Talk:Co-belligerence

Finland, Continuation War and the Siege of Leningrad as an example

Modifications to the article

Finland had no part in the siege of Leningrad. Removed it.

In fact Finland was involved in the Siege of Leningrad in 1941 - 1944, see this: Fact from Encyclopedia Britannica "...prolonged siege of the city of Leningrad by German and Finnish armed forces during WWII. [1]

The chief of the Finnish Government Police (VALPO in Finnish) visited the Theresienstadt concentration camp in 1941. <-- removed for no source.

1. Germany's supply of much needed nickel from Petsamo and iron from Sweden was critical to the Nazis' ability to prolong the war. <--- removed for having nothing to do with Finland. Seems like USSR propaganda to put it here. (it is true though).

This was after Soviet Union had attacked Finland? Or Finland attacked as partner of the Nazi Germany?

Example: Fact from Encyclopedia Britannica "...prolonged siege of the city of Leningrad by German and Finnish armed forces during WWII." [2]12.34.80.73 (talk) 02:00, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Nobody wants Wikipedia contradicting with facts from Encyclopedia Britannica: ...prolonged siege of the city of Leningrad by German and Finnish armed forces during WWII. [3]

Finnish involvement in Hitler's plan Barbarossa and the Siege of Leningrad

File:Part north region Operation Barbarossa.png

Plan of north region of Operation Barbarossa.
Finns to attack Soviet Union from the north.
Germans to attack from the west.

[

Quotes

1. Britannica: "...prolonged siege of the city of Leningrad by German and Finnish armed forces during WWII." [4]

2. "The Siege of Leningrad" a chapter in the book "World War II" By H.P. Willmott, Robin Cross, charles Messenger. Dorling Kindersley, 2004. ISBN:978-0-7566-2968-7

Page 152: "On Hitler's orders in September 1941 the German Army Group North and its Finnish allies had stopped on the outskirts of Leningrad, rather than become involved in a costly city battle... The Axis forces had begun to besiege the city, subjecting it to constant air and artillery bombardment. By October the population of 3,5 million had only enough food to last 20 days. Savage food rationing left five hundred thousand people with no entitlement, and people were driven to eat their pets and birds. By January 1942 the daily death toll had risen to five thousand. There were incidents of cannibalism. There was one loophole in the blockade. The large freshwater Lake Ladogafroze in November, a road was created over the ice that provided the last link in a 240 mile (380 km) route from beyond the German lines in Tikhvin." The map on page 152 shows full encirclement of Leningrad with Finnish army holding the northern perimeter, and Germans - the southern perimeter.

3. The story of World War II. By Donald L. Miller. Simon Schuster, 2006. ISBN: 10: 0-74322718-2.

• Page 67: Leeb's armies were sweeping north to Leningrad, and within two months these armies, together with Finnish forces under Marshal Carl Mannerheim, the Finnish commander-in-chief, all but completed the encirclement of the city.

• Page 68: Witness account by William Mandel, an American reporter in Russia, who was in besieged Leningrad.

• Page 69: Witness account by Peter S. Popkov, Chairman of the city council during the siege of Leningrad.

4. Scorched earth. Leningrad: Tragedy of a City. Lake Ladoga. Between Volkhov and Shlisselburg. (pages 205 - 247) By Paul Carell. Schiffer Military History, 1994. ISBN: 0-88740-598-3

• Anything that happened between the Polar Sea (Arctic Ocean) and Lake Ilmen after September 1941 concerned Leningrad. (p.205) (Because the Finnish forces in 1941 blocked the Murmansk - Leningrad railroad in Karelia and thus severed the supply route to Leningrad.)

• Hitler had accurate information about Leningrad. Finnish intelligence was particularly helpful in this respect. (p 208)

• Map 22. For nine hundred days Leningrad was besieged by German and Finnish troops. (p. 209)

• "In November 1941 another attempt was made to close the ring round the city by linking up with the Finns on the Svir." (pp. 209)

• "Hitler pinned down the entire German Army on sentry duty to a single city., an important centre of war industry, and the naval base of the Baltic Fleet. He continued, as the Finnish leader Field-Marshal Mannerheim so well put it, to "drag this heavy rusksack along on his back right through the war." (quoted from Mannerheim's letter, pp. 209-210)

• Hitler's plan to strangle and starve the city into submission had failed (1943). Finnish confidence in their German allies was shaken. Their military plans collapsed. Finnish Marshal carl Gustav Baron Mannerheim had planned, as soon as the beleaguered city fell, to switch his corps, which were bogged down along the Karelian isthmus encirclement front, over to attack against the Murmansk railway, the route by which the huge American supplies were arriving. The loss of this American aid would have put Russia in a difficult economic situation, and deprive ... of its offensive momentum. (p. 240)

5. The siege of Leningrad. By Alan Wykes. Ballantines Illustrated History of WWII, 3rd edition, 1972.

• chapter titled: The attackers. Photographs of Mannerheim, Leeb, Bock, and Runstedt. (pp. 9-21)

• 22 June 1941. "German troops attacked.... Similar attacks have also been made from Finnish territory." (pp.29-31)

• Map of the siege for Sept 25, 1941: Beloostrov and other northern suburbs of Leningrad are shown occupied by Finnish forces. Southern suburbs Peterhof and Pushkin - occupied by Germans. (p 52) (Beloostrov is 30km from Leningrad's center)

• Hitler had no intention of feeding 3 million citizens even if they could be persuaded to throw themselves abjectly upon his mercy by surrendering. They were to be massacred or given, complete with their city, to Finland as a 'pour boire' for Finnish help in the Eastern campaign." (pp.62-64 with photos)

6. The World War II. Desk Reference. Eisenhower Center Director Douglas Brinkley. Editor Mickael E. Haskey. Grand Central Press, Stonesong Press, HarperCollins, 2004. ISBN0-06-052651-3. Page 210.

• German forces advancing into Russia reached the outskirts of Leningrad in August 1941 and, supported by Finnish troops attacking from the north, began attack to capture the city. The Russians managed to halt the Axis advance by late September, and ... a siege lasted for approximately 900 days. (p. 210)

More facts are known to people who live in St. Petersburg, or been on locations of the siege: in St. Petersburg and suburbs, in museums, and destroyed palaces and mansions. Ilya Repin's home in Repino was vandalized at the time of Finnish presence, the art collection was looted, and the villa of artist Repin was burned to ashes. It is a popular museum now, but Repin's original art did not survive the siege. After the war, Finns donated some money for restoration of the main building, but the original art is still missing.

The norhtern suburbs of St. Petersburg were villas of intellectuals, artists, like Repin, writers, like Gorky, Chukovsky, Anna Akhmatova, and all those villas were burned down during the Siege of Leningrad - northern suburbs were occupied by the Finnish army. They did not advance closer to the center of the city, because of resistance, but the Finns kept the perimeter blocking Leningrad from the north, that of course did not help the suffering survivors and victims who died there.

Who invaded first?

Finnish offesive started after Soviet Union invaded Finland. <-- added, then removed

(above statement is false, because Finnish ships mined Soviet waters before the Soviet air attacks on June 22. It would have been ok to have said the Finnish LAND INVASION started after the USSR launched air attacks. But in fact the mining operations were offensive actions. Soviet troops did not actually invade Finish territory until later.)

If we want to nitpick, the above statement is true, because Finns mined Soviet (or in fact Estonian) water starting from around 8am when first Soviet air/artillery attacks started already a littla after 6am. :-) Anyway, what both parties did before June 25 was like two schoolboys kicking each other under the table, and finally one of them become open by starting flailing with his fists. Similarily Soviet air offensive was the first open, no return, serious act of war between the countries. --Whiskey 15:02, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Drive to alliance?

Removed: "The German government was confident of victory and saw no reason to bind its hands with official written treaties and alliances with the various other states which were counted on joining the campaign."

In fact, Hitler was eager to sign more resolutions between Finland and Germany, as shown by the Ryti-Ribbentrop Agreement of 1944.

But that was 1944. We were talking 1941, when nazis were so confident that they could beat SU by themselves without any support from secondary humans like Finns. When the tide turned against them, the eagerness to tie other nations to them with treaties increased and eagerness of others decreased for obvious reasons.

"The Continuation War formally was seen as a separate war by both Moscow and Helsinki," in the sense that treaties were signed separate from, and earlier than the treaties with Germany and Italy. But Moscow, in fact, and Russians today, sees the battle with Finnish and German divisions on the Finnish front as part of the greater "Great Patriotic War." However, it is ok to say that Helsinki saw it as a separate war.

So, please explain in what sense Moscow sees it "formally" as a separate war? As you might know, Russia also signed "separate" treaties with other Axis coutnries too, like Bulgaria, which declared war on germany too as the tides turned. (Rakovsky 01:54, 31 March 2006 (UTC))

I wonder that also. It is understandable that Finns consider it separate, and it is understandable that Russians consider it just a front in GPW. The Moscow Conference (1943) demanded unconditional surrender from axis nations and when both Romania and Bulgaria fronts collapsed and both countries were occupied by Soviet forces, unlike Finland, they could be seen signing surrender unconditionally. Also, both Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary were signatories of Tripartite Pact, unlike Finland, so there are some differencies, although I guess the official Soviet point for consider Continuation War separate stems from the necessity to sign less than unconditional peace with Finland at the time. --Whiskey 15:02, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Definition of the Co-belligerence

Could someone quote a definition of the word “co-belligerence” (if it exists at all) from an English dictionary? The one in the article does not make sense, at least, in regard to Finland. The article on the Continuation War states “…In this situation, Finland had no alternative but to turn to Germany. From May 1940, Finland pursued a campaign to re-establish the good relations with Germany....”, etc. German troops were deployed in and operated from Finland with the approval of the Finnish government. Doesn’t this mean that the cooperation with Germans was “actively and willfully sought”? This certainly was not a mere coincidence. I understand that Finns view their cooperation with Germany as a necessity, but, since most alliances in politics come from necessity, “co-belligerence” then would apply to virtually any alliance. Wouldn’t a better example for “co-belligerence”, as defined in his article, be the uncoordinated attacks of various barbarians against Rome? Or Turkey, Persia and Sweden fighting Russians at the same time? Also, could someone actually quote a Soviet source that designates Continuation War (by any name) as a separate conflict from the "Great Patriotic War"?

Finally, please sign your posts. --EugeneK 03:22, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I provided a more assertive definition to the co-belligerence and removed lot of weasel words from the intro. Now it is more general and shouldn't be so tied to World War II. --Whiskey 08:20, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

The Soviet Union never considered their fight with Finland to be separate from the Great Patriotic War, hence, the lack of sources claiming so. (Repdetect117 (talk) 22:50, 1 June 2009 (UTC))

Finlands co-belligerence as a euphemism

Why should the term co-belligerence be regarded as a euphemism for alliance? Is co-habitation a euphemism for marriage? There are differing degrees of co-habitation, but it still isn't a marriage if there is no formal association. Citing wartime acts committed by Finland is no more evidence of an alliance than sex acts committed by co-habitators is evidence of marriage. This whole section should be deleted. --Martin

Germany allowed to recruit from Sweden?

What is the source of the statement that Germany was allowed to recruit from non-belligerent Sweden? AFAIK the Swedish government never allowed this; any Swedish volunteers had to go to Nazi-occupied territories or Finland to enlist. Qazper 21:38, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

A good short description about Swedish position can be found f.ex. in http://www.germanwarmachine.com/hitlersforeignlegions/neutralsandallies.htm , so it was German embassy and Auslands organization who did the recruitment. Although Swedish government didn't officially sanction this activity, it turned a blind eye to it. --Whiskey 23:39, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

It was short but not that good. They seem ignorant of the difference between the Hango Battalion and the Svir Company, their numbers of Swedish volunteers are not consistent with modern research (not even close), nor do they give any source to any claim they do.

One Swedish historian, Lars Ericson, who is an acknowledged authority on the subject gives in his book Swedish Volunteers (Svenska Frivilliga, Historiska Media, Lund 1996) the following account (translated and abbreviated by me):

After the opening of Barbarossa the German envoy Schnurre communicated to the Swedish Foreign Secretary Günther the German wish that Swedish volunteers would be allowed to join Wehrmacht. Günther declined on basis of the Swedish neutrality, and stressed that only Finland would be allowed for Swedish volunteers. During July/August 1941 Germany started a clandestine recruitment campaign in Sweden to entice Swedes to join Waffen-SS. This campaign was noticed by Swedish newspapers, which in turn alerted the Swedish government to the problem. September 1 1941 the Foreign Secretary Günther stated that the only applications for foreign military service that would be approved were those concerning the Finnish Army. The reaction in Berlin was very negative: Ribbentrop let the Swedish envoy Richert know that "Sweden failed its historic role at Germany's side in this fateful battle." After this the German clandestine recruitment in Sweden waned to a halt at the end of 1941.

So that Sweden would have allowed German recruitment seems in this case to be a POV without any foundation, and if no real source of this claim can be produced it should be taken out of the article. Qazper 15:56, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Removed the sentence "(As it was allowed to recruit from non-belligerent Sweden and Spain. In fact, Germany didn't recruit from countries formally allied with it.)" after one weeks wait for any decent source of the claim. The claim seems to false in its entirety since AFAIK the Spanish did their own recruiting (and even some conscripting) to fill the Blue Division, and Germany did recruit from at least one formal ally, the Repubblica Sociale Italiana, to form the 29th Waffen Grenadier Division aka Legione SS Italiana. Qazper 07:28, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Returned the sentences and added a reference. Removed although "was allowed..." as it is clear that no formal allowance was given from the government of Sweden to the action. It was a German policy up to the surrender of Italy at 1943 that no recruitment were conducted on allied countries, and similarly recruitment of Romanians and Bulgarians started only after they had made ceasefire with the Allies. --Whiskey 22:50, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. Good changes :) Qazper 09:51, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Co-belligerence definitions

• A country fighting with another power against a common enemy - Merriam-Webster
• One, such as a nation, that assists another or others in waging war, usually without entering a formal alliance. - The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition
• Ally in fight: a person or country that is an ally in a fight or war MSN Encarta Oberiko 17:37, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

WPMILHIST Assessment

Though is quite a bit of content here, it does not appear to be well-organized. The primary definition and discussion of general applications and usage should be organized and expanded, the WWII examples consolidated. LordAmeth (talk) 14:16, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Paris peace treaty

Paragraph from the article:"According to the Treaty of Paris, Finland was unambiguously classified as a Hitlerite ally (“Finland, having become an ally of Hitlerite Germany and having participated on her side in the war against the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom and other United Nations, bears her share of responsibility for this war”). A multitude of countries, Finland including, consented to this determination by signing the Treaty of Paris in 1947."

This is not a good example, if you are at least a little informed about the situation in Paris and in Finland at that time. In Paris, Soviet Union dictated the text in the treaty, and US couldn't affect to the conditions as it wasn't at war with Finland. UK considered Finland lost to the Soviet block and was only interested pressing as strict limits to Finnish military as possible. After Soviets has prepared the text, it was once and only presented to Finnish delegation for comments. Unfortunately Soviet foreign minister Molotov and deputy secretary of foreign affairs Vyshinski announced, that any Finnish attempts to modify the treaty would be countered by Soviets.

The cold war has started to heating up and Finns were desperate to get final peace treaty. Why? Because of Allied Commission, which was placed in Finland as part of armstice treaty. The commission was controlled by Soviets, and it had wide powers to put it's nose everywhere in Finland. It co-operated closely with communists and with communist control of ValPo, state police, it had started arresting people in political basis, deporting anti-communist Finnish citizens to Soviet Union and so on. The only way to stop those activities were to get rid of Allied Commission, and the only way to do that was to get final peace treaty with Soviets.

For Finns only the peace treaty mattered. And the time was running out as it became more and more evident that the consensus between Soviet Union and Western Allies were quickly evaporating. That kind of text as in the introduction paragraph couldn't matter less in that situation: When the man is pointing you with a gun and calling your mother a whore, and you have only a stick, you don't start arguing with him, but agree with him and try to get out from that situation. --Whiskey (talk) 20:38, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Finnish army helping Germans in the Siege of Leningrad

The Finnish forces were stopped by the 23rd Army under Marshal Govorov as they crossed the old Soviet-Finnish border on the Karelian Isthmus.

The Finnish attacks repeated several times during September-December of 1941 upon German pleas for attacks on Leningrad.

This caused Britain to declare war on Finland on December 6, 1941. ref Finland in the Second World War. Between Germany and Russia. By Olli Vehvvilainen. English translation by Gerard McAlister. Palgrave, 2002, pages 100, 101, 104.

The Finns temporarily took, but failed to keep Beloostrov, they also advanced further south from the River Svir in the occupied East Karelia, but failed to establish the second circle of siege in conjunction with Germans.

1. Facts of active Finnish participation in Siege of Leningrad in the book "Finland in the Second World War. Between Germany and Russia." By Olli Vehvilainen. English translation by Gerard McAlister. Palgrave, 2002. (the book is available in libraries)

Page 89. One day before the Operation Barbarossa began, president Ryti stated to a parlimentary delegation... "If a war now breaks between Germany and Russia it could be to the advantage of the whole world."

Pages 98 - 101. Finnish forces crossed the line of Finland's 1939 border, and occupied Russian territories north and east of Leningrad.

Page 100. Churchill appealed to Mannerheim in a personal letter: Surely your troops advanced far enough for security during the war and could now halt and give leave. (Note: Finns did not leave, but blocked the railroad connecting Leningrad with Murmansk and crossed the Svir River trying to connect with Germans to form the larger "second circle" around Leningrad. At the same time Finland expelled all British diplomats from Helsinki.)

Page 100. On 6 December, Great Britain declared war on Finland. This was followed by declaration of war from Canada, Australia, India and New Zealand.

Page 104. Hitler proposed a Finnish border which would run from the White Sea to the Svir River and the Neva River. Hitler's proposal was supported by Ryti who announced in the Finnish Parliament the plan of conquering more lands in the east for the Greater Finland.

Page 104. ..plans drawn up in the Finnish Headquarters in summer 1941, it was the task of the occupation authorities of eastern Karelia to prepare the region for permanent integration with Finland as part of the plan for the Greater Finland.

Page 105. Russian place names were replaced with Finnish ones. The population was segregated into 'nationals' and 'non-nationals'... and the latter were to be deported

Page 107. ... the fate of prisoners of war was even more horrible. In 1941 over 65,000 soviet soldiers had been taken prisoner by the Finns. ... during the first winter, over 10,000 prisoners died of hunger and disease in the overcrouded camps. all in all, over 18,700 men died ... while in captivity in Finland.

Page 108. As hopes of a German victory evaporated, so also public references to a "greater Finland" wained.... in June 1944, ..a massive offensive by the Red Army forced the Finns to withdraw from the area (Eastern Karelia, north-east of Leningrad). Then the dream of a Greater Finland was finally buried.

Page 109. For two-and-a-half years the Finnish Army occupied the positions it had captured in autumn 1941 in Eastern Karelia and north of Leningrad.

2. Fact from Encyclopedia Britannica "...prolonged siege of the city of Leningrad by German and Finnish armed forces during WWII." [5]

Please be diligent! Please be wise! Grow to the task. Do not rush to argument without reading the books from the list of sources diligently page by page.

Nobody wants Wikipedia contradicting with facts from Encyclopedia Britannica: "...prolonged siege of the city of Leningrad by German and Finnish armed forces during WWII." [6]

Finland as part of Hitler's plan Barbarossa and the Siege of Leningrad

Attack on Leningrad was one of three strategic goals in Hitler's plan, codenamed Operation Barbarossa. Hitler's strategy was motivated by Leningrad's political status as the former capital of Russia and the symbolic capital of the Russian Revolution, its military importance as a main base of the Soviet Baltic Fleet and its industrial strength, housing numerous arms factories. By 1941 the city was responsible for 11% of all Soviet industrial output.

The siege was conducted by Wehrmacht's Army Group North, with assistance from the Finnish Army, as part of Barbarossa, which was launched on June 22 1941.

By August 1941 all railway lines to Leningrad were severed, and the city was encircled on land by Finnish armies on the north and German troops on the south.

On August 6 Hitler repeated his order: "Leningrad first, Donetsk Basin second, Moscow third."  From August 1941 to January 1944 anything that happened between the Arctic Ocean and Lake Ilmen concerned the Wehrmacht's Leningrad siege operations.  Arctic convoys using the Northern Sea Route delivered American Lend-Lease food and war material supplies to the Murmansk railhead, but the Murmansk - Leningrad railroad was cut by Finnish armies. After Britain and Canada declared war on Finland, Winston Churchill demanded that Mannerheim and the Finnish armies restore the Murmansk–Leningrad railroad for humanitarian reasons, to allow food supplies to reach Leningrad's civilian population.

File:Part north region Operation Barbarossa.png

Plan of north region of Operation Barbarossa.
Finns to attack Soviet Union from the north.
Germans to attack from the west.

By August 1941, the Finns had advanced to Sestroretsk and Beloostrov northern suburbs of Leningrad, threatening the city from the north, and were also advancing through Karelia, east of Lake Ladoga, threatening the city from the east. However, Finnish forces were stopped by the 23rd Army under Marshal Govorov as they crossed the old Soviet-Finnish border on the Karelian Isthmus. This caused Britain to declare war on Finland on December 6, 1941. This caused Britain to declare war on Finland on December 6, 1941. The Finnish attacks repeated several times during September-December of 1941 upon German pleas for attacks on Leningrad. This caused Britain to declare war on Finland on December 6, 1941. The Finns temporarily took, but failed to keep Beloostrov, they also advanced further south from the River Svir in the occupied East Karelia, but failed to establish the second circle of siege in conjunction with Germans. In the southeast, Germans captured Tikhvin on November 8, but failed to complete the second encirclement of Leningrad by advancing further north to join with the Finns at the Svir River. A month later, on December 9 a counter-attack of the Volkhov Front forced the Wehrmacht to retreat from the Tikhvin positions to the River Volkhov line.

In 1942 the International Naval Detachment K (with boats from Finland, Germany, and Italy) was deployed on Lake Ladoga. During its patrols, the Detachment interdicted the Leningrad supply route in the southern part of the lake, sinking barges with food. Bombing and artillery shelling of Leningrad continued from August 1941 onwards.

Hitler with Finland's Marshal Carl Gustav Mannerheim and President Risto Ryti; meeting in Imatra, Finland, 200 km north of Leningrad, in 1942

On the 6th of September 1941 Mannerheim received the Order Of The Iron Cross for his command in the campaign.Germany's Chief of Staff Jodl brought the award to him with a personal letter from Hitler for the award ceremony held at Helsinki. Mannerheim was later photographed wearing the decoration while meeting Hitler. Jodl's main reason for coming to Helsinki was to persuade Mannerheim to continue the Finnish offensive. During 1941 Finnish President Ryti declared in numerous speeches to the Finnish Parliament that the aim of the war was to gain more territories in the east and create a "Greater Finland"

In November and December 1941, Finnish forces made another advance towards Leningrad and crossed the Sestra River, but were stopped again at the Sestroretsk and Beloostrov settlements 20-25 km north-west of Leningrad's center. There is no information in Finnish sources of such an offensive and neither do Finnish casualty reports indicate any excess casualties at the time. On the other hand, Soviet forces captured the so-called "Munakukkula" hill one kilometer west from Lake Lempaala in the evening of November 8, but Finns recaptured it next morning.  Later, in the summer of 1942, a special Naval Detachment K was formed from Finnish, German and Italian naval units under Finnish operational command. Its purpose was to patrol the waters of Lake Ladoga, and it became involved in clashes against Leningrad supply route on southern Ladoga

Improving the article with inclusion of facts from all-sources

Improvements to the article may be done only with inclusion of facts from various international sources.

Example: Fact from Encyclopedia Britannica "...prolonged siege of the city of Leningrad by German and Finnish armed forces during WWII." [7]

Nobody wants Wikipedia contradicting with facts from Encyclopedia Britannica: ...prolonged siege of the city of Leningrad by German and Finnish armed forces during WWII. [8]

References

• Backlund, L.S. (1983), Nazi Germany and Finland, University of Pennsylvania. University Microfilms International A. Bell & Howell Information Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan
• Baryshnikov, N.I.; Baryshnikov, V.N. (1997), Terijoen hallitus, TPH
• Baryshnikov, N.I.; Baryshnikov, V.N.; Fedorov, V.G. (1989), Finlandia vo vtoroi mirivoi voine (Finland in the Second World War), Lenizdat, Leningrad
• Baryshnikov, N.I.; Manninen, Ohto (1997), Sodan aattona, TPH
• Baryshnikov, V.N. (1997), Neuvostoliiton Suomen suhteiden kehitys sotaa edeltaneella kaudella, TPH
• Bethel, Nicholas; Alexandria, Virginia (1981), Russia Besieged, Time-Life Books, 4th Printing, Revised
• Brinkley, Douglas; Haskey, Mickael E. (2004), The World War II. Desk Reference, Grand Central Press
• Carell, Paul (1963), Unternehmen Barbarossa - Der Marsch nach Russland
• Carell, Paul (1994), Scorched Earth: The Russian-German War 1943-1944[9], Schiffer Publishing, ISBN 0-88740-598-3 {{citation}}: External link in |title= (help)[10]
• Cartier, Raymond (1977), Der Zweite Weltkrieg (The Second World War), R. Piper & CO. Verlag, München, Zürich
• Churchill, Winston S., Memoires of the Second World War. An abridgment of the six volumes of The Second World War, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, ISBN 0-395-59968-7
• Clark, Alan (1965), Barbarossa. The Russian-German Conflict 1941-1945, Perennial, ISBN 0-688-04268-6
• Fugate, Bryan I. (1984), Operation Barbarossa. Strategy and Tactics on the Eastern Front, 1941, Presidio Press, ISBN 0: 0891411976, ISBN-13: 978-0891411970 {{citation}}: Check |isbn= value: invalid character (help)
• Ganzenmüller, Jörg (2005), Das belagerte Leningrad 1941-1944, Ferdinand Schöningh Verlag, Paderborn, ISBN 350672889X
• Гречанюк, Н. М.; Дмитриев, В. И.; Корниенко, А. И. (1990), Дважды, Краснознаменный Балтийский Флот (Baltic Fleet), Воениздат
• Higgins, Trumbull (1966), Hitler and Russia, The Macmillan Company
• Jokipii, Mauno (1987), Jatkosodan synty (Birth of the Continuation War), ISBN 951-1-08799-1
• Juutilainen, Antti; Leskinen, Jari (2005), Jatkosodan pikkujättiläinen, Helsinki
• Kay, Alex J. (2006), Exploitation, Resettlement, Mass Murder. Political and Economic Planning for German Occupation Policy in the Soviet Union, 1940 - 1941, Berghahn Books, New York, Oxford
• Miller, Donald L. (2006), The story of World War II, Simon $ Schuster, ISBN 2 {{citation}}: Check |isbn= value: length (help)
• National Defence College (1994), Jatkosodan historia 1-6, Porvoo, ISBN 951-0-15332-X
• Seppinen, Ilkka (1983), Suomen ulkomaankaupan ehdot 1939-1940 (Conditions of Finnish foreign trade 1939-1940), ISBN 951-9254-48-X
• Симонов, Константин (1979), Записи бесед с Г. К. Жуковым 1965–1966, Hrono
• Suvorov, Victor (2005), I take my words back, Poznań, ISBN 83-7301-900-X
• Vehviläinen, Olli; McAlister, Gerard (2002), Finland in the Second World War: Between Germany and Russia, Palgrave

Bibliography

• Barber, John; Dzeniskevich, Andrei (2005), Life and Death in Besieged Leningrad, 1941–44, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, ISBN 1-4039-0142-2
• Baryshnikov, N.I. (2003), Блокада Ленинграда и Финляндия 1941–44 (Finland and the Siege of Leningrad), Институт Йохана Бекмана
• Carell, Paul (1994), Scorched Earth: The Russian-German War 1943-1944[11], Schiffer Publishing, ISBN 0-88740-598-3 {{citation}}: External link in |title= (help)[12]
• Glantz, David (2001), The Siege of Leningrad 1941–44: 900 Days of Terror, Zenith Press, Osceola, WI, ISBN 0-7603-0941-8
• Goure, Leon (1981), The Siege of Leningrad, Stanford University Press, Palo Alto, CA, ISBN 0-8047-0115-6
• Granin, Daniil Alexandrovich (2007), Leningrad Under Siege, Pen and Sword Books Ltd, ISBN 9781844154586
• Kirschenbaum, Lisa (2006), The Legacy of the Siege of Leningrad, 1941–1995: Myth, Memories, and Monuments, Cambridge University Press, New York, ISBN [[Special:BookSources/ISBN 0-521-86326-0|'"`UNIQ--templatestyles-0000006C-QINU`"'[[ISBN (identifier)|ISBN]]&nbsp;[[Special:BookSources/0-521-86326-0 |0-521-86326-0]]]] {{citation}}: Check |isbn= value: invalid character (help); templatestyles stripmarker in |isbn= at position 1 (help)
• Lubbeck, William; Hurt, David B. (2006), At Leningrad's Gates: The Story of a Soldier with Army Group North, Pen and Sword Books Ltd, ISBN 9781844156177
• Platonov, S.P. ed. (1964), Bitva za Leningrad, Voenizdat Ministerstva oborony SSSR, Moscow {{citation}}: |first= has generic name (help)
• Salisbury, Harrison Evans (1969), The 900 Days: The Siege of Leningrad, Da Capo Press, ISBN 0-306-81298-3
• Simmons, Cynthia; Perlina, Nina (2005), Writing the Siege of Leningrad. Women's diaries, Memories, and Documentary Prose, University of Pittsburgh Press, ISBN 3: 9780822958697 {{citation}}: Check |isbn= value: invalid character (help)
• Willmott, H.P.; Cross, Robin; Messenger, Charles (2004), The Siege of Leningrad in World War II, Dorling Kindersley, ISBN 978-0-7566-2968-7
• Wykes, Alan (1972), The Siege of Leningrad, Ballantines Illustrated History of WWII

External links

• (Youtube) Leningrad blockade part1 (Retrieved on June 29, 2008)

Religious Co-belligerence

In the past few decades the term co-belligerence has been applied to religious and political contexts, particularly within the world of Evangelical theology. Scholars such as Francis Schaeffer have advocated co-belligerence in politics, while others have urged this approach when it comes to relations between Evangelicals and Catholics. Would this be information worth including in the article? Or since it is listed inside of the military history WikiProject should it be best to leave it as it is? DynaGuy00 (talk) 18:18, 8 November 2019 (UTC)