. Why would ITTL be any different?
 
The biggest problem with Finland retaking territory is that those territories are in the hands of the rebels, who the West sees as the good guys and who they support in the war against the Soviets. Having Finland invade would completely mess up the rebels, who would either have to divert resources to fighting a new war or be humiliated and give the Soviets a massive propaganda victory. The only way the West would even begin to consider backing Finland is if the rebels are clearly doomed, and Finland seizing territory is the final "Screw you" the West can give to the Soviets.
 
The biggest problem with Finland retaking territory is that those territories are in the hands of the rebels, who the West sees as the good guys and who they support in the war against the Soviets. Having Finland invade would completely mess up the rebels, who would either have to divert resources to fighting a new war or be humiliated and give the Soviets a massive propaganda victory. The only way the West would even begin to consider backing Finland is if the rebels are clearly doomed, and Finland seizing territory is the final "Screw you" the West can give to the Soviets.
I think we all forgot about that.
 
The biggest problem with Finland retaking territory is that those territories are in the hands of the rebels, who the West sees as the good guys and who they support in the war against the Soviets. Having Finland invade would completely mess up the rebels, who would either have to divert resources to fighting a new war or be humiliated and give the Soviets a massive propaganda victory. The only way the West would even begin to consider backing Finland is if the rebels are clearly doomed, and Finland seizing territory is the final "Screw you" the West can give to the Soviets.

There is also the problem that very few on Europe and America will want to open that can of worm that's border rectification; the was has ended little more than 20 years ago and so, unlike OTL communist fall, ITTL at the moment there is still a lot of tension regarding the post-war change (Italy-Jugoslavia, Hungary-Romania, Germany-Poland, etc. etc.).
Finland actively trying to take back the lost territory can start a domino effect that will engulf all east europe; the problem is that things can start by themselfs due to an humanitarian crisis or a widespread rebellion and some genuine attempt to put a band aid in the situation before it become unmanageable.
Maybe a rebel faction itself come to the decision to give up part of the territory in exchange of support.
 

As long as we are talking about the questionable and abhorrent things Finns did in the times of WWII, we should add the racist and inhumane treatment of the Soviet prisoners of war in the Finnish camps in 41-42. The food was poor and shelter inadequate, and due to the dire nature of the cold winter conditions, the mortality of Soviet soldiers in Finland was high, almost as high as that of the Finnish soldiers held as POWs in the USSR during the war.

Also, let us remember that in 1940-1955, Finland deported 120 000 people to Stalin's Soviet Union due to Soviet demands, often against these people's will and often also against actual Finnish laws in force at the time. This included, among others, 50 000 Ingrians who had escaped Stalinist rule to Finland during the war. It included Estonian volunteers who had fought for the Finnish people. The majority of these people were punished by the Soviet state, often sent to the gulag for 10-25 years. Thousands of them died due to this. This process includes only some acts of defiance against what was happening, for example the commander of the Finnish Navy going against his orders and allowing most of the Estonians who served in the Navy during the war to escape west instead of handing them over to the Soviet authorities to be sentenced for "treason" against a state that had annexed their country and now saw fit to punish these men for fighting against this aggressor.

In terms of the discussion here about Finland, it is good to remember that after 1944, Finland did everything the Soviet government demanded of it to make amends for the Continuation War. It handed over more territories on top of those lost in 1940, it sentenced war criminals and those seen as guilty for waging aggressive war. It handed over all those people mentioned above to be punished by a totalitarian state when in a perfect, just world it should have protected them. The Finns paid the huge war reparations, mostly in industrial products, the USSR demanded in full in 1944-1952. So, by the 1960s, post-WWII Finland had made its amends to the USSR for the Continuation War. What had not been done was the USSR repaying Finland for the damages and lost territories caused by the Winter War and its outcome. Let us also remember that Finland would not have allied with the Germans in the first place without the Soviet aggression against it in 1939-40. In the 1960s, still, there was roughly 100 000 people in Finland who had lost their homes and belongings in the Karelian areas the USSR annexed in 1940. There was a widespread feeling that Finland had been wronged in the war.

Then again - by the 60s, the formerly Finnish Karelian areas had been resettled with Soviet citizens. Viipuri-Vyborg was now a majority Russian town. Generally speaking, asking these areas to be returned to Finland would mean again expelling these people to other parts of the USSR, or them becoming residents of Finland against their will. Neither option would be fair towards these people. So, unfortunately returning Finland to the 1920 borders would probably not be feasible - also considering all the other political and economic questions involved. What might be doable could be returning Petsamo and the Salla area, or parts of them - up north, the question of population transfers, etc, would not be a major problem in the same way it would be around Lake Ladoga. So, perhaps some sort of a compromise could be arranged that would give Finland back its port on the Arctic coast.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top