USSR offer of peace to Finland in August 1941

[SolomonW]

In August 1941, the Soviet Union through the US government stated its
willingness to make peace with Finland with territorial concessions.
Finland did not reply.

Do you think the Soviet offer was real?
Do you think Finland could have made peace then?
What do you think would have happened in Finland accepted the Soviet offer?

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

[Don Phillipson]

Post by SolomonW
In August 1941, the Soviet Union through the US government stated its
willingness to make peace with Finland with territorial concessions.
Finland did not reply.

The USSR's "willingness to make peace" when suffering catastrophic
defeat by the Wehrmacht offered Finland nothing of value to Finns.

[Michael Emrys]

Post by SolomonW
What do you think would have happened in Finland accepted the Soviet offer?

No way to say definitively, but two things come to mind. The first is
that Hitler would not have been very happy with them. Whether German
formations operating out of Finland could continue to do so would have
been problematic, with ensuing consequences.

The second is that, assuming that the USSR survives the war, what is to
keep it from taking back whatever it had conceded after the war with
Germany is over?

In short, why should Finland take seriously any offer by the Soviets
that are not part of a general peace settlement with some assurance that
it would be enforceable?

Michael

[Rich Rostrom]

Post by SolomonW
In August 1941, the Soviet Union through the US government stated its
willingness to make peace with Finland with territorial concessions.

What were these concessions, and what other conditions
were included? Was Finland expected to change sides,
and expel German forces from its territory, including
the North?

Post by SolomonW
Finland did not reply.
Do you think the Soviet offer was real?

Idunno. I'd like to see some history on this. Do you
have a source?

Post by SolomonW
Do you think Finland could have made peace then?

With difficulty. I believe that one condition of the
German-Finnish alliance was that neither party would
make a separate peace. In 1944, when Marshal Mannerheim
replaced President Ryti as head of Finland, he indicated
that he was not bound by this pledge.

In August 1941, complete Axis triumph over the
USSR was apparently imminent. That would leave
Germany as uncontested hegemon of the Continent.
Britain was just hanging on, and the U.S. was
neutral.

It would not be prudent for Finland to double-
crass Germany at the height of its power. And
what was there to gain? The USSR would be destroyed
in a few weeks anyway - it seemed.

Post by SolomonW
What do you think would have happened in Finland accepted the Soviet offer?

Without knowing the terms, impossible to say.

[SolomonW]

Post by Rich Rostrom
Idunno. I'd like to see some history on this. Do you
have a source?

Although I guess reading the book, that the Soviets offer was a generous
territorial concession, and Finland leave the war, but I cannot answer this
as a fact as all these questions as my reference.

"Finland's war of choice" By Henrik O Lunde are only quoted in passing. The
book's reference for this statement is William L Langer and Everett "The
undeclared War 1940-41" p551 which might have more detail.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

[e***@helsinki.fi]

Post by SolomonW

Post by Rich Rostrom
Idunno. I'd like to see some history on this. Do you
have a source?

Although I guess reading the book, that the Soviets offer was a generous
territorial concession, and Finland leave the war, but I cannot answer this
as a fact as all these questions as my reference.

A public offer of 1939 borders would have made it extremely difficult for Finland to continue war.

[SolomonW]

Post by e***@helsinki.fi
A public offer of 1939 borders would have made it extremely difficult for Finland to continue war.

Not necessarily, the argument in the book I quoted "Finland's war of
choice" By Henrik O Lunde is that the Finnish public basically were in
favour of the war and its only when the losses started to mount up, and it
became clearer that the war was going against Germany that the Finnish
public started to turn against the war.

If someone has evidence to dispute this, I would love to hear it.


---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

[Rich Rostrom]

Post by e***@helsinki.fi
A public offer of 1939 borders would have made it extremely difficult for Finland to continue war.

Not necessarily, ... its only when the losses started to mount up, and it
became clearer that the war was going against Germany that the Finnish
public started to turn against the war.

Well, what did the Finnish public want from
the war?

If the USSR returned all the territory
ceded in 1940, what else would Finland
want?

Or more precisely, what would Finns want,
and want their government to get, by
continuing the war?

OTOH, IIRC the terms of the German-Finnish
alliance included a pledge of "no separate
peace", so it would be very awkward for
Finland to leave the war. That pledge would
appear to obligate Finland to remain at war
until the USSR surrendered to Germany or
made some kind of peace deal.

One wonders how much the Finnish people
liked that.

[SolomonW]

Post by Rich Rostrom
Well, what did the Finnish public want from
the war?

Well according to the book, the writer makes a strong case that
the Finns wanted orginally security, the only power that could offer
that to them in 1941 was Germany.

Germany sweeten the deal by offering them their territories back.

Once this was accept, the Finns wanted East Karelia.

Post by Rich Rostrom
If the USSR returned all the territory
ceded in 1940, what else would Finland
want?

East Karelia

<..>

Post by Rich Rostrom
That pledge would
appear to obligate Finland to remain at war
until the USSR surrendered to Germany or
made some kind of peace deal.

The Finns broke that agreement

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

[GFH]

Post by Rich Rostrom
OTOH, IIRC the terms of the German-Finnish
alliance included a pledge of "no separate
peace", so it would be very awkward for
Finland to leave the war. That pledge would
appear to obligate Finland to remain at war
until the USSR surrendered to Germany or
made some kind of peace deal.

Yes, and the Germans were very frustrated and
angry that at the Finns because they would not
advance into Russia.

GFH

[WJHopwood]

On Friday, June 13, 2014 6:35:56 PM UTC-4, Rich

Post by Rich Rostrom

Post by SolomonW
In August 1941, the Soviet Union through the US
government stated its willingness to make peace
with Finland with territorial concessions.

.....

Post by SolomonW
Do you think the Soviet offer was real?

Idunno. I'd like to see some history on this. Do you
have a source?

I'd also like to see a source for that inasmuch as the
source I have [The Historical Encyclopedia of World
War II] doesn't even mention such an overture. It
also paints a quite different scenario with regard to
the position of Finland vis-a-vis the USSR in August
of 1941.
In brief. according to my source, Finland and Russia
concluded a treaty ending their 1939-40 "winter war"
with each other in October of 1940. At that time
Finland was forced to become responsive to Soviet
demands, including the de-fortification of the Aaland
Islands, cede territory, and thereafter adopt a policy of
neutrality with regard to the war in Europe.
Subsequently, Finland became concerned about its
growing political and economic isolation from the Western
powers and leaned toward Germany as being more
approachable with regard to their needs than the Allied
powers.
As a result, Finland concluded an agreement which
permitted German armed forces to cross Finnish territory
toward Norway and solicit Finnish assistance with regard
to Operation Barbarossa.
Finland was at first cool to a German suggestion that
they participate in an attack against Leningrad, but later
agreed to the concentration of German forces in northern
Finland for an incursion into Murmansk. Finland also
agreed to subordinate a Finnish division to the German
command of Norway. In a final step, on June 26,1941,
Finland declared war against the USSR for the second time.
So, if Finland declared war against the USSR in June
of 1941, does it seem plausible that the USSR would be
the side to make peace overtures to Finland only two months
later? Particularly in view of the fact that only three months
afer August of 1941, Finland officially took back from
the USSR the provinces it had ceded to the USSR at the
end of the "Winter War" of 1939-40.

WJH

[m***@netMAPSONscape.net]

Post by WJHopwood
On Friday, June 13, 2014 6:35:56 PM UTC-4, Rich

Post by Rich Rostrom

Post by SolomonW
In August 1941, the Soviet Union through the US
government stated its willingness to make peace
with Finland with territorial concessions.

.....

Post by SolomonW
Do you think the Soviet offer was real?

Idunno. I'd like to see some history on this. Do you
have a source?

I'd also like to see a source for that inasmuch as the
source I have [The Historical Encyclopedia of World
War II] doesn't even mention such an overture. It

"making overtures" is a pretty common thing, and it would have made
sense for the Soviets at the time.

Post by WJHopwood
So, if Finland declared war against the USSR in June
of 1941, does it seem plausible that the USSR would be
the side to make peace overtures to Finland only two months
later? Particularly in view of the fact that only three months
afer August of 1941, Finland officially took back from
the USSR the provinces it had ceded to the USSR at the
end of the "Winter War" of 1939-40.

Yes. Finland was unlikely to be threat in the near future, but Germany
was tearing into Russia at almost running speed at the time. They would
close one potential front, and remove one ally from the Nazis.

How well they would have honored those terms after the war is another
matter.

Mike

[SolomonW]

Post by m***@netMAPSONscape.net
"making overtures" is a pretty common thing, and it would have made
sense for the Soviets at the time.

We know at this time and later Britain, and the US were making overtures to
Finland to get them out of the war.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

[SolomonW]

Post by WJHopwood
Particularly in view of the fact that only three months
afer August of 1941, Finland officially took back from
the USSR the provinces it had ceded to the USSR at the
end of the "Winter War" of 1939-40.

In the book "Finland's war of choice" By Henrik O Lunde p56 it states that
the Finns wanted more then just these former provinces, they also wanted
Greater Finland including East Karelia. He then gives a quote by
Mannerheim which you will find here.

http://heninen.net/miekka/p1_e.htm

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

[e***@helsinki.fi]

Post by SolomonW

Post by WJHopwood
Particularly in view of the fact that only three months
afer August of 1941, Finland officially took back from
the USSR the provinces it had ceded to the USSR at the
end of the "Winter War" of 1939-40.

In the book "Finland's war of choice" By Henrik O Lunde p56 it states that
the Finns wanted more then just these former provinces, they also wanted
Greater Finland including East Karelia. He then gives a quote by
Mannerheim which you will find here.
http://heninen.net/miekka/p1_e.htm

The public opinion was virtually unanimous only about the 1939
borders. The occupation of East Karelia was controversial. A
public offer of 1939 borders would have made continuing the war
very difficult. Of course, making a separate peace would also have been
difficult.

[SolomonW]

The public opinion was virtually unanimous only about the 1939 borders.

I would agree with that too.

The occupation of East Karelia was controversial.

Not sure with who, can you name Finns in 1941 that opposed this.

A public offer of 1939 borders would have made continuing the war
very difficult.

I was thinking that too, but after taking the initial territory, I think
the Finns wanted more.

Of course, making a separate peace would also have been difficult.

That is for sure.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

[e***@helsinki.fi]

Post by SolomonW

The public opinion was virtually unanimous only about the 1939 borders.

I would agree with that too.

The occupation of East Karelia was controversial.

Not sure with who, can you name Finns in 1941 that opposed this.

Most Social Democrats and Swedish speakers. Probably also some Conservatives,
e.g. Paasikivi.

Post by SolomonW

A public offer of 1939 borders would have made continuing the war
very difficult.

I was thinking that too, but after taking the initial territory, I think
the Finns wanted more.

There certainly were many, who wanted more. In the Army there were also
refusals to to cross the 1939 borders.

[SolomonW]

Post by e***@helsinki.fi

Post by SolomonW

Post by e***@helsinki.fi
The occupation of East Karelia was controversial.

Not sure with who, can you name Finns in 1941 that opposed this.

Most Social Democrats

I am not sure about most but the Social Democrats went along with it.

Post by e***@helsinki.fi
and Swedish speakers.

Again went ahead with it.

Post by e***@helsinki.fi
Probably also some Conservatives,
e.g. Paasikivi.

Paasikivi was one of the few that was always against it.

Post by e***@helsinki.fi

Post by SolomonW
I was thinking that too, but after taking the initial territory, I think
the Finns wanted more.

There certainly were many, who wanted more. In the Army there were also
refusals to to cross the 1939 borders.

Somehow everyone went ahead with it, some it appears were hoping to use
territories as a negotiating point with the USSR.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com