What do you think?
Rate this book
Δαυίδ εναντίον Γολιάθ: Πως επιβίωσε η Φινλανδία απέναντι στον Στάλιν
Το επίκαιρο αυτό βιβλίο ξεκινάει με τη δραματική καταγραφή της αποτυχημένης εισβολής του Στάλιν στη Φινλανδία. Τον Νοέμβριο του 1939 ο σοβιετικός στρατός έστρεψε όλη τη δύναμή του εναντίον της μικρής ανεξάρτητης δημοκρατίας του Βορρά. Ωστόσο, ο Γολιάθ κάμφθηκε από την αποφασιστικότητα και τη γενναία αντίσταση του ∆αυίδ και, παρά την τεράστια στρατιωτική της υπεροχή, η σοβιετικη πολεμική μηχανή απέτυχε ντροπιαστικά να κατακτήσει τη μικρή χώρα, υποχρεωνόμενη σε βαρύτατες απώλειες.
Στην αυγή του Β΄ Παγκοσμίου Πολέμου μια εποποιία, αντίστοιχη με την ηρωική ελληνική αντίσταση κατά του Μουσολίνι, γράφτηκε στα παγωμένα δάση και στις εκτάσεις του Βορρά. ονομάστηκε «Χειμερινός Πόλεμος».
Η γενναία μικρή Φινλανδία κατόρθωσε να ξεφύγει από τα δόντια του Στάλιν τρεις ακόμη φορές. Ο καθηγητής Kimmo Rentola διερευνά όχι μόνο την εισβολή του Στάλιν, αλλά και ολόκληρη τη δεκαετία των τεταμένων σχέσεων μεταξύ Σοβιετικής Ένωσης και Φινλανδίας που ακολούθησε, δηλαδή την έξοδό της από τον Β΄ Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο, το πραξικόπημα του 1948 που στήριξαν οι Σοβιετικοί, καθώς και τον χαρακτηρισμό της από τη Μόσχα ως εχθρικό κράτος το 1950.
Φέρνοντας στο φως νέα στοιχεία, αυτή η συγκλονιστική αφήγηση είναι ιδιαίτερα επίκαιρη σήμερα που η Φινλανδία επέλεξε, έπειτα από 75 χρόνια εύθραυστων ισορροπιών μεταξύ των δύο υπερδυνάμεων, να ενταχθεί τελικά στο ΝΑΤΟ.
Με πηγές από αρχεία από όλο τον κόσμο, ο Rentola διεκτραγωδεί με λεπτομέρεια την περίπλοκη ιστορία αυτής της μικρής δημοκρατίας και παράλληλα εμβαθύνει στα κίνητρα και στις αποφάσεις του Στάλιν, με τις οποίες διαμορφώθηκαν τελικά τα όρια των δυο γεωπολιτικών στρατοπέδων που κυριάρχησαν για τα επόμενα 50 χρόνια.
Στην αυγή του Β΄ Παγκοσμίου Πολέμου μια εποποιία, αντίστοιχη με την ηρωική ελληνική αντίσταση κατά του Μουσολίνι, γράφτηκε στα παγωμένα δάση και στις εκτάσεις του Βορρά. ονομάστηκε «Χειμερινός Πόλεμος».
Η γενναία μικρή Φινλανδία κατόρθωσε να ξεφύγει από τα δόντια του Στάλιν τρεις ακόμη φορές. Ο καθηγητής Kimmo Rentola διερευνά όχι μόνο την εισβολή του Στάλιν, αλλά και ολόκληρη τη δεκαετία των τεταμένων σχέσεων μεταξύ Σοβιετικής Ένωσης και Φινλανδίας που ακολούθησε, δηλαδή την έξοδό της από τον Β΄ Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο, το πραξικόπημα του 1948 που στήριξαν οι Σοβιετικοί, καθώς και τον χαρακτηρισμό της από τη Μόσχα ως εχθρικό κράτος το 1950.
Φέρνοντας στο φως νέα στοιχεία, αυτή η συγκλονιστική αφήγηση είναι ιδιαίτερα επίκαιρη σήμερα που η Φινλανδία επέλεξε, έπειτα από 75 χρόνια εύθραυστων ισορροπιών μεταξύ των δύο υπερδυνάμεων, να ενταχθεί τελικά στο ΝΑΤΟ.
Με πηγές από αρχεία από όλο τον κόσμο, ο Rentola διεκτραγωδεί με λεπτομέρεια την περίπλοκη ιστορία αυτής της μικρής δημοκρατίας και παράλληλα εμβαθύνει στα κίνητρα και στις αποφάσεις του Στάλιν, με τις οποίες διαμορφώθηκαν τελικά τα όρια των δυο γεωπολιτικών στρατοπέδων που κυριάρχησαν για τα επόμενα 50 χρόνια.
352 pages, Paperback
First published January 9, 2024
14 people are currently reading
299 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
Read
April 9, 2024conversation with Joseph Stalin. ‘Hitler is a genius’, Stalin told Eden, ‘but he does not know when to stop.’ ‘Does anyone know when to stop?’ Eden asked. Yes, said Stalin: ‘Me.’
One place where Stalin did indeed stop was Finland. In fact he stopped pursuing his original intentions for the nation on Russia’s western border three times: in the Winter War of 1939-40; in the closing days of the Second World War, as the map of Europe was being redrawn by the Allies; and again in the late 1940s when there were plans for a coup to install in Finland a communist government with close ties to Moscow. How did a small state like Finland manage to avoid Stalin’s predations where others did not? That is the question answered in Kimmo Rentola’s book, a detailed account of the challenges Finland faced in its relationship with the Soviet Union and of the ways that its leadership dealt with them. The country’s postwar president Juho Kusti Paasikivi believed that the survival of a small state ‘required much stronger political skill than leading a great power’. These are words that will resonate in many parts of the world now consumed by conflict as Europe was in the middle years of the last century, not least in those countries with reason to fear renewed Russian aggression. In Finland, Stalin backed down. Why?
Russia’s experience of the Winter War seems to have given Stalin an enduring admiration for the Finns as soldiers. As Rentola argues, the success of Soviet-Finnish relations after the Second World War was largely based on the Finns’ performance as Russia’s adversaries after the invasion of November 1939. The military feat had domestic consequences in Finland, too. Rentola cites some astonishing figures to explain why. ‘When a foreign historian is informed of the total number of Finnish soldiers killed in the war (a little under 100,000) and asked to guess the civilian death toll, the estimates are invariably in six figures. The correct answer – 2,000 – is difficult to believe, as it is so exceptionally low.’ One consequence, as Rentola persuasively argues, is that having largely escaped the killing, rape and destruction suffered by others during the war, the Finns also escaped the ‘lingering bitterness and distress’ felt elsewhere in Europe. There is perhaps a comparison to be drawn with the fate of another Nordic country, Denmark, whose army Prussia had crushed in 1864. As Knud J.V. Jespersen has written, for decades afterwards Danish historians concluded that ‘things always went wrong when the Danes tried to box above their weight’. The experience of 1864 does seem to have been a factor in Denmark’s decision not to offer any serious or sustained resistance to the German invasion of 1940. Both in 1864 and in the Winter War, the smaller nation was defeated by its bigger neighbour, but Finland having, in the words of a character in Väinö Linna’s 1954 novel The Unknown Soldier, ‘crossed the line a respectable second’, gave the Finns a confidence that deserted the Danes after their devastating defeat. The Soviets won the Winter War, but at a price: the deaths of more than 120,000 soldiers – greater losses than they would experience in ten years in Afghanistan.
Read the rest of the review at HistoryToday.com.
James Rodgers is the author of Assignment Moscow: Reporting on Russia from Lenin to Putin (Bloomsbury, 2023) and a former BBC correspondent in Moscow.
One place where Stalin did indeed stop was Finland. In fact he stopped pursuing his original intentions for the nation on Russia’s western border three times: in the Winter War of 1939-40; in the closing days of the Second World War, as the map of Europe was being redrawn by the Allies; and again in the late 1940s when there were plans for a coup to install in Finland a communist government with close ties to Moscow. How did a small state like Finland manage to avoid Stalin’s predations where others did not? That is the question answered in Kimmo Rentola’s book, a detailed account of the challenges Finland faced in its relationship with the Soviet Union and of the ways that its leadership dealt with them. The country’s postwar president Juho Kusti Paasikivi believed that the survival of a small state ‘required much stronger political skill than leading a great power’. These are words that will resonate in many parts of the world now consumed by conflict as Europe was in the middle years of the last century, not least in those countries with reason to fear renewed Russian aggression. In Finland, Stalin backed down. Why?
Russia’s experience of the Winter War seems to have given Stalin an enduring admiration for the Finns as soldiers. As Rentola argues, the success of Soviet-Finnish relations after the Second World War was largely based on the Finns’ performance as Russia’s adversaries after the invasion of November 1939. The military feat had domestic consequences in Finland, too. Rentola cites some astonishing figures to explain why. ‘When a foreign historian is informed of the total number of Finnish soldiers killed in the war (a little under 100,000) and asked to guess the civilian death toll, the estimates are invariably in six figures. The correct answer – 2,000 – is difficult to believe, as it is so exceptionally low.’ One consequence, as Rentola persuasively argues, is that having largely escaped the killing, rape and destruction suffered by others during the war, the Finns also escaped the ‘lingering bitterness and distress’ felt elsewhere in Europe. There is perhaps a comparison to be drawn with the fate of another Nordic country, Denmark, whose army Prussia had crushed in 1864. As Knud J.V. Jespersen has written, for decades afterwards Danish historians concluded that ‘things always went wrong when the Danes tried to box above their weight’. The experience of 1864 does seem to have been a factor in Denmark’s decision not to offer any serious or sustained resistance to the German invasion of 1940. Both in 1864 and in the Winter War, the smaller nation was defeated by its bigger neighbour, but Finland having, in the words of a character in Väinö Linna’s 1954 novel The Unknown Soldier, ‘crossed the line a respectable second’, gave the Finns a confidence that deserted the Danes after their devastating defeat. The Soviets won the Winter War, but at a price: the deaths of more than 120,000 soldiers – greater losses than they would experience in ten years in Afghanistan.
Read the rest of the review at HistoryToday.com.
James Rodgers is the author of Assignment Moscow: Reporting on Russia from Lenin to Putin (Bloomsbury, 2023) and a former BBC correspondent in Moscow.
January 10, 2025
While as an US Army officer in WW2 my dad who spoke Finnish was invited to go into an undercover group who was to parachute into Finland. He declined as he didn't see Finland as a US adversary or Russia as our friends. He mainly fought in France.
This is an interesting book and I am sure read by students in the diplomatic field. Wasn't easy to follow everything but that is not the books fault but due to complexity of events.
Source Libby Audiobook (with a 2 month wait)
This is an interesting book and I am sure read by students in the diplomatic field. Wasn't easy to follow everything but that is not the books fault but due to complexity of events.
Source Libby Audiobook (with a 2 month wait)
July 21, 2024
Not a military history. Focuses on the diplomacy, spying, and background manoeuvrings that resulted in the preservation of Finland's autonomy during World War II and The Cold War. Very readable. I'd prefer footnotes to a long notes section at the end.
Takeaways:
1. It seems doubtful that the Finns would have succeeded militarily without Mannerheim, an old school aristocrat who led Finland's military effort and was respected by everyone. Mannerheim wasn't elected, it was just understood that there was no one else to act as comander in chief. The right man for the time.
2. Besides the successful Finnish resistance, one reason the Soviets ended the Winter War so quickly was English plans to attack the USSR in Caucasia (by provoking the Turks to do so). No one expected Germany to roll over France so quickly and after that happened, the idea of the Western Europeans attacking the USSR became impossible.
3. One reason Hitler was so confident attacking the USSR was the Red Army's poor performance against the Finns.
4. Post-war, the Soviets did their best to move Finland into their orbit. Many decisions made by Finland's communist party (including leadership appointments) were dictated by Stalin. Paranoia was justified.
5. After the war, the Finns, despite retaining their independence, were forced to hold show trials for their wartime government (as if they had started the war). The leadership were sentenced to jail but quickly pardoned. In reality, of course, it was the Soviets who had made a pact with the Nazis and waged wars of aggression.
6. After Finland's civil war (1918), many Finnish reds fled to the newly formed USSR. In the 30s, Stalin murdered most of them. This contributed to Finnish unity during World War II and after. Even Finnish leftists and Marxists (who were numerous) hated the Russians.
7. Stalin justified Soviet domination of Eastern Europe by referencing the Russian empire, which had swallowed those countries. It seems strange that imperial Russia would be a model for the Soviets. It makes me think of Putin, who has justified the war in Ukraine on the same basis (Ukraine was historically part of Russia).
Takeaways:
1. It seems doubtful that the Finns would have succeeded militarily without Mannerheim, an old school aristocrat who led Finland's military effort and was respected by everyone. Mannerheim wasn't elected, it was just understood that there was no one else to act as comander in chief. The right man for the time.
2. Besides the successful Finnish resistance, one reason the Soviets ended the Winter War so quickly was English plans to attack the USSR in Caucasia (by provoking the Turks to do so). No one expected Germany to roll over France so quickly and after that happened, the idea of the Western Europeans attacking the USSR became impossible.
3. One reason Hitler was so confident attacking the USSR was the Red Army's poor performance against the Finns.
4. Post-war, the Soviets did their best to move Finland into their orbit. Many decisions made by Finland's communist party (including leadership appointments) were dictated by Stalin. Paranoia was justified.
5. After the war, the Finns, despite retaining their independence, were forced to hold show trials for their wartime government (as if they had started the war). The leadership were sentenced to jail but quickly pardoned. In reality, of course, it was the Soviets who had made a pact with the Nazis and waged wars of aggression.
6. After Finland's civil war (1918), many Finnish reds fled to the newly formed USSR. In the 30s, Stalin murdered most of them. This contributed to Finnish unity during World War II and after. Even Finnish leftists and Marxists (who were numerous) hated the Russians.
7. Stalin justified Soviet domination of Eastern Europe by referencing the Russian empire, which had swallowed those countries. It seems strange that imperial Russia would be a model for the Soviets. It makes me think of Putin, who has justified the war in Ukraine on the same basis (Ukraine was historically part of Russia).
December 8, 2023
This is a political and not a general or military history of Finland in the 1940s. Therefore it is less interesting than it could have been, though it is a well written political history.
Finland knew how to fight and did very well against their powerful Soviet neighbour. This and the quiet support of Sweden appears to have kept it independent. But both these factors receive less attention in the book than they deserve, though they are the primary ones. Clearly though, a lot of effort and research has been put into this study.
Not necessarily worth a read unless you’re rather interested in the topic.
Finland knew how to fight and did very well against their powerful Soviet neighbour. This and the quiet support of Sweden appears to have kept it independent. But both these factors receive less attention in the book than they deserve, though they are the primary ones. Clearly though, a lot of effort and research has been put into this study.
Not necessarily worth a read unless you’re rather interested in the topic.
November 5, 2024
How Finland Survived Stalin : From Winter War to Cold War (1939-1950) (2024) by Kimmo Rentola is an interesting book that explores how Finland avoided Soviet conquest. Rentola is a professor of history.
The fact that Finland wasn’t occupied by the Soviets is really curious. Given that Finland borders Russia and is a small country that was part of Tsarist Russia at times it would almost be expected that like Baltic Republics the Soviets would have occupied it. Finland had a much more locally supported Communist party than most of the Eastern European states that were incorporated into the Warsaw pact.
If people know about the Soviets and Finland it’s usually that Finland remarkably held on against the Soviets early in the war and indeed humiliated them by stopping their advance. The book makes the very interesting point that this failure prompted Stalin to reinvigorate the officer corp and get the Soviet Army organised. Indeed, without this reorganisation the German advance against the Soviets may have been more successful.
Rentola wrote the book after getting access to Soviet archives that gave more detail about what the Soviets were thinking in regard to Finland. Stalin gave some real thought to Finland and the Finnish leaders were also remarkably crafty in their responses. They managed to avoid being occupied by the Soviets while also avoiding problems with the German forces that were stationed in Finland toward the end of the war. They also had some luck in that Soviet attention was focused on the war in Eastern Europe. The Soviets also wanted to push their advance after the Western Powers landed in France in order to avoid the Western Powers advancing too far across Europe.
The book has extensive detail about how the Soviets were taking reports from their agents in Finland and also what orders they were giving the Finnish Communist Party. The detail contained is interesting. There are some remarkable quotes from Stalin, one in particular that Stalin described Hitler as a genius but one who didn’t know when to stop. Stalin was then asked who does know when to stop, Stalin’s reply was that he did. It’s a particularly interesting quote because it shows Stalin’s flexibility and hints at why Stalin didn’t occupy Finland. Finland was better as a buffer state if it wasn’t in the Western sphere of influence than a painful place to occupy.
How Finland Survived Stalin is a surprisingly interesting book about a part of history that most non Finns probably don’t think much about. It’s worth a read for anyone interested in the topic.
The fact that Finland wasn’t occupied by the Soviets is really curious. Given that Finland borders Russia and is a small country that was part of Tsarist Russia at times it would almost be expected that like Baltic Republics the Soviets would have occupied it. Finland had a much more locally supported Communist party than most of the Eastern European states that were incorporated into the Warsaw pact.
If people know about the Soviets and Finland it’s usually that Finland remarkably held on against the Soviets early in the war and indeed humiliated them by stopping their advance. The book makes the very interesting point that this failure prompted Stalin to reinvigorate the officer corp and get the Soviet Army organised. Indeed, without this reorganisation the German advance against the Soviets may have been more successful.
Rentola wrote the book after getting access to Soviet archives that gave more detail about what the Soviets were thinking in regard to Finland. Stalin gave some real thought to Finland and the Finnish leaders were also remarkably crafty in their responses. They managed to avoid being occupied by the Soviets while also avoiding problems with the German forces that were stationed in Finland toward the end of the war. They also had some luck in that Soviet attention was focused on the war in Eastern Europe. The Soviets also wanted to push their advance after the Western Powers landed in France in order to avoid the Western Powers advancing too far across Europe.
The book has extensive detail about how the Soviets were taking reports from their agents in Finland and also what orders they were giving the Finnish Communist Party. The detail contained is interesting. There are some remarkable quotes from Stalin, one in particular that Stalin described Hitler as a genius but one who didn’t know when to stop. Stalin was then asked who does know when to stop, Stalin’s reply was that he did. It’s a particularly interesting quote because it shows Stalin’s flexibility and hints at why Stalin didn’t occupy Finland. Finland was better as a buffer state if it wasn’t in the Western sphere of influence than a painful place to occupy.
How Finland Survived Stalin is a surprisingly interesting book about a part of history that most non Finns probably don’t think much about. It’s worth a read for anyone interested in the topic.
November 9, 2024
Jakie były główne przyczyny konfliktu między Finlandią a Związkiem Sowieckim?
Jakie znaczenie miała wojna zimowa dla dalszych losów Finlandii i Europy?
Jaką rolę odegrała Finlandia w zimnej wojnie?
Kimmo Rentola w swojej książce #finlandiakontraStalin próbuje odpowiedzieć na powyższe pytania zapraszając czytelnika w podróż w głąb skomplikowanych relacji między małym, nordyckim krajem a potężnym imperium sowieckim. Autor, wybitny historyk, przybliża nam wydarzenia, które miały miejsce w latach 1939-1950, odsłaniając kulisy politycznych rozgrywek, w których Finlandia stała się pionkiem w szerszej grze o dominację w Europie.
Rentola nie skupia się jedynie na opisie bitew i zmagań militarnych, choć te niewątpliwie stanowią istotny element narracji. Autor zagłębia się w umysł Stalina, analizując jego strategię i motywy, które przyświecały mu w relacjach z Finlandią. Dzięki temu czytelnik zyskuje głębsze zrozumienie sowieckiego przywódcy i jego wizji świata. Jednocześnie, Rentola nie pomija perspektywy Finów, ukazując ich determinację w obronie niepodległości i godności narodowej.
Jedną z największych zalet tej książki jest jej kompleksowość. Autor umiejętnie łączy wątki polityczne, społeczne i militarne, tworząc spójny obraz sytuacji międzynarodowej i wewnętrznej zarówno Finlandii, jak i Związku Sowieckiego. Dzięki temu czytelnik nie tylko poznaje fakty historyczne, ale także zyskuje szerszą perspektywę na wydarzenia, które miały miejsce.
Rentola pisze językiem przystępnym, unikając skomplikowanych terminów i nadmiernej szczegółowości, co nie oznacza jednak, że upraszcza omawiane zagadnienia. Autor prezentuje złożoność sytuacji, nie obawiając się stawiać trudnych pytań i przedstawiać różne interpretacje wydarzeń. Dzięki temu książka jest zarówno pouczająca, jak i intrygująca.
„Finlandia kontra Stalin” to pozycja obowiązkowa dla wszystkich zainteresowanych historią Europy XX wieku. Jest to nie tylko doskonałe studium przypadku relacji między wielkim mocarstwem a małym państwem, ale także wartościowa lekcja o tym, jak ważne jest zachowanie niezależności i godności w obliczu zewnętrznych zagrożeń. To także przestroga przed totalitaryzmami i przypomnienie o tym, że nawet najmniejsze narody mogą stawić opór potężnym przeciwnikom.
Rzetelnie i dobrze napisana literatura faktu. Polecam
Jakie znaczenie miała wojna zimowa dla dalszych losów Finlandii i Europy?
Jaką rolę odegrała Finlandia w zimnej wojnie?
Kimmo Rentola w swojej książce #finlandiakontraStalin próbuje odpowiedzieć na powyższe pytania zapraszając czytelnika w podróż w głąb skomplikowanych relacji między małym, nordyckim krajem a potężnym imperium sowieckim. Autor, wybitny historyk, przybliża nam wydarzenia, które miały miejsce w latach 1939-1950, odsłaniając kulisy politycznych rozgrywek, w których Finlandia stała się pionkiem w szerszej grze o dominację w Europie.
Rentola nie skupia się jedynie na opisie bitew i zmagań militarnych, choć te niewątpliwie stanowią istotny element narracji. Autor zagłębia się w umysł Stalina, analizując jego strategię i motywy, które przyświecały mu w relacjach z Finlandią. Dzięki temu czytelnik zyskuje głębsze zrozumienie sowieckiego przywódcy i jego wizji świata. Jednocześnie, Rentola nie pomija perspektywy Finów, ukazując ich determinację w obronie niepodległości i godności narodowej.
Jedną z największych zalet tej książki jest jej kompleksowość. Autor umiejętnie łączy wątki polityczne, społeczne i militarne, tworząc spójny obraz sytuacji międzynarodowej i wewnętrznej zarówno Finlandii, jak i Związku Sowieckiego. Dzięki temu czytelnik nie tylko poznaje fakty historyczne, ale także zyskuje szerszą perspektywę na wydarzenia, które miały miejsce.
Rentola pisze językiem przystępnym, unikając skomplikowanych terminów i nadmiernej szczegółowości, co nie oznacza jednak, że upraszcza omawiane zagadnienia. Autor prezentuje złożoność sytuacji, nie obawiając się stawiać trudnych pytań i przedstawiać różne interpretacje wydarzeń. Dzięki temu książka jest zarówno pouczająca, jak i intrygująca.
„Finlandia kontra Stalin” to pozycja obowiązkowa dla wszystkich zainteresowanych historią Europy XX wieku. Jest to nie tylko doskonałe studium przypadku relacji między wielkim mocarstwem a małym państwem, ale także wartościowa lekcja o tym, jak ważne jest zachowanie niezależności i godności w obliczu zewnętrznych zagrożeń. To także przestroga przed totalitaryzmami i przypomnienie o tym, że nawet najmniejsze narody mogą stawić opór potężnym przeciwnikom.
Rzetelnie i dobrze napisana literatura faktu. Polecam
October 19, 2024
"Finlandia kontra Stalin. Od wojny zimowej do zimnej wojny 1939-1950" to bardzo ciekawa lektura, która napisana jest przystępnym językiem. Czytało mi się ją doskonale, nie miałam trudności w jej odbiorze. Przeczytałam ją w kilka dni.
To książka przedstawiająca relację Finlandii i ZSRR. Nie przeczytamy tutaj zbyt wiele o działaniach wojennych, są one bardziej jaki taki zarys, tło, wprowadzenie w sytuację. Tytuł ten opowiada o historii politycznej. Choć uwielbiam czytać o taktyce, działaniach armii i byłam trochę rozczarowana, że książka raczej pomija takie aspekty to i tak bardzo spodobała mi się jej treść. Jest bardzo interesująca.
Nie miałam zbyt dużej wiedzy na temat Finlandii zanim sięgnęłam po ten tytuł. Można powiedzieć, że wiedziałam gdzie ona leży, była w przeszłości częścią Szwecji i że w czasie II wojny światowej toczyła się tam wojna zimowa. Tym bardziej zaciekawiła mnie zawartość tej lektury. Dowiedziałam się z niej wiele.
Przeczytamy tutaj głównie o polityce, dyplomacji czy działaniach wywiadowczych. Książka ta opowiada o kluczowych wydarzeniach jak oczywiście o wojnie zimowej, planowanym zamachu stanu, wyborach parlamentarnych i prezydenckich. Autor przedstawia skutki i refleksje danych wydarzeń i ich znaczenie w historii Finów.
Znajdziemy tutaj również trochę informacji o Polakach i Polsce. Te wątki polskie trochę się przeplatają w historii Finlandii. Nie wiem jak wy, ale ja bardzo lubię czytać o historii naszego narodu, szczególnie kiedy mowa o historii innych państw i te informacje są bardziej poboczne, że jakoś gdzieś zaznaczyliśmy się w historii innych nacji.
Jesli lubicie czytać książki historyczne, albo po prostu ciekawią Was losy tego północnego kraju, bardzo polecam Wam sięgnąć po ten tytuł. Na pewno nie będziecie żałować!
To książka przedstawiająca relację Finlandii i ZSRR. Nie przeczytamy tutaj zbyt wiele o działaniach wojennych, są one bardziej jaki taki zarys, tło, wprowadzenie w sytuację. Tytuł ten opowiada o historii politycznej. Choć uwielbiam czytać o taktyce, działaniach armii i byłam trochę rozczarowana, że książka raczej pomija takie aspekty to i tak bardzo spodobała mi się jej treść. Jest bardzo interesująca.
Nie miałam zbyt dużej wiedzy na temat Finlandii zanim sięgnęłam po ten tytuł. Można powiedzieć, że wiedziałam gdzie ona leży, była w przeszłości częścią Szwecji i że w czasie II wojny światowej toczyła się tam wojna zimowa. Tym bardziej zaciekawiła mnie zawartość tej lektury. Dowiedziałam się z niej wiele.
Przeczytamy tutaj głównie o polityce, dyplomacji czy działaniach wywiadowczych. Książka ta opowiada o kluczowych wydarzeniach jak oczywiście o wojnie zimowej, planowanym zamachu stanu, wyborach parlamentarnych i prezydenckich. Autor przedstawia skutki i refleksje danych wydarzeń i ich znaczenie w historii Finów.
Znajdziemy tutaj również trochę informacji o Polakach i Polsce. Te wątki polskie trochę się przeplatają w historii Finlandii. Nie wiem jak wy, ale ja bardzo lubię czytać o historii naszego narodu, szczególnie kiedy mowa o historii innych państw i te informacje są bardziej poboczne, że jakoś gdzieś zaznaczyliśmy się w historii innych nacji.
Jesli lubicie czytać książki historyczne, albo po prostu ciekawią Was losy tego północnego kraju, bardzo polecam Wam sięgnąć po ten tytuł. Na pewno nie będziecie żałować!
November 8, 2024
I once asked a young Finnish historian which side Finland was on during the Second World War. His answer consisted of two words: “It’s complicated.”
It is indeed. This book tries to make sense of all the twists and turns of the years between the outbreak of the Second World War and Stalin’s death fourteen years later.
Reading it now, not long after neutral Finland decided to join NATO, I more clearly understand what a momentous moment that was.
The simple narrative that I knew about the war — brave, plucky Finns standing up to the Russian bear — is only partly true. Finland’s relationship with Nazi Germany is one of the more morally complex issues this book touches upon.
Recommended for anyone who, like me, knows very little about this important historical episode.
June 13, 2025
Kimmo Rentola's title summarizes how Finland maintained independence throughout the Winter War, Continuation War and Cold War. Significant detail is given to how Stalin viewed Finland as a buffer against Western invasion, and how the roles of aggression, resistance, compromise and luck spared Finland the fate endured by Eastern Europe. The text also gives significant attention to Finnish political factionalism and personalities, which can confuse readers new to the topic. A few passages also read poorly, likely a result of translation. These are minor shortfalls, leaving Rentola's title as a solid general history to an otherwise specific national experience.
July 18, 2024
Pretty good, albeit idiosyncratically written. The most striking aspect was how much the Soviets knew about other countries' plans due to espionage. (He says the Brits knew much too, but discusses that less.)
It focuses on diplomacy and espionage and doesn't discuss military matters that much. That probably makes sense, in part because they've been extensively covered elsewhere - but at the same time Finland's military resilience was of course a big reason that the country survived, so at times it feels like this leaves some gaps in the account (maybe in particular about 1944).
It focuses on diplomacy and espionage and doesn't discuss military matters that much. That probably makes sense, in part because they've been extensively covered elsewhere - but at the same time Finland's military resilience was of course a big reason that the country survived, so at times it feels like this leaves some gaps in the account (maybe in particular about 1944).
January 10, 2025
If you are seeking a specialist history of how the Finns achieved the peace that they did after the Continuation War in all of its intricate detail, this is an excellent book.
If you are generally interested in how the Finland managed to survive Stalin when everything to its west all the way to Berlin fell behind the Iron Curtain, it is about 300 pages too long.
Depending on what you are hoping to get, this can be a five-star book. My motivation for reading this book was more the latter than the former. Hence, three stars for me.
If you are generally interested in how the Finland managed to survive Stalin when everything to its west all the way to Berlin fell behind the Iron Curtain, it is about 300 pages too long.
Depending on what you are hoping to get, this can be a five-star book. My motivation for reading this book was more the latter than the former. Hence, three stars for me.
July 14, 2025
On page 78 it says: Since the political side is the primary object, military operations will receive only a cursory glance.
That should have been mentioned on page 1. This book tells the reader barely nothing about the two wars Finland waged against USSR. I recommend reading this book only if you are well-adversed about the wars already.
It's fair to focus solely on the political side but it makes the book a dry reading and strangely detached.
That should have been mentioned on page 1. This book tells the reader barely nothing about the two wars Finland waged against USSR. I recommend reading this book only if you are well-adversed about the wars already.
It's fair to focus solely on the political side but it makes the book a dry reading and strangely detached.
March 4, 2024
impressive
A great analysis of the relations between Finland and Stalin. A Tribute to JK Paasikivi, president of Finland.
This Kimmo Rentola’s contribution and Mauno Koivisto’ the Russian idea were published in English since November 2023.
Two impressive books open many mysteries.
A great analysis of the relations between Finland and Stalin. A Tribute to JK Paasikivi, president of Finland.
This Kimmo Rentola’s contribution and Mauno Koivisto’ the Russian idea were published in English since November 2023.
Two impressive books open many mysteries.
April 9, 2024
Very good book, it's more of an political, international relations look at this period. It should be combined with an military historical book if a person wants those views too. Though the military events played an important role, though the political in this period usually gets ignored.
I can warmly recommend this book.
I can warmly recommend this book.
December 17, 2024
very interesting
A very interesting overview of a rarely covered corner of the cold wall. For all that Finland lost two wars against the Soviet Union in the 1940s, at the end of the day, the country was fortunate and escaped the worst that Stalin could do to it. Why and how? Read this book and find out.
A very interesting overview of a rarely covered corner of the cold wall. For all that Finland lost two wars against the Soviet Union in the 1940s, at the end of the day, the country was fortunate and escaped the worst that Stalin could do to it. Why and how? Read this book and find out.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews