Ledinis pragaras. Žiemos karas 1939—1940 m.

by William R. Trotter, Mindaugas Krankalis (Translator)

1939 m. lapkričio 30 d., po pasienyje prie Mainilos surengtos provokacijos, kai sovietai patys apšaudė savo teritoriją, Raudonosios armijos pajėgos įsiveržė į nepriklausomą Suomiją. Šios šalies parlamentas nesutiko tenkinti įžūlių ir ultimatyvių Maskvos reikalavimų. Puikiai suvokta, kad pasidavimas Kremliaus teritoriniam bei politiniam šantažui reikštų nepriklausomybės praradimą.

„Suomijos klausimą" Kremliuje tikėtasi išspręsti per kelias savaites. Maskvoje suformuota Stalino parankinio O. Kuusineno marionetinė vyriausybė nekantriai laukė akimirkos, kai paskui raudonuosius durtuvus galės įžengti į Helsinkį ir kloti pamatus krašto inkorporavimui į SSRS sudėtį. Tačiau „išvaduojamasis žygis" į suomių žemes komunistinei ordai virto pačiu tikriausiu lediniu pragaru. Atkakli šiaurės tautelė kilusiame Žiemos kare sugebėjo apginti savo nepriklausomybę.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, War, Russia, Military History, World War II, Military Fiction

424 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2000

Reviews

[Matt · Rating 4 out of 5]

“At the easternmost end of the Baltic Sea, between the Gulf of Finland and the vastness of Lake Ladoga, lies the rugged, narrow Karelian Isthmus. Although the land is sternly beautiful – cut laterally by numerous clear blue lakes, tapestried with evergreen forest, and textured by outcroppings of reddish gray granite – it has little intrinsic worth. The soil grows few crops, and those grudgingly, and the scant mineral resources are hardly worth the labor of extraction. Yet there are few comparably small areas of land in all Europe that has been fought over so often and so stubbornly. The reason is geographic. Since the beginning of European history the Karelian Isthmus has served as a land bridge between the great eastward mass of Russia and Asia and the immense Scandinavian peninsula that opens to the west. The Isthmus has been a highway for tribal migration, a conduit for trade and cultural exchange, and a springboard for conquest…”
- William R. Trotter, Frozen Hell: The Russo-Finnish Winter War of 1939-40

The Russo-Finnish War is a somewhat forgotten episode of the Second World War, likely because it does not fit comfortably into the simplified overall arc in which the good guys won and the bad guys lost. It started with Finland as the victim of Soviet aggression, staunchly defending its homeland against Joseph Stalin, to the cheers – but not the assistance – of the western world. It ended, quite unfortunately, with Finland tethered to Nazi Germany, having twice been defeated by the Soviet Union within the span of five years.

While Finland’s dark bargain with Hitler has many explanations, it is still hard to excuse. It’s also the likely reason why the heroic Finnish stand has never gotten the attention it deserves, at least outside of Finland itself.

This complex and vicious struggle is ably captured in William R. Trotter’s Frozen Hell, which manages to pack a lot of information into only 270 pages of text.

***

The First Russo-Finnish War (1939-40) – often referred to as the Winter War – began with the Soviet invasion of Finland following Finnish refusal to accede to numerous demands made by Stalin. Those demands included the exchange of territory that would make it easier for the Soviet Union to protect Leningrad. As Trotter notes, Stalin’s demands were probably strategically justified, but without basis in either international law or morality. Neither of those things stopped the Soviet Premiere from flinging his post-purge Red Army at Finland on multiple fronts, including against the so-called Mannerheim Line that protected the Karelian Isthmus.

Initially, the Soviet steamroller was stopped dead in its tracks. On the Karelian Isthmus, the Red Army demonstrated an abject inability to undertake combined arms operations, instead settling for massed infantry assaults that were poorly supported by artillery and armor. More famously, in the dense woods, deep snow, and bitter cold farther north, the hearty Finns’ small-unit tactics – including ski troops and snipers – decimated the unprepared Soviet troops that blundered heedlessly into this unforgiving terrain.

After a long stretch that had seen both Hitler and Stalin swallow smaller nations whole, barely pausing to digest them, a large part of the unconquered world cheered for Finland. These cheers, however, were not followed in equal measure by military aid. Though Great Britain and France came up with some harebrained schemes to support Finland – mainly to protect their own interests with regard to their war with Hitler – none of this amounted to anything.

In the end, the Soviets regrouped, reorganized, and then smashed the Mannerheim Line to pieces. The Finns sued for peace, losing a great deal more territory than they’d initially been asked to concede. The Soviets gave up no territory, but suffered far more in human terms, with over one-hundred thousand fatalities, and as many as two-hundred thousand wounded.

After Hitler tore up his agreement with Stalin and invaded the Soviet Union, the Finns reentered the fray on Germany’s side, undoubtedly hoping to reclaim what they’d lost. The Second Russo-Finnish War – which is only briefly covered in Frozen Hell – ended in a second, far less noble Finnish defeat.

***

This seesawing tale is well-captured in Frozen Hell, which approaches its subject from multiple angles. Divided into five parts, Trotter covers the entirety of the war, from its causes to its consequences, in a consistently reader-friendly manner. By the time I finished, my main criticism of the book was that it should have been longer.

To tell this story, Trotter uses a variety of methods, shifting between narrative and analysis, between soldiers and politicians, and between battles and negotiations. There are fascinating discussions on the competing military technologies, and on the difference between Finnish and Soviet soldiers. In a famous phrase that has been translated, paraphrased, and polished, Napoleon once wrote that “the moral is to the physical as three is to one.” That proved true in the Finnish wilderness, as Finland’s spirited and outnumbered defenders proved more than a match for the Red Army conscripts they faced.

There are also many gripping descriptions of battle, often focusing on the visceral experiences of individual fighting men. This is certainly not a military history, but Trotter’s recounting of the great Finnish victory in the Battle of Suomussalmi is excellent.

This multidisciplinary approach is valuable, because it allows Trotter to touch upon a lot of topics. On the downside, it keeps things from flowing seamlessly. At the start of Frozen Hell, for instance, Trotter’s opening chapter takes us to the eve of Russia’s invasion. In the very next chapter, though, he steps back to detail the entire life of Carl Gustaf Mannerheim. After this biography – which is extremely well done – Trotter devotes a chapter to the order of battle, pedantically placing troops on the map. Only then does he circle back to the fighting, which had begun in chapter one.

Another issue with Frozen Hell is that its shortness means that Trotter skimps out on a lot of detail. He is more than capable of describing a battle, but due to these apparently self-imposed space limitations, he skips many of the engagements, having determined that they do not merit retelling.

***

According to the collected wisdom of the internet, Trotter wrote Frozen Hell after becoming interested in the Winter War during a college research project. I’ve actually read two of his novels before – The Sands of Pride and The Fires of Pride – both set in North Carolina during the American Civil War, and a long way from Finland. All this is to say that I cannot vouch for the veracity of Trotter’s conclusions, especially since there is only a two-page note on sources. Still, it seems that Frozen Hell has maintained a solid reputation since its 1991 publication, and might be the standard English-language account.

In any event, Trotter’s skills as a novelist are on full display, with keen and evocative descriptions of landscapes, people, and events.

***

Like hundreds of other titles, Frozen Hell has been languishing on my shelf for years. Were it not for Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, it might still be there. It was the parallels of these two widely-separated events – Russia once again invading a much smaller country, while the rest of the globe scrambles to calibrate a response – that spurred me to finally pick it up.

Trotter, of course, wrote this decades before the Russo-Ukrainian War, and so any similarities must be drawn by the reader alone. Ultimately, the different geopolitical circumstances, the strikingly different technologies, and the specter of nuclear weapons convinced me that any analogies would be specious. The only identical aspect of these two wars, fought nearly eighty-five years apart, is that once again humans – mostly young – are fighting and dying in the miserable frost and chill.

[Paul Haspel · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Winter War of 1939-40 is a true-life David-and-Goliath story that would have seemed like an impossibility, if it hadn’t actually happened. When the armies of Stalin’s Soviet Union invaded Finland in late November of 1939, any outside observer might have concluded that Finland was doomed. Yet the “gallant little Finns” fought back, making up for the inadequacy of their war materiel through courage, innovation, and a thoroughgoing knowledge of their wintry homeland – all of which makes William R. Trotter’s The Winter War a compelling read.

Trotter, a North Carolina writer, grew up in Charlotte and attended Davidson College, a prestigious liberal-arts institution in the Charlotte area. Most of his other books have related to the history of his beautiful home state, as with his three-volume study The Civil War in North Carolina (Volume 3, The Coast, is a popular seller in bookshops along the Outer Banks). Why, then, did a writer so strongly steeped in the history of North Carolina, U.S.A., want to write a book about Finland?

Here is one possible reason. Trotter’s The Civil War in North Carolina has plenty of bad things to say about the Confederate government; the author’s contempt for Jefferson Davis is palpable. And yet Trotter offers plenty of stories of plucky, outnumbered North Carolina rebels who somehow find ingenious ways of getting the better of numerically superior, better-armed, better-equipped Unionist adversaries. That archetype – the doughty underdog prevailing against heavy odds – certainly can also be seen in Finland’s ultimately successful fight to maintain their national independence in the face of Soviet aggression.

The early chapters of The Winter War set forth the initial Soviet demands for cessions of Finnish territory. Stalin’s regime claimed that the U.S.S.R. was merely trying to provide for the security of the city of Leningrad (now St. Petersburg); but it becomes increasingly clear that Stalin’s real aim was total Soviet domination of Finland. With his well-known wish to reclaim for Russia as much of the former czarist lands as possible, Stalin may even have wanted to incorporate Finland into the Soviet Union – a fate that would befall the Baltic States of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.

It is fortunate for Finland that, amidst the confused welter of Finnish interwar politics, a suitable leader for the Finnish war effort emerged: Baron Carl Gustav Mannerheim, known universally then and ever since as Marshal Mannerheim. An old-school aristocrat, a 19th-century man to the core, Marshal Mannerheim seemed decidedly out of place in the 20th century – but, as it turned out, his unbending personality and stiff-upper-lip approach to both life and combat made him the perfect man to lead Finland in the Winter War.

The soldiers of the Finnish Army made good use of their knowledge of Finland’s landscape. Soldiers in white snowsuits, traveling to battle on skis, launched lightning raids on slow-moving Soviet formations; the Soviets came to refer to the Finns as Белая смерть, Belaya Smert’ -- the “White Death.”

And as it progressed, the Winter War engaged the imagination and the sympathy of Western observers, in large part because of the quiet courage of the Finnish soldiers. That Finnish brand of courage became known, outside as well as within Finland, via the Finnish term sisu – a term for which Trotter provides a helpful definition:

That bristling little word was once the most famous Finnish idiom ever to become part of the outside world’s vocabulary. It can be translated as “guts” or “spunk” or “grit” or “balls,” or as a combination of all those words together. The word in Finnish has nuances that resist easy translation. (p. 62)

A good example of Finnish sisu can be found in Lieutenant Colonel Aaro Pajari’s 12 December 1939 raid on Soviet forces near the town of Ägläjärvi. At first, Pajari’s raid sounds suicidal – “With one company, he was preparing to ambush an entire regiment” (p. 106). But Pajari – leading the attack even though he was suffering from serious heart illness – had sisu to spare. The attack achieved complete surprise – so much so that the only Finnish casualty was Pajari himself, collapsing from his heart illness, while the panicky Soviets increased the significant casualty count that the Finns had already inflicted when two Soviet battalions fired into each other!

Trotter sums up well the salutary effect that the Pajari raid had upon Finnish morale: “Word of the raid’s success, the first Finnish victory anywhere on the crisis-plagued Fourth Corps front, spread quickly and had a bracing effect on the defenders’ spirits. The Russians could not only be beaten, they could be made fools of” (p. 107). The Battle of Tolvajärvi, of which Pajari’s raid was a part, resulted in almost 10,000 Soviet casualties, as opposed to about 500 for Finland; and it was through just such improbable victories that the “gallant little Finns” began to capture the admiration, and not just the sympathy, of the larger world beyond that theatre of war.

Another good example of sisu – that quiet, undemonstrative, peculiarly Finnish brand of courage – comes from the Battle of Suomussalmi (7 December 1939 – 8 January 1940), a Finnish victory that was so one-sided that it is still studied at military academies like West Point and Sandhurst and Kingston. Using motti tactics that involved trapping a larger force, cutting it into smaller pieces, and then destroying the pieces in detail, three Finnish regiments, with some battalion support, wiped out an entire Soviet army division. Finnish casualties: less than 2,000. Soviet casualties: around 20,000.

Against the backdrop of this historic battle, the behaviour of one sergeant, who had taken over and led his unit after all his commanding officers had been wounded or killed, provides a fine example of sisu. A battalion commander, Captain Lassila, saw that the sergeant had received two bullet wounds that had pierced his lung. “Lassila stopped by the man’s stretcher and inquired as to his condition. The sergeant grinned and said that he found it much easier to breathe with two holes in his chest” (p. 215). Sisu!

Eventually, the Soviet leadership, tired of seeing the Red Army amass such appalling casualties, got rid of the political hacks who had survived Stalin’s purges, and brought in competent commanders who improved Soviet tactics and devoted even more heavy weaponry to the campaign against Finland. When the Red Army renewed its offensive on 1 February 1940 with a major artillery barrage, “The sound of that first big salvo…produced a terrifying convulsion of the earth. An iron wall of sound and vibration crashed into the defenders’ nervous systems like the last thunderclap of Armageddon. To the fury of the cannonade was added the impact of concentrated carpet bombing, the heaviest and most sustained aerial attacks in the history of warfare to date” (p. 215).

And when the peace treaty was signed, Finland did indeed have to give up part of its Karelian borderland with Russia; the country’s second largest city, Viipuri, became the Russian city of Vyborg. And yet Stalin had paid an exceedingly high price for the territory that the Soviet Union had acquired: “One Soviet general, looking at a map of the territory Russia had acquired on the Karelian Isthmus, is said to have remarked: ‘We have won just about enough ground to bury our dead’” (p. 263). And, as author Trotter aptly points out, “Of all the Baltic nations that negotiated with Stalin in 1939, only Finland resisted aggression. Only Finland survived as a free nation” (p. 269).

It is impressive to consider Trotter’s dedication to this project, as demonstrated by the verve with which he took on the difficult task of translating Finnish documents about the war. Further evidence of Trotter’s commitment to this project can be seen in the way he visited important sites from the war, a number of which were once in Finland but are now in the Russian Federation.

Discussing the strength of the “Mannerheim Line” of fortifications that the Finnish Army had built as a safeguard against possible Soviet aggression, Trotter informs the reader that “It is still possible to get a first-hand impression of the strength of the line’s fortifications by examining the ruins of several of its blockhouses….The surviving bunkers show signs of terrible damage – the author crawled around inside one that looked as though it had been beaten into the earth with a giant ball-peen hammer.” Trotter adds that “the entire Isthmus is still considered a militarily sensitive area by the Russians. One would be well advised not to go wandering through the woods” (p. 63). Trotter, an American, seems to have his own share of good Finnish sisu.

The Winter War: The Russo-Finnish War of 1939-40 tells an impressive story of courage and resourcefulness under the most difficult of circumstances – a story that no doubt resonates with special pride in the hearts of the Finnish people.

Addendum, 21 January 2023:

Thinking about the way Finland resisted the Soviet Union in the Winter War of 1939-40, and about the way Ukraine continues to resist Russian invaders today, the following parallels come to mind:

1. A dictator in Moscow sends his army to invade a democratic neighbour, believing that his war will be won within days, and that he will be able to do what he wants with his defeated enemy.

2. The leader opposed to the Moscow dictator is thought to be overmatched, out of his depth; but he shows an unexpected ability to adapt to circumstances, and inspires his people.

3. The soldiers and civilians of the invaded nation use their knowledge of their country's landscape to slow and eventually halt the invaders, inflicting heavy casualties.

4. The invading army, composed primarily of poorly trained draftees, and bedevilled by corruption and venality within the commissioned-officer ranks, betrays exceedingly poor morale at all levels.

5. The battlefronts become static, while the invading regime begins to show increasing signs of desperation.

Hoping and trusting that Ukraine will prevail in this era's war, as Finland did in their war of 80+ years ago.

[Jim · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a compelling read, actually a reread, as I first read this book back in the 90s ( it was published in 1991). Reading it in February 2022, one can't help but think of the ongoing Russian military build-up against a neighboring country, in this case, Ukraine. We can only hope Ukraine shows courage and determination in standing up to Russia, as Finland did in 1939, and that the Russian dictator Putin backs down. A big difference from before is that Ukraine has been receiving material permitting it to make a strong stand in its defense. In the case of the Russian attack on Finland in 1939, the Finns were not only heavily outnumbered (Russia had a population of 150,000,000 to Finland's under 4,000,000), but they were not very well-equipped against the mighty Russian war machine bearing down on them with all its tanks and planes and heavy artillery.
The Finns showed us a picture of true heroism, their resistance winning the admiration of the world (except for Russia). It was truly a David vs. Goliath story, with the big difference being that, in this case, little David lost the fight. But he bloodied Goliath's nose and so hurt the giant that Goliath was unable to finish off his pipsqueak opponent-- and so David survived. Joseph Stalin, the ruler of Russia, that is, I should say, the Soviet Union, was doubtless surprised that his tiny neighbor refused to make concessions to him. Can anyone doubt that the Soviet Union would have stopped with getting the concessions they wanted and not attempt to annex Finland into the Soviet empire, as they would with Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania in 1940?
After a savage three-month war fought under brutal, subarctic conditions, Finland was finally defeated. But Stalin would not try to subjugate Finland. It was not just the cost that would be exacted, but the uncertain situation in Europe at that time, as World War II had started--and there was an aggressive Germany to Stalin's west and an aggressive Japan to his east. Stalin could not afford to be tied-down in an endless war to conquer Finland.
Trotter tells the story of the Winter War of 1939-40 brilliantly. Military historians would want more detail but most readers will find that this account superbly recreates the military action of the war with all its tragedy and drama. The story of a small nation that fought against overwhelming odds and kept its freedom is an inspiring one that needs to be read--and remembered.

[Ray · Rating 4 out of 5]

I will admit that my knowledge of Finland is a bit sketchy. It is limited to Sibelius (name only I am afraid), Sami Hyppia, Lassi Viren, Leningrad Cowboys Go America and those heavy metal berserkers who won Eurovision.

I also knew a little about the Winter War in 1939 where the plucky Finns fought the Red Army, and I was curious to know why and how they were relatively successful where so many of the other nations in the buffer zone between Stalin and Hitler were first chewed up by the Nazis and then swallowed by the Soviets.

This book provides a good understanding of the war, its origins, the campaigns and the aftermath.

Finland in 1939 had a population of almost 4 million, compared to 150 million Russians. Its army had few tanks, anti tank weapons or modern planes, and was heavily outnumbered in terms of artillery, men and materiel. It stood no chance against the Russian war machine.

But what was expected to be a walkover did not materialise. The Finns knew the terrain, were fighting for their homes and families, and were led superbly by experienced, flexible and resourceful commanders. In Gustav Mannerheim they had an outstanding leader. The Russian army was of lower calibre, with faltering morale and an officer corps eviscerated in Stalins great purges, absolutely terrified of taking the initiative.

The Finns held the Karelian Isthmus for three months against overwhelming odds, inflicting 6-7 casualties on the enemy for each one they suffered. In the snow filled woods north of the main theatre of war the Russians kept to the roads, resulting in formations of men and machines twenty miles long on narrow tracks. The Finns left the roads to the enemy, skied through the woods, concentrated their forces and cut the Russian lines to pieces, then eliminated the isolated, starving and freezing pockets of Russian soldiers on an individual basis.

In the end of course the sheer weight of numbers told. The Russians frontal attacks gradually wore down the defences and the defensive line was breached. The terms imposed by the Russians were severe but Finland survived as an independent nation. Contrast this with the fate of Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia and the Warsaw Pact nations.

I learnt a Finnish word in reading this book - Sisu. Roughly translated it means stoic bravery, grit and resilience in the face of overwhelming adversity, to the point of sheer bloody mindedness. It describes perfectly the gutsy character of the Finnish soldier.

The final words should be from Gustav Mannerheim. This is an extract from his final message to his troops after the war was ended

"That an army so inferior in numbers and equipment, should have inflicted such serious defeats on an overwhelmingly powerful enemy, and, while retreating, have over and over again repelled his attacks, is a thing for which it is hard to find a parallel in the history of war. But it is equally admirable that the Finnish people, face to face with an apparently hopeless situation, were able to resist giving in to despair, and instead to grow in devotion and greatness.

Such a nation has earned the right to live"

[A.L. Sowards · Rating 4 out of 5]

My little brother has been telling me for years that I should read this book. He told me it would make me want to be Finn for a day. After reading about how cold it was during the war between the Finns and the Soviets in 1939, I don’t think I want to be a Finn (burr!), but I do admire them. A lot.

This book talks about how the Soviet Union invaded Finland. And despite the fact that the Red Army vastly outnumbered the Finns and had far superior air power, armor, and artillery, the Finns did an impressive job of holding them off, winning some battles and making entire divisions disappear into the snow. Eventually Stalin got embarrassed and angry that the campaign was taking so long and sent so many troops in that they pushed the Finns back and forced them to accept horrible terms. So after tremendous bravery and sacrifice, they lost. But you know what, the Finns kept their independence. And they were the ONLY European country sharing a border with the Soviet Union that was able to do that after WWII. I’d say their sacrifice was worth it. And very interesting to read about.

Not five stars because I’ve read other history books that were better written. The writing wasn’t bad, I just felt it could have been better. I recommend it for military history buffs and anyone else that likes David vs. Goliath type stories.

Note: I read the electronic version of this book. It would have been a lot easier to flip to the maps if I was reading a paper copy. So unless you know Finnish geography really, really well, I recommend a print edition.

[Henna · Rating 5 out of 5]

Being a Finn who was raised overseas, I have never officially studied Finnish history and hence try to educate myself during my adult years by reading books on it… Having my grandparents lived through the winter war, and having my granddad had to evacuate from his home in the Karelian Isthmus, this war hits “close home” and feels like it was only yesterday… I am enormously grateful for the generation of my grandparents for having defended my country and for having managed to keep it “free” and as such I strongly feel it is my obligation to study this history more in detail.

Emotionally Trotter´s account of the Russo-Finnish “Winter War” of 1939-1940 was tough read, however a well written piece on a must-know part of Finnish history.

Proximity of Leningrad to foreign (Finnish) border and the Fascism incited by the Lapuan Movement in Finland, supposedly "made Stalin feel threatened" ; a good excuse to conquer Finland, as the Soviet Union had done with the rest of the Baltic countries . Stalin put forward a demand for territory for this sovereign nation, which the Finnish obviously refused in the numerous negotiations with Stalin and Molotov. Kremlin was upset with the stubbornness of this small nation who didn’t want to play to their tune, and as the excuse for starting a war, used the lunatic threat of this nation of 3,5 million people invading their nation of 171 million, with the help of Imperialists who would use Finland as their base to jointly invade the USSR . Russia faked the famous “Mainila shots” on November 26, 1939 and started the “winter war”. Stalin and the Soviet Red Army were determined to “walk over” Finland in two weeks... This tragic "walkover" try ended up lasting 105 days, and killing a quarter of million of Soviets and 25.000 Finns…

What made it particularly challenging for Finland was that this small nation (which had been part of Sweden from the 12th century until 1809 and part of Russian Empire then until 1917 and independent from 1917 onwards) possessed no single operation antitank gun or sufficient weaponry in the spring of 1939, but luckily it possessed a population full of braveness and guts (“sisu” as we say in Finnish) who were determined to defend their nation…

The brave Finnish army was under the command of Marshal Mannerheim, who had made his military career and 35 year experience and reputation in the Russo Japanese war under Czarist Russian rule, as well as during his 3 year horseback trek from Turkmenistan to Beijing, covering a distance of 9000 miles. In Finland he was little known back then, however the ablest of the Finnish warriors. He commanded the “whites” in Finland in the “civil war” against Bolsheviks in 1918, a fact which earned him the iron cross from Kaiser Wilhelm, in fact the only one ever awarded to a military commander who had fought against Germany. Quoting the author “Mannerheim had done much more than simply lead his nation through two wars, he had let it out of war with Russia, yet managed to keep it free, identity intact. Whatever one may think of this or that element of his character and career, the independence of Finland is itself his monument, that achievement alone makes him loom as a genuine hero”.

The Russians started their march towards Finland, with the objective of “walking over it” in two weeks, with no worthwhile intelligence estimate of their opponents, with inaccurate maps and with useless armor taking into account the battleground, which consisted of some of the densest forest of the world, and totally unprepared with no ski training for the arctic winter. At the same time, Mannerheim´s plans for Finland were based on “the most honorable annihilation with the faint hope that the conscience of mankind would find an alternative solution as a reward for bravery and singleness of purpose”

Trotter´s book describes the war in details, and the efficiency and the bravery of the undernumbered Finnish army becomes evident. I admit I truly did not care to read for all the detailed and exhaustive description of the atrocities battle by battle (e.g. that of Taipale where 9 Finnish batteries fought against 84 Russian batteries, creating a slaughter equivalent to Somme in miniature, or the impressive Finnish victory in Tolvajärvi, the Raate road massacre, the battling in Summa, etc.) but Trotter´s clear and concrete way of writing made the terrible reading worthwhile. His chapter “the winter soldiers” is a touching analysis on the qualities and the nature of the Finns which made their soldiers unbeatable.

Finns bravely defended their country for 105 days, after which the peace terms were negotiated, in which the country lost slices of its territory in the Karelian Isthmus, Karelia, Rybachi peninsula, and had to cede Hanko for several decades. Roughly 25.000 Finns and 250.000 Russians were killed, and 43.500 Finns and 250.000 Russians wounded. 420.000 Finns, my grandpa included, lost their homes.

Nevertheless, the nation resisted aggression and remained free.

I have to end this review the same way as Trotter ends his wonderful book, i.e. by quoting from the farewell order of Marshal Mannerheim to the soldiers of the Finnish Army, which summarizes the Winter War and which leaves me practically in tears for all the thankfulness I feel for the older generations who bravely fought through this war:

“Soldiers! I have fought on many battlefields, but never have I seen your like as warriors!... After sixteen weeks of bloody combat, with no rest by day or night, our army stands unconquered before an enemy whose strength has grown in spite of terrible losses.
…Our fate is hard, now that we are compelled to surrender to an alien race land which for centuries we have cultivated with our labor and sweat…yet we must put our shoulders to the wheel, in order that we may prepare, on the soil left to us, a home for those rendered homeless, and a better life for all; and, as before, we must be ready to defend our diminished homeland with the same resolution and with the same fire with which we defended our individual homeland.
We are proudly conscious of our historic duty, which we shall continue to fulfill: the defense of western civilization which has been our heritage for centuries. But we also know that we have paid, to the last penny, any debt we may have owed to the West.
…That an army so inferior in numbers and equipment, should have inflicted such serious defeats on an overwhelmingly powerful enemy, and, while retreating, have over and over again repelled his attacks, is a thing for which it is hard to find a parallel in the history of war. But it is equally admirable that the Finnish people, face to face with an apparently hopeless situation, were able to resist to giving in to despair, and instead to grow in devotion and greatness.
Such a nation has earned the right to live”

[Mike · Rating 4 out of 5]

There wouldn't be much point in ignoring the fact that I read this book between March and May (2022), and therefore with Russia's invasion of Ukraine in the background. I've heard enough people referencing the Winter War since February 24th of this year that I was no doubt primed to notice the parallels between the struggle of modern-day Ukraine and that of "brave little Finland”- even if there is also a lot that doesn't line up, and we should probably be wary of comparisons.

But let's start with what's uncannily familiar. There's the fact that Stalin tried to create something called the Finland People's Republic just over the Finnish border in the town of Terijoki, and invaded only after a formal request of assistance from that ostensible government. There were the Russian soldiers (or Soviet soldiers rather, which would naturally include those from other Soviet republics, including Ukraine- Trotter's book was published in '91 but mostly written during the Cold War era, and like a lot of Americans of my parents' generation, he sometimes uses “Russian” and “Soviet” interchangeably) unsure of where exactly they were or why, or assured that the Finnish working-class would greet them as liberators and do most of the fighting for them. There was also the gratifying spectacle of a belligerent nation getting bitch-slapped by a smaller country they had vastly outgunned and outmanned. That lasted in Finland's case for a time, anyway.

In contemporary Russian fears of NATO expansion, moreover, there's an echo of what Trotter identifies as Stalin's real motivations to invade. I don't know if there are other schools of thought about Stalin's motivations, but Trotter makes them sound not totally irrational. Stalin was correct, after all, to suspect that Germany would eventually attack the USSR. Large nickel deposits had also recently been found in the Petsamo region of Finland, therefore (in Stalin's reasoning) making Germany, already dependent on iron ore from Sweden, more likely to invade and occupy Sweden's neighbor. Stalin also remembered that Imperial Germany had assisted Mannherheim and the Finnish White Guard against the Reds in 1918. In his mind, Finland and Germany might still be buddies. Maybe the Finns wouldn't even mind if Germany were to use their country as a launching pad to attack the USSR, a highly desirable launching pad considering that the Finnish border was just 30 km away, across the Karelian Isthmus, from Leningrad. It was therefore necessary, at least as Trotter reconstructs Stalin's thinking, to establish defenses inside Finland before the Wehrmacht (and since this was late 1939, everyone including Stalin was spooked by the way the blitzkrieg- with the help of the USSR, of course- had decimated Poland) took it by force- or maybe, Stalin suspected, with the consent of the Finns. So let's invade them before they (with the help of a larger western power) invade us, seems to have been the thinking. That kind of rationalization is familiar today, too. The impression I've come away with, however, is that Soviet policy was based mainly on brutal realpolitik, rather than animated by the genocidal intent in Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Stalin didn't have some deranged pseudo-historical fixation on Finland in particular, either; rather, he saw the invasion of their country as a practical measure.

And then there are the aspects that I hope don't turn out to have modern-day parallels, recounted mostly in the later chapters. Daladier and Chamberlain, for example, tried for political reasons of their own to keep Finland fighting instead of eventually agreeing to Soviet terms, both leaders making promises of military assistance that never materialized, but which it sounds like could have resulted in the Soviet occupation of all of Finland, had the Finns grasped at these phantoms.

Trotter apparently began what would become A Frozen Hell in 1962, as a research project for a seminar in Russian history, and took 24 years to complete it. Along the way he learned Finnish and spent some time living there, describing in the afterword “a lifelong love affair with the Finnish landscape." Clearly he dedicated a significant part of his life to putting together this account of the war for a contemporary western audience that still doesn't have many to choose from. Like the Spanish Civil War, the Winter War was followed closely by Americans as it was happening (like the war in Ukraine today), but has since been eclipsed in collective memory by the much larger conflict that followed. And that's a shame because it is a truly riveting and inspiring story, despite the fact that the Finns lost. Or did they. I guess you would say they lost; and that without military assistance from the west, the loss was inevitable. But they nevertheless dealt such humbling blows to the Red Army in the early months of the campaign, especially in the forests north of Lake Ladoga, that they eventually made it untenable for the Soviet leadership to continue the war, especially when Stalin felt the USSR had other enemies to worry about. Trotter naturally goes into great detail about just how the Finns accomplished that- the motti encirclements, the hit-and-run tactics, the use of skis and snow camo, that most of us have probably at least read about in passing. Not having a great handle on military strategy and tactics myself, I think I often tend to defer to their importance, and it's no question that the way the Finns utilized their natural landscape was crucial, but you also can't ignore the simple fact that the Finns had something real to fight for, whereas the Soviets were fighting at the points of their commissars' guns. Mannerheim said the Soviets in their suicidal frontal assaults displayed “a fatalism incomprehensible to a European”, but that of course is BS. European or not, most people don't savor the idea of freezing their asses off in a foreign country for reasons they don't understand, nor of charging across frozen lakes straight into enemy fire. You do that kind of thing only when you have no choice in the matter.

Finland's land border with the USSR was over 1,000 km long (as is its current border with Russia), but it was nevertheless a tall order for the Soviets to stage a successful invasion along most of that stretch, due to lack of roads and the inhospitable landscape- the dense boreal forests of pine and spruce on the Finnish side. In an interview I read recently with a Finnish General named Pekka Toveri, he didn't seem very concerned about the prospect of the armies of the Russian Federation attacking from that direction. The example of the Winter War, and of the losses the Soviets endured trying to strike through those forests, is probably a big part of the reason why. It's also why the most important stretch of land in the Winter War turned out to be the Karelian Isthmus, which connects the two countries and separates Lake Ladoga from the Gulf of Finland. It was only after the Soviets' early losses in late '39 that they paused and concentrated their forces for an all-out February assault on the Isthmus, pushing towards the historic city of Viipuri. Helsinki wasn't far away. Severely outgunned is still an understatement, and Finnish resistance finally became untenable. A British journalist named John Langdon-Davies was in a restaurant in Helsinki when the peace terms were announced over the radio:

“Every now and then, as the true tragedy unfolded itself, my eyes caught a quick movement from first one table and then another. It was the movement of a man or woman suddenly brushing away tears...I could not understand anything that was being said, except for the proper names. It was words like 'Viipuri' and 'Hanko' that produced this movement- a stifled, spasmodic cry that seemed to come from almost everybody in the room, as if in response to a physical blow.”

Not long after, a photojournalist for Life magazine named Carl Mydans found himself sharing a train compartment with three Finnish officers, bound for Sweden.

During the night, all four men maintained a polite silence. The following morning Mydans was dressing and, like two of the other men, discreetly trying to maintain as much decorum as he could inside the cramped quarters. The Finnish colonel was shaving, balancing his razor against the swaying of the train. He caught Mydans's eye in the mirror.
“You are an American?” he asked in clear English. Mydans nodded, noticing that the other two Finnish officers were studiously averting their eyes. The colonel began to scrape at his chin once more.
“At least you will tell them that we fought bravely.”
Mydans whispered that he would, indeed.
The colonel carefully wiped his razor, then dabbed at himself with a towel. He had cut his cheek and there was a tiny bubble of blood swelling there. When he had taken care of that, he began to button his tunic. Mydans observed that the officer's hands were trembling.
Suddenly he peered up at Mydans with an expression of anguish. He began in a hoarse, quiet voice: “Your country was going to help...” Then, in a louder voice: “You promised, and we believed you...”
Then he grabbed Mydans by the shoulders, his fingers digging in, and screamed: “A half-dozen goddamned Brewster fighters with no spare parts is all we got from you! And the British sent us guns from the last war that wouldn't even work!”

The attachment that Finns seemed to have to Viipuri in particular caused me to look it up, thinking that surely it had been returned to Finland by now, maybe by that nice man Boris Yeltsin. Nope. Despite the fact that when you look at the Isthmus on a map, the city is clearly closer to what you'd have to call the Finnish side, it's been part of Russia since the Red Army retook it (the Finns briefly got it back during Barbarossa) in '45. Instead of Viipuri they call it Vyborg, which makes it sound like a technical death metal band, a generic European beer, or maybe a Stallone movie set in the year 2052. It's painful to read about the relevant negotiations (such as they were) between the Finnish diplomats and Molotov, because you hate to think of the Finns granting any concessions at all to these motherfuckers; and yet, completely overmatched in terms of both manpower and weaponry, it was almost certainly the smart thing to do. Finland though slightly reduced remained a free state after the war, and throughout the Cold War years of Finlandization.

The book probably offers just the tip of the iceberg for understanding Finland during this period, but I think it has at least given me a solid foundation for further reading about the Continuation War and the Finns' alliance with the Germans. It's interesting how roles can flip so quickly- so yes, Finland allied with Germany, and the sympathies of the wider world abruptly shifted to the Soviet Union. General Marshall told Roosevelt at the outset of Barbarossa that the Red Army "would be utterly defeated in no more than ninety days", which sounds oddly like what Stalin's subordinates assured him about Finland. Trotter spends a short chapter on all this towards the end, commenting that it's one of the most debated periods in Finnish history. I'll bet. I haven't read enough to offer a real opinion, but it does sound to me like geographic and political realities didn't give the Finns a lot of great options. It also seems to me that if you are caught between two overwhelming military powers, you are going to side with the one you think gives you the best chance of retaining your own independence and reclaiming your own stolen territory, the one that hasn't bombed your cities.

It's also worth mentioning that I've finished this book just as Finland (along with Sweden) looks set to join NATO, a direct consequence of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Given the history recounted here, it might seem curious that Finns hadn't previously displayed any great desire to be in NATO, but then again maybe it's not so strange. For one thing, I'm sure the historical memory of this resistance is inspiring to them. If they can fight off invasion once, they can do it again. And secondly, I've gotten the impression that, even into the post-Cold War period, Finland has maintained a policy of not wanting to antagonize Russia unnecessarily. They preserved their freedom that way throughout the Cold War, so why rock the boat. And for a long time, it must have seemed that their colossal neighbor was no longer a threat to them. Now they clearly think otherwise, and the Russian leadership really has no one to blame but themselves.

[Dj · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book could actually be called: The Mouse that Roared. The big large neighbor wants bits of Finland and Finland doesn't want to give up the land that they have. This one sided appearing conflict turned everything on its head and the world took noticed and stood behind Finland in unity for a time. Finland had few advantages in this conflict in fact it had almost nothing that would give an indication that they would be able hold the Russian's off for any amount of time.

The Russians seemingly with every advantage gave most of them up and let the Finn's man handle their Armies. Fighting with Large mass armies and little support either from the air or from their artillery. Considering the use the Russian's put their Artillery to later in the war that seems almost unforgivable.

This was the first time the Russians had put their new Armies in the field and they made mistakes a plenty. This is what caused Hitler and his high command to think that Russia would fall just like the West and Poland had. They forgot the one lesson of the Winter War that they should have been paying attention too. No matter how bad they were doing, how many losses they were being subjected to, the Russians would ruthlessly keep going and in the end numbers do tell. And even if the Russians were slow learners, they did learn from their mistakes.

[Charles · Rating 2 out of 5]

Firstly, I have the UK edition, titled The Winter War: The Russo-Finnish War of 1939-40. I find this to be a more apt title than the more excitingly titled American edition: A Frozen Hell: The Russo-Finnish Winter War of 1939-1940. This book is an amateurish military history of an oft over-looked conflict at the very beginning of WWII. It’s a survey study providing a brief description of the operations during the conflict. A serious student of Military and Diplomatic history is going to need to supplement their readings on the conflict with additional sources, rather than use this book.

I mentioned this book is brief. My copy was a slender 285-pages. It was published in 2013.

Prose was workman-like. Technically, the book was well edited. I found only minor grammar and spelling errors. I suspect the author has literary pretensions. (I would have preferred him being a military historian.) There was an over-use of superlatives. For example, I counted the use of “superb” three times within two pages describing Finnish units. He spent a lot of effort to include anecdotes into the narrative. However their use was uneven. In places they were effective. I found the anecdotes involving Mannerheim to be very interesting, although many of the ‘snippets’ I thought were extraneous and did not contribute to the narration. For example, I thought there were too many short passages extolling Finnish bravery. He also bent some effort toward making his descriptions evocative. This is a talent most military historians do not have. Unfortunately this ability was not fully developed with this author either.

The organization of the book was good. There was a logical and detailed breakdown of the different actions along the front. Land operations received the majority of attention. Air operations were appropriately integrated into the narrative. Naval operations received less attention than air operations.

Descriptions of combat in the individual points of action along the front were good. The Smoke of Battle and the élan of Finnish troops was well conveyed.

There were brief descriptions of the diplomatic history of the conflict. However, the book would have benefited from a larger discussion.

Use of maps was poor for a military history. There were enough maps, but they were low resolution line drawings. For example, I had difficulty distinguishing between roads and rivers in the maps. The maps also did not include a ‘scale’, needed to determine distance. Units were sometimes, but not always indicated on the maps. I needed to use a proper Atlas to better understand the front. The maps were also not always positioned properly within the book to directly support the narration.

Use of pictures was good. I spent a long time poring over them. All pictures were from Finnish archives.

I think thought the greatest weaknesses of the book were its lack of analysis and its Finnish-centric point-of-view.

At no point in time was there a detailed, high-level analysis of the military and diplomatic situation.

The Finnish Army had the following advantages: the military advantage of defense, the advantage and thorough knowledge of the terrain, severe winter weather conditions and qualitative superiority in manpower. Finnish doctrine was simple, but also relatively mature. However, the Finnish strategy was flawed. Their objective was to inflict either a Pyrrhic victory on the Russians or hold-out long enough to set up the conditions for international intervention. In either case the Finn’s small nation would have taken such a heavy toll that the achievement would not be worthwhile.

The Russians had a preponderance of men and modern war material. However they had a severely defective doctrine and command structure. At the highest level Russian doctrine hadn’t yet adapted to the new ideas, technologies, and organizational designs of WWII warfare. Their tactics, techniques, and procedures were not a match to the Finn’s advantages. The Russian strategy was a limited act of territorial aggrandizement.

In addition, despite having a chapter titled 'Order of Battle', there was no detailed, quantitative description and analysis of the combatant’s Order of Battle. There was no description of the Finnish military organization. Not a lot has been written on the Finnish military of the period. For example, I can only assume they followed the post-WWI divisional model of the German army: 6500 men in three regiments with each regiment having three battalions. Likewise there was no organizational description of the Russian military organization. (This can easily be found in other military histories of the period.) For example, a Russian Rifle (Infantry) Division was 8700 men in three regiments. A Russian Infantry division was about a third larger in manpower than a Finnish division. A fact not found in this book.

A detailed, quantitative inventory of the military hardware would have been helpful. Finnish military hardware was somewhat well addressed. However, I was not familiar with the oft referenced pre-WWII Russian military hardware, such as the T-35 armored vehicle.

This is also very much a Finnish history. The Finns were the heroic good guys, the Russians were the brutish bad guys. The greatest majority of information, anecdotes and descriptions were from Finnish sources, although some information from captured Russian documents was included. Only a very few Russian published sources available in the West were cited. A proper use of Russian archives, likely available in 2013 would have added a lot of depth to this book. In particular, the evolution of Russian strategic objectives would have been explained. It also would have been an interesting counterpoint to include a reminiscence of Cpl. Ivan Stroganoff, a Russian sapper infiltrating the Mannerheim line, to compare with the stories of Sgt. Ole Erkko defending a bunker on the line.

This is an OK read for those interested in a survey of a brief, peripheral, conflict to WWII which has mostly been forgotten in the West. However, while it had some elements of serious military and diplomatic history scholarship, it’s more of a popular history. In places the book reads like popular entertainment. In particular, it’s not objective and it’s weak on any critical analysis. Readers interested in this conflict should not look at this as a primary source.

If you’re interested in a better example of a popular military history, I recommend An Army at Dawn: The War in North Africa, 1942-1943, Volume One of the Liberation Trilogy or any of Rick Atkinson’s Liberation Trilogy books.

[Numidica · Rating 4 out of 5]

The story of the Finnish-Russian Winter War has long been known to me in its broad outlines, but this was my first foray into the details of that short conflict which was sandwiched between Germany's invasion of Poland and the Battle of France. The gallant Finns, who stopped the Red Army, at least for a few months, faced approximately ten-to-one odds and an enemy who had material advantages that were completely unanswered by the equipment of the Finnish Army. The Soviets had tanks in abundance, the Finns had none. The Russians had fighter and bomber aircraft in the thousands, the Finns had 78 aircraft, 14 of which were obsolete. The Red Army had hundreds, if not thousands of howitzers and mortars; the Finns had dozens at best, and all were obsolete.

In 2024, it impossible to read about the Winter War without making comparisons to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and many of the analogies are apt. The Russian generals were afraid to tell Stalin that the war could take months, so they told him it would be a simple thing to drive the tank columns to Helsinki in a couple of weeks. The Russian generals in the first phase of the war (Dec 1939-Jan 1940) were mostly incompetent sycophants who held their positions primarily because Stalin had killed most of the competent generals in the purges of the 1930's. These generals drove their divisions in straight lines on the few roads that were available in eastern Finland, and made excellent targets for the Finns, who stopped the columns with fire from roadblocks, and then cut up the remaining formation with attacks that came through the "impenetrable" forests that the Finns knew so well. Entire Red Army divisions were destroyed in this way, and one is reminded of the Russian column that drove toward Kyiv in Feb 2022, which was destroyed in detail by the Ukrainians.

But there are big differences between the Winter War and Ukraine in 2022. The Finns were skilled in woodcraft and how to live in the forest in winter; the Russians were not. So the Finns knew if they stopped a Russian division, and simply held it in place for a few days, the extreme cold weather (temperatures went as low as -40F) would do most of the work. The Finns actually built saunas near the front lines to give soldiers a sauna bath every 2-3 days, and their underground shelters were warm, with hot food. The Finns were also well-equipped from a clothing standpoint for the winter, dressing in layers, unlike the Russians, who often had only felt boots with no real soles or heels, and standard overcoats.

Because the Russian generals were inept, they did not do the one thing that might have saved their offensive - they did not continue to attack after initial contact with Finnish forces. Instead they went over to the defense, and their men starved and froze while being steadily fired at by preternaturally accurate Finnish snipers, and attacked at close range by unbelievably brave Finns who approached tanks on foot and disabled them with grenades, molotov cocktails, and in some cases, crowbars. The heavy weapons the Finns did have were used with strict economy, and only where they could be most effective, such as shooting a 37mm Bofors at a line of tanks on a road, stopping the first tank to halt the column, and then working from the rear forward to destroy the rest. A somewhat surreal aspect of the war was the use of naval guns (coastal artillery) near Viipuri to attack Russians crossing the ice toward Finnish positions. The enormous 10 inch shells would shatter the ice, causing Russian tanks, troops and truck to sink into the Gulf of Finland where they drowned.

After the defeat of this initial advance by the Red Army, Stalin was furious. Those generals who had not died with their troops in Finland were recalled, interrogated and shot, and new, more competent generals were put in charge. It was in this period, Feb-Mar 1940 that Timoshenko and Zhukov began to rise through the ranks of senior command. Once more professional Russian leadership had arrived, and fresh troops, the outcome was preordained. In the attack on the critical Karelian Isthmus, the Russians lined up 80 howitzers per mile on average to pound the Finnish positions. Tanks were told to keep advancing, as were infantry, and by dint of mass waves of attackers, whose bodies often piled up in the hundreds in front of Finnish positions, the attacks finally succeeded in pushing back the Finns to their last defensive line, and the Finnish government sued for peace. One is reminded of Grant in the Civil War; the Russians had realized that the only way to end the war was to keep attacking.

The final casualty count will likely never be known exactly, but Trotter estimates that Russian losses were ten times as great as Finnish losses. It is a military rule of thumb that the attacker's losses are about three times the losses of the defender, and the added incompetence of the early Russian efforts apparently roughly tripled the count of Russian dead. In Ukraine, by the way, the Russian losses are estimated to be about 3 to 4 times as great as the Ukrainian losses.

A few quibbles about the book. Trotter really needed more maps to illustrate his descriptions of the various battles - I'd say three times as many maps are needed. Also, his footnoting is sparse for a work of history. Because of the lack of maps, one can easily become confused by the use of Finnish place names when one has no easy guide to where the towns, lakes, etc are located in reference other locations that have been discussed. That said, this is the best popular history of the Winter War we are likely to see, and overall, it's quite good. Despite their ultimate defeat, the stand of the Finns in 1939-40 was an amazing feat which was morally correct, in that the people were defending their nation from an invader, and the strength of the Finns' resistance, their willingness to fight, was likely the key factor in their not being absorbed into the Soviet sphere at the end of WW2, as their neighbors, Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia all were.

[Sleepy Boy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Absolutely excellent book on the Russo-Finnish War. Immensely readable yet with great detail, the author does a great job of intertwining the reality on the ground, command, and diplomatic fronts.

[Peter · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very solid treatment of the four-month long Winter War of 1939 – 1940 when Russia invaded Finland, for no good reason. Following an outline of the Finnish political setting and a brief biography of their main military leader, the author sets forth a day-by-day, blow-by-blow description of the heroic defensive ground war by Finland, and the bungling of the overbearing, paranoid, gangster-like Russians. Which is surprisingly not at all boring. This war went fast. From the Russians crossing the border in late November to their getting thoroughly stymied by early February, the front was very active and viscously fluid.

To followers of the War in Ukraine, it was all so familiar, as the Russian actions then were exactly the same as their 2022 invasion of Ukraine now—starting with the Russian leadership believing their own propaganda, that the Finns would welcome them, next suffering some serious defeats by the numerically inferior, but tactically superior Finns, and then revising their “tactics” into simply meat-wave after heartless meat-wave, like the Orcs in the Two Towers. And the West, then too, failed to provide sufficient weapons and support to the heroic Finns (that time, because they were also concerned about Hitler’s Germany, which had already by that time overrun Poland and Czechoslovakia, and was threatening France and England).

Russia: lies and paranoia (and bullying and violence), all the way down.

[Oleksandr Zholud · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a history non-fiction about the Soviet assault on Finland in 1939. It gives short information about the main events both before (from the independence of Finland in 1918 and politics of the 20s and 30s) and after (the Continuation war and post-WW2 situation). While it is more pro-Finnish, it is more a support to the victim of the aggression and I see it as quite an unbiased account.

First, it highlights the situation right before the military action, trying to advocate positions of all sides, including the fact that while Stalin was wrong to expect Finland as a base for another Great Power (most probably Great Britain) to attack the USSR, purely theoretically it was possible. What surprised me was that Mannerheim consistently urged a policy of conciliation right before the attack, including giving the demanded territories (including parts of the Mannerheim’s line!). He already supplied a resignation request and only the first Russian bombs falling on Helsinki saved him from being sacked.

The initial phase of the war is given first at the strategic level, but then the author goes quite deep into a tactical situation in each war theater (alas the maps in the e-book are quite small), giving both descriptions of attacks and counterattacks as well as anecdotes about participants, like this story:
A lieutenant named Huovinen taped five stick grenades together and crawled toward the tanks; his friend, First Lieutenant Virkki, intended to provide covering fire, despite the fact that he was carrying only his side arm. At a range of forty meters Virkki stood up and emptied his 9 mm. Lahti automatic at the vehicles’ observation slits. The T-28s replied with a spray of machine-gun fire, and Virkki went down. Those watching felt sure he had been killed. But he had only dropped down to slap another magazine into the butt of his weapon. That done, he jumped up and once more emptied his pistol at the tanks. Altogether this deadly dance step was repeated three times, at which point the Russian tankers seemed to become unnerved. They turned around and clanked back to the village. Meanwhile, Lieutenant Huovinen had been crawling closer to them from the rear and now had his arm cocked to throw the grenade bundle. Just at that moment the tank nearest him put on speed and retreated. He lowered his grenades in astonishment. Surely there were not many instances in modern warfare of tanks being repulsed by pistol fire.

At the end, there is an exciting chapter on policies of the Great Britain and France (which wanted to set a base in Sweden to stop supplies of iron ore to Nazi Germany, covering it as a pledge of support for Finns) as well as neutrality of Sweden and Norway, which had no desire to turn into war theaters for other powers.

Overall, it is an excellent description of the Winter War, with multiple parallels to the current Russian invasion of Ukraine, from artillery superiority to ‘no care for losses’ approach of Russian commanders with human waves to incidents of Red aircraft strafing hospitals and hospital trains, which were so common that the Finns finally painted over any Red Cross insignia that were visible from the air.

“Hakkaa Päälle!”

[Dan · Rating 4 out of 5]

This short and unequal winter war shows why sometimes it is worth fighting a war that you know from the start that you will lose.

[Richard Sisson · Rating 1 out of 5]

A fascinating story, poorly told!

Frozen Hell is an account of the 1939-40 Winter War, a conflict which involved a Soviet invasion of Finland in 1939 during the Phoney War period of World War II between the fall of Poland and the Nazi invasion of Denmark, Norway and Western Europe.

The really interesting thing about this book about unprovoked Russian aggression against a neighbour, is to be reading it as Putin’s Russia has launched a war of conquest against Ukraine and neutral Finland and Sweden have decided to join NATO. There are so many parallels: a determined defense against the odds, international condemnation, incompetent Russian military leadership and tactics, high Russian casualties, Russian puppet regimes in conquered territories, effective use of snipers by the defenders, the deployment of overwhelming odds by the Russians and use of wanton destruction to achieve their aims. And on it goes.

The author’s style of writing history is very poor. Although apparently inspired by the author’s college research and an exchange in Finland, the quality of scholarship is poor. There is no bibliography, just a two-page Notes on the Sources, and minimal referencing, once every ten or dozen pages. The best that can be said is that the is author is enthusiastic, even passionate about the subject. The book is otherwise amateurish, sensational, lacking in objectivity and full of sweeping statements, outlandish subjective comments, poor judgement and constant contradiction.

One example will suffice, the author’s treatment of the Finnish commander in chief, Mannerheim, who he lionises and criticizes in turn and with gusto. Outrageous, subjective nonsense! The narrative is short on dates and detail and while the fighting in each theatre of operations is organized into a dedicated chapter, the narrative jumps around rather than following a strict chronological approach. It actually reads more like the script of a documentary. made for a general audience - don’t misunderstand me, a dramatic and populist approach is fine, even important for such programs if they are to be engaging, but inappropriate for a history book.

[Laurence · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sisu is a Finnish word which is especially relevant in this book. Sisu is a special strength and persistent determination and resolve to continue and overcome in the moment of adversity, an almost magical quality, a combination of stamina, perseverance, courage, and determination held in reserve for hard times.

Stoic, staunch defense in overwhelming odds is one thing, to survive and somewhat hold its own for as long as it did is quite a feat. The Finns should be proud.

[Emil · Rating 2 out of 5]

Admittedly biased, sensationalized "popular history", that's a quick, easy read. Zing-bang-pow! The author knows a good deal about the "heroes" of his book - the Finns, but not nearly as much about the Red Army who engaged them and why, most of the politics is glossed over. The only useful information in this book are the basic who what when where facts that it does contain, more or less. Check out Carl Van Dyke's "The Soviet Invasion of Finland" instead.

[Andrew Davis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well written account of Winter War. The maps could be better, especially when dealing with places that since have been taken by Russians and Google Maps is of no help. A brief synopsis follows.
Finland was ruled till 1809 by Sweden. A part close to Petersburg belonged to Russia. After that belonged to Russia. Soon after October Revolution in Russia, the Finnish Parliament assumed sovereignty.
In October 1939 Stalin issued summons to the Finns to discuss the current situation. Russians wanted some islands in the Gulf of Finland, to move the border further from Leningrad and to lease the peninsula of Hanko to establish their military base there with 5000 soldiers. Finns refused.
In preparation for attack on Finland, Stalin nominated O. Kuusinen as a ruler of Finnish People’s Republic. The war’s first shots were fired on November 26, from within Russian territory, which killed apparently 4 Russian soldiers.
General Meretskov was put in charge of 4 armies:
1. Seventh – on the Karelian Isthmus under Meretskov. Comprised between 12 and 14 divisions, 1000 tanks. The objective was Viipuri, the breaching of the Mannerheim Line and ultimately Helsinki. Later divided into the Seventh and Thirteenth armies
2. Eight – north of Lake Ladoga. Made up of 6 rifle divisions and 2 tank brigades. Its objective was to take the Mannerheim Line from the rear.
3. Ninth Army – Made up of 5 rifle divisions. Its objective was to cut Finland into two.
4. Fourteenth Army – Made up of 3 divisions and based in Murmansk. Its objective was to capture the arctic port of Petsamo and the Lapland capital of Rovaniemi.
The Red Army division was supposed to number 17,000 soldiers, whilst the Finnish one 14,400 soldiers.
The Mannerheim’s forces were deployed as follows:
1. Army of the Karelian Isthmus – 6 divisions under General Hugo Ostermann. On the rights, the Second Corps under General Ohquist, composed of the 4th, 5th and 11th divisions. On the left flank Third Corps, under General Heinrichs, composed of the 9th and 10th divisions.
2. Fourth Corps – 2 divisions manning a 100 km line from the north of Lake Ladoga, and commanded by General Hagglund.
3. North Finland Group – covering the remaining 1000 km to the Arctic Ocean. Led by General Tuompo.
On 30th of November Russian planes attacked Helsinki. General Meretskov stormed across the Isthmus frontier with 120,000 men and 1,000 tanks.
The first major Russian blows fell on Taipale sector. By mid-December the main weight of the Russian attack had shifted to the Summa sector. Manning the centre of Mannerheim Line, in the Summa sector, was the Finnish 5th Division. The first big Soviet push against the Summa sector can on December 17th. Russian had been stopped cold against the Mannerheim Line.
Mannerheim appointed Colonel Talvela to defend Tolvajarvi. He organised for Aaro Pajari to ambush Russians bivouacking along the road to Aglajarvi. In the Illomantsi sector Colonel Per Ekholm led the charge. One of his patrols discovered an enemy battalion. Ekholm organised an ambush and killed 350 Russians. However Russians were not as passive as they seemed. An entire Soviet battalion marched undetected north of Lake Tolvajarvi and fell upon Pajari’s supply line, the road to Korpiselka. Russians first overrun field kitchens and begun to eat. Pajari put together 100 cooks, clerics and medics and they counterattacked in bayonet fighting. This engagement was dubbed the “Sausage War”. Talvela decided to counterattack on 12th of December. They managed to destroy Russian command at hotel in Hirvasharju.
A small stream north of lake Lodoga – Kollaanjoki (the Kolla River) became “Kolla Front”. Colonel Teittinen made a stand. He defended his positions till ceasefire on March 13.
Finns introduced a tactical operation called “motti”. Russians had to travel across forest track in a long convoy of tanks and trucks. Finns applied strong concentrated attacks to break the convoy and then liquidate its parts one by one. They applied it to 15 km stretch of Uomaa road.
Further up north, the battle of Suomussalmi became a military classic. It resulted in two Russian divisions 163rd and 44th to be eliminated. Major General Zelentsov, the 163rd Division aimed to cut Finland into two parts. The Finish forces operated under Colonel Paavo Susitaival (“the Susi task force”). By applying motti tactic they launched their attack on 12th of December. By December 30th, the Finns counted more than 5,000 bodies with unknown number who perished in the wilderness during breakout attempts. The 44th division was led by general Vinogradov. By January, the 8th 27,500 Russian bodies were counted. Zelentsov’s body was never identified. Vinogradov returned to Russia and was arrested by NKVD and shot.
Far north defence was led by Major General Tuompo. His deputy was Kurt Wallenius. Russians took Petsamo after a short firefight. Russians sent 122nd division from their base at Kandalaksha at the tip of the White Sea to attack Rovaniemi, the capital of Lapland. Having taken Salla they sent an infantry regiment and company of tanks toward Pelkosenniemi, while the rest of the division pushed toward Kemijarvi. Wallenius took defence of Kemijarvi. He struck back on 17th of December and Russians pulled back. Russians continued to attack with fresh troops. Beginning 2nd of January Wallenius struck with a series of short assaults and pushed them back to Markajarvi. There they stayed for reminder of the war.
During the first week of January Stalin set up a “North-western front” under command of Timoshenko. His chief of staff was Zhukov. Timoshenko divided all forces on the Karelian Isthmus into two corps:
• 13th Army under General Grendal in the Taipale sector, and
• 7th Army under Meretskov on the southern Isthmus.
Russians started their offensive on February 1st. They continue on 2nd and 3rd of February with new assaults. On the 10th and 11th the Soviet offensive widened, as attacks thundered against every sector of the line from Taipale to the Gulf of Finland. By nightfall on February 11th the Mannerheim line started breaking. On February 15th, Mannerheim authorised a general retirement of 2nd Corps to the Intermediate Line.
February 18th came to be known as the “Black Day at Taipale”. An entire Soviet division attacked Taipale line. The following day Ostermann resigned his command and was replaced by General Talvela.
On 13th of March a treaty was signed in Moscow and cease-fire declared. The Finnish Army had begun the war with around 150,000 men. By 10th of March its losses totalled about half of that figure. Russian losses are estimated at 230,000 to 270,000 dead and another 200,000 to 300,000 wounded.

[Michael Burnam-Fink · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Winter War was one of the side stories of the Second World War. In 1939, the Soviet Union decided to extend its defenses around Leningrad by taking out Finland, a former Russian province that had broken away during the Revolution. Tiny and poorly armed, war with Finland should have been short and victorious.

While the Finns lacked tanks, aircraft, and artillery, they had a deep reservoir of fighting spirit. The classic story is of Finnish ski guerrillas cutting road-bound Soviet columns to pieces in the frozen woods, and while that did happen, Trotter goes beyond the popular heroics to show the war as it really happened. These 'motti' tactics were ones of desperation and weakness. The Finns would have much preferred a quick victory so they could redeploy forces to the decisive theater of the Karelian Peninsula. On the Mannerhaim line, they held out through sheer will against uncoordinated Soviet attacks. Russian attacks were massive, but tanks and infantry didn't work together, and artillery alone couldn't dislodge the dug in Finns.

The Western powers promised aid, which was slow in coming and insufficient. Finally, in March the Soviets reorganized, and this time their attacks overwhelmed the Finnish defenders. Finland signed a harsh peace treaty at gunpoint, and then fought another hard war again as part of the Axis, the Continuation War. While Finnish casualties were small in absolute terms, and lopsided in relative terms, for a nation of 4 million people they were decimating, and the scorched earth defense, territorial concessions, and the later Continuation War left a bitter peace. The weakness of the Soviets may have played a role in Hitler's decision to betray his then ally in Operation Barbarossa, while also giving Stalin a hint of his military's failures, and enough time to initiate reforms that ultimately lead to victory in the broader war, though not without millions of dead Russians and other Soviet peoples in the process.

Trotter is biased towards the Finns, but not to the point of blindness. He admires their courage, but also notes that amateur tank hunting teams with satchel charges are no substitute for actual anti-tank weapons, which the Finns lacked. Their commander, Mannerhaim, was an archaic cipher, a Tsarist officer and Swedish noble who never mastered Finnish and who at minimum allowed atrocities when he was the leader of White forces during the 1919 Finnish Civil War, and may have ordered war crimes against Finnish socialists. But ultimately, he was the man of the hour, an iron-willed commander who enabled a stiff defense at a time other European powers collapsed. Trotter's book is about as good as an English history is going to get.

[Vicky Hunt · Rating 5 out of 5]

"The Dead in their Frozen Hundreds"

An account of the Finnish resistance to Russia's onslaught in 1939 that ends with Stalin taking much land from Finland, but only after Russia pays for it with the life of untold thousands of soldiers. It was reckoned by some soviets that the ground stolen from Finland was barely enough room to bury the dead. The Finns fought well beyond the point where they knew they would lose. Very little help was given to Finland. Even Sweden and Norway refused to allow English/ French/ American troops to pass through their territory to assist Finland, on the grounds that they themselves must remain neutral.

Later, Finland joined with Hitler in a revenge assault on Russia in the "Continuation War." That ended about the same for the Finns, but only through their own bravery and the wise strategy of their leader Baron Gustav Mannerheim was Finland able to remain free today. The book reminds us of the importance of standing strong under invasion.

Trotter does a great job of describing the battles, the strategy of the generals, the weapons and war craft used, and the courage of the people. He even describes the types of Soviet tanks. He wraps it all up in a unique Finnish voice that allows you to appreciate the bravery of the Finns. And, he delivers it in story format, so its really the perfect account of a war in every way.

Particularly intriguing was the use of Mottis to surround invading soldiers. This consisted of trapping them in small areas, where they would be surrounded and literally besieged for long periods of time, while the Finns picked them off. The Russians would try to fly in support planes to drop food to their men, but most often these drops were shot down or missed the targets. When they did land inside the Mottis, the starved Russian soldiers would pounce on the food to eat and die.

The Finns fought guerilla style on skis, and had very limited weaponry. Much of what they used was taken from the frozen dead of Russia's troops. The book includes maps of the battles and strategies used. The diplomacy efforts were also very interesting, even though the peace terms were so poor. Through it all, the Finnish citizens were resolute to persevere. And, the author shares many personal glimpses of the people.

I read this book for my stop in Finland on my Journey Around the World in 80 Books for 2018. I recommend it highly. I enjoyed it in Kindle and Audible whisper-sync. That is really the best way to read the book, since the pronunciation of the Finnish place names is an acquired skill that will be enhanced with sight and sound. The narration was excellently performed by Matthew Lloyd Davies. My next stop will be Estonia, as I head for a final sweep south to finish Europe.

[Steve]

Lest there be any doubt about Russian behavior in war, spend time with Mr. Trotter’s concise history of a conflict that is far from the minds of Americans living today. This story really begins when Finland succeeded from Russia in late 1917 – recall that Russia acquired Finland from Sweden as a consequence of events during the Napoleonic era. A Communist-inspired revolt erupted shortly after independence, an event that did not generate much support from Lenin, who had plenty on his plate. Germany came to Finland’s aid in 1918, and the uprising was suppressed.

Since the 1939 Finnish border with Soviet Russia sat uncomfortably close to Leningrad, Stalin figured, with significant prodding from the local party boss Andrei Zhdanov and his cronies, that good reason existed to establish an adequate territorial buffer should war with Germany erupt – the Soviets had taken note of what the German blitzkrieg in Poland might mean should the tables turn. The Soviets at first asked the Finns to redraw their mutual border, a proposal that also included limited concessions. The core Soviet objective was the Karelian Isthmus, a threatening access corridor that runs between Lake Ladoga and the Gulf of Finland, which leads directly to Leningrad. The Finns refused. The Soviets were not to be deterred. On 26 November 1939, they fabricated a casus belli with the “Mainila shots” incident, a poorly staged border affair that lacked the requisite whiff of authenticity. The Soviets continued with the farce, responding to the concocted provocation with attacks in force across multiple fronts.

The Finns fought with exceptional valor under the command of the legendary Baron Carl Gustav Mannerheim. He sought to battle for time while establishing a defense that might summon assistance from the major Western powers. Appeals were made to Sweden, Britain, and France, among others, for direct military relief. Sweden crouched beneath the table of neutrality. Britain and France were more than generous with their abundant, inspiring rhetoric, which naturally proved insufficient to counter advancing Soviet divisions. The Finns were on their own. And yet they were remarkably effective at stopping their much larger and better-equipped opponent for more than two months.

The Soviet commanders displayed classic ineptitude along with appalling disregard for their troops; an equally appalling vengeance was directed toward Finnish civilians. His forces having been effectively countered, and having suffered large, embarrassing losses, Stalin turned to Army Commander, First Rank, Semyon Konstantinovich Timoshenko to turn things around for the motherland. Accompanying the former barrel maker as chief of staff was the hero of Khalkin Gol, Georgi Zhukov. With a reinvigorated offense, the Soviets were poised to control events. The new leadership broke through the Mannerheim Line, which ran across the Karelian Isthmus, on 11 February 1940. The Russians gained in momentum while the Finns withered, though with notable honor and courage.

A peace agreement was signed on 12 March 1940. Finland ceded territory to the Soviets but remained an independent nation. In 105 days of war, the author notes that roughly 70,000 Finns were killed and wounded – from a total population of less than four million. And the Soviets? The author mentions that Finnish historians generally believe that the Soviets lost 230,000 to 270,000 killed in action and 200,000 to 300,000 troops wounded, astonishing numbers for such a limited campaign.

But that was not the end of this story because in 1941, Finland joined Germany as a cobelligerent against the Soviet Union in the Continuation War. The Finns reclaimed the land they lost in 1940, the limit of their ambitions. By 1944, however, Finland was on the defensive. The Finnish government negotiated yet another armistice, ceding back the recovered lands, agreeing to expel German troops in Northern Finland, yet maintaining its independence, albeit with a degree of accommodation to the Soviet Union.

What lessons might be taken from this history that are relevant to the current war in Ukraine? While there are some similarities between these two conflicts, they are decidedly different. Putin appears intent on regime change, even if that is to take decades, with ambitions that will affect all of Ukraine. The Ukrainian war also provides the rationale for maintaining the Russian security state, essential for a man intent on living a full natural life without ever surrendering office. The Finnish war, in contrast, occurred over only a few months and had limited territorial aims. Stalin was surprisingly content to allow Finnish political independence. There may be one important lesson, however. I think Stalin understood the potential cost of Finnish intransigence to be good enough reason to avoid wholesale de facto annexation. With Western nations similarly feckless today as in 1939, leaving Ukraine to fight alone, perhaps that country’s only path forward if it wishes to remain independent lies in convincing Vladimir Putin that Ukrainian resolve is as strong as the Finns, and that a Pyrrhic victory likely awaits ultimate Russian success. From the Finnish episode, I am left to conclude that without a Russian coup d’état or substantial international assistance to aid Ukraine, the Russian war machine will ultimately have its way, though the losses will be staggering and beyond justification – they already are.

And I cannot resist one last thought reflecting on Russian attitudes in war. With such a perplexing disregard for life, which appears long rooted in Russian culture, why would anyone choose to live in that country if they have a choice? Moreover, why would anyone choose to raise a family there? I believe there are many on this planet that cherish human life; apparently, Russian leaders are not counted among them in the year 2025 for reasons that I can only partially understand.

[John Valdez · Rating 5 out of 5]

In the winter of 1939, Russia attacked a smaller country thinking its campaign would be over in twelve days, while a welcoming population embraced Russian troops as liberators. The attack bogged down due to poor logistics, inept leadership, poor troop performance, and more importantly, a tenacious and motivated defense. This is the story of Frozen Hell, in which the author describes in great detail the brutal winter war between Russia and Finland that took place between November 1939 and March 1940.

The book takes a significant amount of research and distills it into a readable and well organized account of the fighting that took place in rural Finland’s snowfields, ice covered lakes, and dense forests. Mr. Trotter begins the book by giving a concise history of Finland, which was once part of Sweden and later Russia. His background of the Finnish Civil War and its parallels to the Russian Revolution was especially interesting as many of the Finnish anti-communist leaders would become key players in the Finnish defense, including Finnish general Carl Gustaf Mannerheim.

After detailing the history and events leading up to the fighting, Mr. Trotter breaks the book into sections corresponding to the different areas of the war’s fronts. He provides a tactical analysis of each area describing Finnish and Red Army troop strengths and movements without overwhelming the reader with casualty figures, names, and equipment totals. He provides maps effectively to illustrate the battles by area. Within each section, he also provides chapters that take you away from the battlefield, for example, a chapter describing the international reaction, the air war, and the Finnish homefront. He also writes well to the extent that parts of the book read like a novel as he describes Finnish ambushes on Russian units, building suspense and intrigue.

He writes the book mostly from the Finnish perspective but does discuss Russian generals and Stalin’s goals in some detail as well. And while he points out the poor performance of the Red Army in the early days of the war, he does give credit to those Russian divisions that performed well. He does lavish praise on the Finnish fortitude and bravery in inflicting heavy casualties on the larger Red Army while holding their positions. He described the Finnish resourcefulness and innovation in using the snow and knowledge of terrain to their advantage. He also gives quite a bit of credit to the Finnish concept of “susi”, which essentially translates to the mettle and courage unique to Finns. .

He finishes the book by providing a detailed account of the peace negotiations, which generally favored the Russians as their numbers in both men and material started to give them a clear advantage. He also sets the stage for the Continuation War of 1941, in which Finland joined Nazi Germany’s attack on the Soviet Union.

I recommend this book to anyone who is interested in this part of World War II history especially, parts of that history that are not as widely known.

[Cav · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was an excellent book. If only all history and war books were written in this style.
The author begins the book with a short backstory on the relationship of the belligerents, and their respective leaders; Gustav Mannerheim, and Joseph Stalin. He then talks about the factors leading to the tensions between the nations, namely Stalin's fear of a Wehrmacht assault across the Karelian Isthmus, which would jeopardize Russia's only ice-free port, the city of Leningrad.
The book continues on with the telling of the the story of the onset of hostilities, and covers the ensuing battles in a chronological fashion. It wraps up with the peace negotiations, and the aftermath of the war.

Russia and Finland have a long, intimate, and complicated relationship. Many Finns went to Russia and advanced through the Russian military, among them Mannerheim, who went on to become commander-in-chief of Finland's defence forces during World War II, Marshal of Finland, and the sixth president of Finland (1944–1946). He is a central character in this book.
The book details how the Finnish army - a motley crew comprised of soldiers, farmers, reservists, the young, and the old - fought the Red invaders with great bravery and tenacity. Their tactics and combat stats for this war are legendary. A few quotes: "Finnish fighter pilots performed prodigies of valour with their motley collection of planes, diving time and time again into Red formations that outnumbered them 10, 15 and even 20 to 1.
...All told: Finnish fighter pilots shot down 240 confirmed Red aircraft, against the loss of 26 of their own planes."
On aircraft downed by ground fire:
"Finnish anti-aircraft was quite deadly. Estimates of Red planes brought down by ground fire range from 314 to 444, and these include only the confirmed kills. Taking the lowest number as a benchmark, that works out to one kill for every 54 rounds of cannon fire, and one low-altitude kill for every 300 rounds of automatic fire.
If the unconfirmed kills are added (planes last seen trailing fire and losing altitude), the total number of Russian aircraft lost during the total 100 days of the war approaches 800."

The Winter War had ramifications beyond Finland. A quote from the Wikipedia page of the Winter War:
"Hostilities ceased in March 1940 with the signing of the Moscow Peace Treaty. Finland ceded 11 percent of its territory representing 30 percent of its economy to the Soviet Union. Soviet losses were heavy, and the country's international reputation suffered. Soviet gains exceeded their pre-war demands and the USSR received substantial territory along Lake Ladoga and in Northern Finland. Finland retained its sovereignty and enhanced its international reputation. The poor performance of the Red Army encouraged Adolf Hitler to think that an attack on the Soviet Union would be successful and confirmed negative Western opinions of the Soviet military. After 15 months of Interim Peace, in June 1941, Nazi Germany commenced Operation Barbarossa and the Continuation War between Finland and the USSR began."

All told, the end of the war saw the entire Karelian Isthmus being lost to Russia, as well as all the Baltic Sea islands mentioned by Stalin at the start of negotiations, Hanko and some adjacent coastline, the entire Rybacki Peninsula, and a great slice of Korelia north of Lake Ladoga. In total, roughly 25,000 square miles of land, including every strong natural defense line Finland possessed.
In human terms, the war cost 24,923 Finns killed, and 43,557 wounded. Approximately 420,000 lost their homes.
The numbers of Russian casualties was under-reported at the time, and best estimates now peg their losses as ranging from 126,875–167,976, or 230,000-270,000 dead or missing (depending on the sources cited), and 188,671–207,538 or 200,000-300,000 wounded, again depending on the source.
One Soviet general, looking at a map of the territory Russia had acquired on the Karelian Isthmus, is said to have remarked: "We have won just about enough ground to bury our dead."
To those figures must be added the 5,000 Russian POWs who were repatriated from Finland, who according to many sources, were packed off to secret NKVD camps in the wilderness near the White Sea, interrogated, then shot.

The book closes with a brief discussion about the Continuation War 15 months later. A war that saw the Finnish armed forces act as co-belligerent and close ally to Nazi Germany for an assault on Russia. The author states: "That Finland should fight the Soviet Union again, only 15 months after the end of the Winter War; and in doing so it should compromise its national image, if not its honour, seems a cruel twist of history. That Finland fought at the side of Nazi Germany officially as a co-belligerent, but in every practical aspect as a close ally, seems tragic. There was a disturbing aspect of the continuation war, in that a nation that only 15 months before, had been held up a shining example of freedom and democracy, should now make aggressive war at the side of one of history's most ruthless, totalitarian regimes. No subject in Finnish history remains more clouded than the Continuation War. Finnish writers have spilled rivers of ink debating the complex chain of events and machinations that brought Finland into the conflict on Germany's side. But even today there remains many unanswered questions; gaps of knowledge and ambiguities. Was there a concerted plot on the part of certain Finnish generals and politicians to plunge the nation into war? Was the primary motive of these men (if indeed there was such a cabal) simply to regain the land that Russia had seized in March 1940? Or did vaster and more sinister schemes of aggrandizement fuel their machinations? Or was the nation simply a helpless victim of the inexorable pressures of circumstance and geography? No consensus on these matters exist in Finland itself, so it would be folly to presume one in these pages."

Author William Trotter has a great writing style that makes the events of the Winter War easy to understand and follow. The book was written in an engaging way, free of the trademark long-windedness and pedantry that plagues some of the other history and war books I've read.
I would very much recommend this book to anyone interested in WW2 history.
I only wish that the author had done a follow-up book to this one, in the same style, chronicling the Continuation War. Looks like I'll have to find another author to tell that story.

[Thom · Rating 4 out of 5]

Covers the reasons behind and the actions in the Winter War, a mismatched conflict between Finland (population 4 million) and Soviet Russia (population 150 million), raging 80 years ago today. If you don't know your history, this book will show you the strength of Finnish resistance, and Sisu.

First published in 1991, the history of this 105 day war gains much from released Soviet documents. The analysis of the starting phases, the continuation and the final peace treaty are excellent. Some of the battle descriptions bog down a little in details of troops. I supplemented the functional maps with wikipedia research and a hex map from a wargame I own on the subject. Contains excellent explanations of the reasons and personalities of the combatants - especially Baron Mannerheim.

This one hasn't been on my reading list, but I've been eyeing it over the years, and now was a perfect time to dive in. I'm glad I did! The author has also published a few American Civil War books, and while that isn't my favorite genre, I will definitely consider them. I'd also like to read about Finnish sniper Simo Häyhä, nicknamed Белая смерть or "White Death". This book rates a solid 4 stars out of 5.

[Ushan · Rating 2 out of 5]

I have read a great deal of material about the 1939-1940 Soviet-Finnish War in Russian on the Internet, but not a single-volume popular English-language history book about this war. This is such a book. It talks in detail about how the prewar negotiations broke down; why the Soviets did not understand that their conditions were unacceptable to the Finns; the action on each front during the first period of the war, which the Finns, amazingly, won, despite having a much smaller army and few arms compared to the Soviets; how the Soviets learned from their mistakes, and won the war during the second period. One chapter discusses Otto Kuusinen's puppet government of "People's Finland", which promised an eight-hour day to the Finnish workers, something they had already enjoyed for twenty five years, and the breakup of landed estates to the Finnish peasants, even though there were only a few hundred landholdings over 300 acres in all of Finland; I think this is an example of a person being blinded by his ideology. Another talks about the outside world's reaction to the war, including Britain's and France's plans for intervening in it. If they had, and the Red Army ended up fighting the British and French armies, this would effectively mean the Soviet Union entering World War II on the side of the Axis; the consequences of this for the world would be too terrible to contemplate; fortunately, the Soviet-Finnish war ended before this could take place. The author learned Finnish, spent a year in Finland, and read a great deal of primary source materials while there; he does not use any Soviet sources except Khrushchev's memoirs. Trotter is very sympathetic to the Finns; his tone sometimes reminded me of Tom Clancy's books about the US Army. In the last chapter he says that "modern Finnish historians" estimate the Soviet casualties as 230 to 270 thousand dead and another 200 to 300 thousand wounded; General Krivosheev's book about Russia's military losses in twentieth-century wars gives much smaller numbers: 71 thousand killed in action, 16 thousand dead of wounds, 39 thousand missing in action, 189 thousand wounded. The last chapter also discusses Finland's participation in World War II. Finland's part in the Siege of Leningrad is not mentioned, and neither is the fact of the Finns almost reaching the Murmansk railroad, through which lend-lease went from the Western Allies to the Soviet Union. The Finnish occupation of East Karelia is mentioned, and the fact that its population did not welcome the Finns as liberators is blamed upon the "massive resettlement programs carried out by Stalin in the 1930s" and not upon them being foreign occupiers who set up concentration camps.

[Blaine Welgraven · Rating 5 out of 5]

“Such a nation has earned the right to live.”

—William A. Trotter, A Frozen Hell

A remarkable book, and maybe the most readable-yet-scholarly little war history I've ever read. Trotter legitimately matches great war historians like Ambrose and Atkinson in the clarity and intelligibility of his writing. The scene he lays out captures your attention from page one: European nations diplomatically dither, Germany watches with interest, and Russia's massive army invades (on the pretense of Finnish aggression) against a nation of four million people.

The odds were well beyond staggering. The entire Finnish army possessed less than 150 tanks and aircraft, and many of these were antiquated World War I models. Russia's massive army possessed thousands of aircraft and tanks, while outnumbering Finnish soldiers on-the-ground better than 2-1. As the world largely watched, the Finns, led by brilliant Commander-in-Chief Carl Mannerheim, utilized quick-strike sniper-ski teams, motti tactics, more than a little sisu (a Finish term that doesn't translate exactly in English but is defined by Trotter as akin to grit or determination), and the frigid Finnish winter to annihilate entire Soviet divisions.

Trotter, who passed away in North Carolina in 2018, was lauded as a renaissance man in his obituary. It shows in his work. In a relatively brief 250 pages, Trotter manages to illuminate the history of Finnish-Russian relations (including their complex military-training relationships), highlight the Finnish cultural and political landscape, set the world stage (i.e., why Finland fought alone), and keep the entire battle narrative--from strategic to tactical levels--entirely clear. Finally, while not overcome by it, Trotter's Frozen Hell is an emotional work, and is better for it.

In the end, perhaps we could all learn something from the Finnish concept of sisu. Trotter, as he inevitably did, wrote it best: "Such a nation has earned the right to live."

[Eric S · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5 stars
This is a well-written popular history of a unique and little known war. William Trotter does a masterful job of blending campaign descriptions and eyewitness accounts to make an accurate and interesting book. I particularly like the way he describes the different sectors from south to north. This gives the reader a much better feel for the differences in fighting in each of those areas. That is something a lot of "general" histories miss. I recommend this book to anyone who wants to become familiar with the very high cost that the Finns paid to retain their independence.

[Derek Weese · Rating 5 out of 5]

It was strange, while reading this book I felt this, rather odd, yet comfortable, presence overcome me. For a time I thought about massive, thick, conifer forests, snowy landscapes, beautiful, yet small and quaint cities, beautiful women and some of the best metal music in the world. While reading this book, I wanted to be a Finn. For a few days, I believed I was an honorary one.
This is an excellent, if brief, history of an event that is largely unknown in the annals of the military history of the twin world wars. At least its unknown in anything outside of its mythology. William R. Trotter should be praised for bringing the epic tale of perhaps the greatest David vs. Goliath tale in all of global military history.
Finland, land of Arctic beauty yet extreme harshness, creating a rock steady, hardy people, was a land that for much of its history had been under the auspices of someone else. First Sweden and then Russia had occupied the nation as part of their Imperial possessions, and had done so for centuries. Following the collapse of the Czarist Empire under both internal stresses as well as the hammer blows of the German Army, Finland for the first time in centuries became an independent nation.
While Russia tore itself to shreds, repeatedly, first during a Civil War and then during horrific ideological purges, Finland too had to undergo agonizing birthing pains. It is important to note this as the story of the Winter War has its origins in these birthing pains. Finland too, like so many nations neighboring the nascent Soviet Union, had to withstand a bloody, Communist inspired Civil War. The Nationalists, under Baron Mannerheim, however, emerged victorious and Lenin's idea of reabsorbing Finland into a new Red Russian Empire died stillborn. it would be under Stalin's rule, however, following the signing of the infamous Nazi-Soviet Pact in August of 1939 that this Nationalist victory in the Finnish Civil War came back to haunt them.
Stalin was looking for buffer zones to protect vital Russian territory (perhaps the most common thread in Russian history since Peter the Great). The Karelian Isthmus, the Raate Peninsula (primarily Petsamo) and the Finnish Baltic islands were all targets of thuggish, Communist diplomacy in the Autumn of 1939.
Finland, for obvious reasons, could not simply give these territories away to a hungry Russian Bear, no sovereign state could and claim independence. Despite the horrendous numerical disparities, Finland chose to contest the issue by force of arms.
Trotter's weaving of the tale of the actual combat, which I won't go into here in any detail, is among the best descriptions of WWII combat I've read. Providing just enough tactical, small unit detail to make you feel like you're there, while never once losing site of the broader, strategic picture. One thing to notice about this book is that Trotter chips away at the mythology of the Winter War and reveals that the main story of the Finnish resistance was not the amazing victories against stupendous odds in the northern Fourth Corps Sector near lake Ladoga (such as the still studied in Military Academies triumph of Suomassalmi) but rather the very conventional (as opposed to guerrilla nature of the conflict farther north) fighting along the Karelian Isthmus. Here the Finnish Army, out-manned, outgunned, yet never even remotely outfought, drowned the Red Army in its own blood. So severe was the kill ratio against the Red Army that many Finnish soldiers, slaughtering dozens, sometimes hundreds of other human beings a day, literally went insane for the sheer amount of killing they had to perform. And yet the Red Army simply kept coming.
Trotter also humanizes the Red Army, and pays homage to their own heroism and truly astonishing bravery and sheer masculine courage in the face of such remorseless killing. Let it never be said that the Soviet soldier would not fight or could not show bravery. And during the course of the war, the Russians did learn from their mistakes, albeit the Soviets never once showcased any true spark of genius in war as did the Finns.
The truth is that the Communist ideology infusing the Red Army meant that Commissars and officers who survived the purges, simply by being too stupid to be considered a threat to Stalin, were incapable of showing the individual initiative and flexibility that is so vital to modern warfare. The vastly outnumbered Finns made the Russians pay the price for their ideological stupidity in the lives of hundreds of thousands of brave, damned near heroic young men whose lives were essentially wasted against a foe who could never have hurt them had Stalin not pushed for the war.
In the end, however, Russian learning curves, and simple sheer firepower, meant that the Finns could not ultimately succeed. Russia won the war, though Finland forever earned its independence in the near mythical heroism of its outnumbered, yet giant in spirit military.
This is an excellent book on the Winter War of 1939-1940, and while it seems that, finally, they are printing more books on the topic in English, this is perhaps your best starting point. Give it a read. And trust me, for the days that you're reading it, you'll think of yourself as a Finn for a day.
Highly recommended.

[IWB · Rating 4 out of 5]

Much neglected, if not entirely unknown, in American's World War Two frame of reference, is the war as it played out in the Nordic regions; in this case the so-called Russo-Finnish Winter War. This book is an exceptionally interesting account of the Soviet invasion of Finland, presumably to acquire, at the least, Finnish land as a buffer against a possible Nazi advance via Norway. Particularly noteworthy are the acheivements of the Finnish infantry's elite ski snipers, who put a serious damper on Russian morale, as well as exacted heavy tolls on Soviet personnel and equipment.

Like any good red-blooded American, you'll be rooting for the Finns all the way through, even though you know that, inevitably, the Finns, while superior soldiers to the incompetant invading Russian forces, must capitulate in the face of overwhelming enemy numbers and resources. It's a real page turner, especially if you detest the Soviet Union.

Well researched and written in a narrative style that, while not the most elegent, doesn't distract the reader from learning about this important episode of WWII military history. A must have for students and fans of WWII.

[Michael · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book gives an excellent overview of the military and political history of the Winter War. It is well written and engaging. The author cares a lot about the subject, and that comes across in his writing. Overall an great read.