Denmark's Complex Relationship with Nazi Germany During World War II

Denmark's history during World War II is often misunderstood due to its complex relationship with Nazi Germany. Officially, Denmark maintained neutrality in 1939 but faced the harsh reality of German occupation from April 1940 to May 1945. This article aims to clarify Denmark's stance and actions during this period, emphasizing that while not actively supporting Germany, the country was not immune to the broader conflict.

Denmark's Neutrality and Early Years

The Danish government declared neutrality in 1939, in line with its traditional policy of maintaining distance from European conflicts. This neutrality, however, was not based on fear or support for Germany; rather, it was a calculated political decision intended to avoid direct entanglement in the looming war. The Danish Royal Family, along with many citizens, had indeed significantly Germanic heritage, which some argue could have contributed to initial hesitation in fully opposing Germany. Nevertheless, public and political opinion shifted once it became clear that Germany intended to act against Danish neutrality.

The German Invasion and Occupation

Denmark's neutrality and its declaration of neutrality were swiftly put to the test in April 1940. Germany invaded Denmark with limited resistance. The Danish government, led by Prime Minister Thorvald Stauning, attempted to negotiate a non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany. Their efforts were largely ignored by Hitler. On the morning of April 9, German tanks entered Copenhagen, marking the beginning of the occupation of Denmark.

Under the terms of the invasion, Danish authorities agreed to work with the occupying German forces. However, the Danish government did not declare war on Germany, understanding that full resistance would only result in more suffering for its people. This non-declaration of war was not an act of support for Germany but rather a pragmatic decision to maintain order and avoid unnecessary conflict.

Denmark's Cooperation and Resistance

Denmark's cooperation with Nazi Germany was necessary for several reasons. First, it allowed the Danish government to continue some semblance of functioning, providing basic services to its citizens. Second, it was a way to protect Danes from the harsher policies of Germany regarding the Jewish population. The Danish resistance was active during this period but primarily focused on assistance and rescue rather than armed rebellion.

The Danish act of saving the Jews is one of the lesser-known yet significant events in World War II history. In 1943, the Danish resistance worked alongside the Danish government to facilitate the escape of nearly 7,000 Jews to safety in neutral Sweden. This effort demonstrates the complexity of Denmark's stance, as they maintained cooperation with the occupiers while simultaneously taking bold steps to protect their own citizens.

Post-War Reckoning and Legacy

After the occupation, Denmark faced a 40-year-long communist charge that its leaders had collaborated with the Nazis. This charge was based on the notion that Denmark's continued cooperation with Germany was inherently complicit. However, the majority of historians and political figures now agree that Denmark's actions were based on practical considerations aimed at protecting the country and its people.

Denmark's history during World War II has been re-evaluated in the decades following the war. While not perfect, the actions of the Danish government and people during this period have been increasingly viewed in a positive light. The focus is now on the legacy of Danish resistance and the remarkable acts of saving the Danish Jews.

Conclusion

Denmark's relationship with Nazi Germany during World War II is a nuanced story of survival, resistance, and cooperation. The country did not support Germany, but it also did not resist Nazi occupation to the point of all-out warfare. This complex history has shaped Denmark to be a nation that values neutrality and humanitarian efforts. Understanding this history is crucial for contemporary discussions of cross-cultural relationships and the complexities of wartime actions.