I am sorry, but this is disappointing, and it shows a poor and simplified picture of Denmark in the 1930s and 1940s. This might be inevitable in HoI4, but some things can be changed to make Denmark better and more accurate. There is no reason why Denmark should just be dunked on and made into a joke, while a neutral country like Sweden is given a serious, and probably slightly overpowered, focus tree. But hey, maybe Sweden could also get a two-part, historically accurate focus tree: first focus could be "Help Nazi Germany", second focus could be "Do nothing else".
There are inaccuracies and missed opportunities here, and I'd like to go through some of them:
First of all, Denmark did not begin a policy of disarmament after 1864. On the contrary, Denmark spent large sums building up a huge defensive perimeter around Copenhagen, and all Danish politics actually revolved around this issue during the last part of the 1800s. King Christian IX even instituted a sort of semi-dictatorship in order to keep Council President Estrup - the firmest proponent of the West Wall around Copenhagen - in power. Denmark had, relative to its size, the strongest armed forces in Scandinavia by the time World War I broke out. On paper the army could mobilise 178,000 men, and the navy was well-stacked with mines, torpedo boats and submarines. This is because Danish policy actually was to deter the British from commencing major raids and operations into the Baltic, thus making a German invasion of Denmark unnecessary. This of course required a very strong military, which I've just mentioned that Denmark had. The Venstre Prime Minister I. C. Christensen had been the chief architect behind this policy, as the previous Estrup government was almost solely focused on countering the threat of what was seen as an inevitable German invasion.
The Danish policy of disarmament and low military spending therefore did in fact not start until 1922, when the Neergaard government decided that the military threat of Germany had disappeared with the country's defeat in World War I. The radical disarmament of Denmark's military, and the beginning of the poor state that it was in when the Germans invaded, did in fact not come about till the Military Budget / Military Law of 1932. So while the Danish military was in a bad stape in 1936, it did in fact have lots of experience to draw from, and it would not have been hard to bring it back to its old strength from before 1932 or 1922. The policy of disarmament was officially abandoned in 1937, when Stauning instituted a new military budget, the aim of which was the slow rearmament of Denmark. Even when the Germans invaded in 1940, the Danish Army did in fact number 94,000 men. But the army hadn't been mobilised, and the commonly mentioned number of 14,500 Danish troops on the 9th of April 1940 was actually just the number of sergeants, professional officers and conscripts undergoing basic training - the real, actual army did not get to fight. The Danish Army was thus much better prepared to face the German onslaught than the Norwegian Army was, despite decades of neglect. The reason for Denmark's quick surrender was the Stauning government, whose foreign policy was run by P. Munch. No Munch, no two hour surrender.
---
Why are the names Sønderjylland and Schleswig both used? It's just the Danish and German words for the same province. The German name could fittingly be Southern Schleswig.
---
Denmark was an agrarian society, but it was more industrialised than both Norway and Finland, and it had major dockyards. Why does Denmark, of all the Nordics, get a malus to its industry? It was the richest country in the North.
This is very wrong and actually the cause of a huge missed opportunity. First of all, just for historical accuracy - no, the King did not nearly cause a civil war 20 years prior. The Easter Crisis has often been overblown. The election following the crisis was a huge victory for the parties that had supported the King's actions. Anyway, I digress: the King was certainly a big political player, and he became
the symbol of Danish national unity during the war. Not having him be a national spirit makes absolutely no sense.
The King was a close friend of Stauning, and the King, alongside the King's trusted friend General Erik With, actually tried to influence Stauning to become more pro-military. They succeeded in this, and Stauning's relationship with the severely anti-militaristic party Radikale Venstre grew a bit sour in the middle of the 30s. It was not until 1939 that Stauning gave up on his rearmament plan. Even after this the King continued to play a political role, and his political power sharply increased after the occupation, as he became a hugely popular national icon, and therefore someone that the politicians had to listen to. He demanded the dismissal of Foreign Minister P. Munch, leader of Radikale Venstre, and instead appointed three apolitical ministers - Erik Scavenius as Foreign Minister, Eigil Thune Jakobsen as Minister of Justice and Gunnar Larsen as Minister of Transport. The King's rising power culminated in October of 1940, when a delegation known as the Højgaard Circle approached the King with a proposal: appoint his royal cousin, Prince Axel, as Prime Minister and leader a cabinet composed almost entirely of businessmen and non-politicians. The group was heavily inspired by Maréchal Pétain, and the King seriously considered the matter for some days.
You can read more about it here:
https://meile.dk/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Hoejgaardkredsen1940.pdf (There is an English abstract on page 89).
The Højgaard Circle is rather famous here in Denmark, and it should be the obvious candidate for the non-aligned faction spot. The faction could work like this: The King appoints Prince Axel, and Denmark then has the choice of trying to stay neutral, being pressured into joining the war on Germany's side or openly rebelling against the Germans. The last thing was actual thing that many Danish officers conspired to do, especially one Colonel Helge Bennike, who wanted to mobilise the army and gather it on Sjælland to fight to the last man and redeem the humiliating surrender in 1940. A Prince Axel government, though a political bomb, would have been very popular amongst the revanchist officer corps, and the King - being very anti-German - would probably have taken kindly to such officers and their plans.
---
With regards to the historical political tree - why is 'Sign the Kanslergadeforlig' a focus? It was signed in 1933 - three years before the start of the game. Christmas Møller was the true leader of the opposition, and he was also without a doubt the most interesting politician in Denmark in this time period. It would make much more sense to construct an explicit pro-Stauning tree and an explicit pro-Christmas Møller tree. The Stauning tree could include slowly rearming the military, like he historically tried to do, and maybe it could also include focuses where the Social Democrats work with Møller's Conservatives, which Møller wanted. Stauning's tree should also focus on his work to give Denmark a new constitution, and the outcome of this project should be rather decisive for the Stauning path. Stauning became rather depressed and tired when the constitutional referendum failed, and it probably played a large part in his fatalism in 1940. A victory for Stauning's constitution in the referendum would likely have meant that Stauning would have resigned in favour of Hans Hedtoft, who was known as an avidly pro-defence politician in the ranks of the Social Democratic Party. Stauning retiring would therefore have led to a very different World War II for Denmark.
Hedtoft might've followed the I. C. Christensen policy from World War I: Satisfy the Germans by keeping the British out. However, the British had plans to push into the Baltic, and such a push might land a Hedtoft-led Denmark in a war with Britain on the side of Germany. This is another missed opportunity in this dev diary: A non-fascist Denmark should also have the potential of joining up with Germany due to this old World War I-era policy, which had in fact been the cornerstone of Danish neutrality prior to P. Munch taking over the foreign ministry in 1929. But one should not forget that Germany was Denmark's archnemesis, and Denmark ending up on its side against our traditional friends in Britain and France might also here lead to the Højgaard Circle approaching the King with a certain proposal. The King certainly wouldn't have taken kindly to Danish soldiers fighting and dying for the cause of Germany against his relatives in Britain.
The Møller-path, however, should be extremely pro-rearmament. Whereas Stauning was slow and cautious with rearmament, it was Christmas Møller's whole raison d'étre. He would have unwaveringly built up the military, no matter the cost, and Christmas breaking with Denmark's policy of neutrality and joining up with the Allies prior or during the war should also be an option. Møller was anti-German, and he would not have fought the British if they had executed Operation Catherine.
Møller would have countered any German invasion of Denmark. On the morning of the 9th of April 1940 he stormed into the Folketing and told the other politicians that they could easily assemble enough soldiers to kick the Germans back into the sea, since not many Germans had been landed. The other politicians disagreed, and when he learnt that the government had surrendered without a real fight he broke down in tears.
Møller should also be able to take charge of the country in some capacity during the occupation, which would mean a violent break with the Germans.
Lastly, a Erik Scavenius path should definitely also be a possibility. His Danish government would follow a strictly pro-German line, though trying to maintain neutrality. This could possibly end with the Allies or the Soviets declaring war on Denmark, however.
Where is The Little General Staff / Den Lille Generalstab? Why is there no Little General Staff mechanic? They were hugely important, and could serve for some interesting paths for the Danish player. As I've said, many members of the Danish officer corps wanted a violent break with the forces of occupation, but they were all subservient to The Little General Staff. The aforementioned Bennike proposed raising a 50,000 strong Danish volunteer army in Sweden in order to liberate Denmark by force of arms. Ebbe Gørtz, the leader of The Little General Staff, believed that the only purpose of the army was to serve as the loyal servants of the politicians. He therefore wanted the DANFORCE to be the military arm of the legitimate Danish government, and a tool with which they could restore order after liberation. Eventually Gørtz's point of view won out, but it could have turned out differently. Why not have a The Little General Staff mechanic, where the pro-liberation war (Bennike) and pro-government (Gørtz) factions battle it out for the power over and the fate of The Royal Danish Army? This would also be very exciting for the player.
In addition to The Little General Staff, Denmark should also have some events / decisions related to the so-called 'military waiting groups', also known as Undergrundshæren / The Underground Army. These were groups of military-trained Danes, loyal to The Little General Staff and led by officers of the Danish Army. The Underground Army was supposed to rise up when the battle for the liberation of Denmark had commenced. The military waiting groups consisted of about 50,000 men.
Denmark seems to have very few political advisors compared to the other Nordic countries. I would suggest adding some more. Candidates could definitely include Ole Bjørn Kraft, Aksel Møller and Halfdan Hendriksen for the Conservatives; Hans Hedtoft, H. C. Hansen and Hartvig Frisch for the Social Democrats; Søren Brorsen and Thomas Mygdal-Madsen for Venstre. Gustav Rasmussen should also be potential advisor, as some in the Højgaard Circle wanted him to serve as Foreign Minister in Erik Scavenius's place. Vilhelm la Cour might also have a place as a non-aligned advisor.
Cay Lembcke was out of the DNSAP by 1933. His wife later forced him to make a 180-degree turn and become opposed to Nazi ideology. C. O. Jørgensen would be a better candidate for the advisorial role that Lembcke currently occupies.
Knud Kristensen didn't become the leader of Venstre until 1941. Oluf Kragh should be the leader of Venstre in 1936.
Erik baron Bille-Brahe was considered for the position of Chief of Army in 1940. He should definitely be an available commander. Kristian Knudtzon was leader of DANFORCE, so he should also be an available commander. Aage Rolsted should probably be a commander as well.
With was an extremely talented officer. I would give him a higher skill level. In fact - why are all Danish commanders skill level 1? Rolsted, Knudtzon, Bille-Brahe, Hammerich, Vedel, etc. were all good and talented officers. Vedel could be given skill level 3.
Sweden gets a plethora of skill 2 and 3 commanders. Why doesn't Denmark? The Danish officers had had far more amble opportunity to gain experience during World War I. The Danish Army made a partial mobilisation of 60,000 men. The Swedish Army only ever mobilised 13,000 men. And furthermore, 30,000 Danes had served in the German Army during World War I, and some of these would go on to became officers in the Danish Army. H. M. Lunding, leader of the Danish intelligence service, was a WW1 veteran.
This might just be because the commanders are WIP, but it does look a lot like a mixture of ignorance and Swedish bias.
The Military Law of 1922 had actually established a Home Guard, the Landstorm. This Landstorm's backbone was the 30,000 Danes from Schleswig who had been conscripted into the German Army in World War I, and who thus had real combat experience. Though, to be fair, what the Landstorm was basically what the Home Guard became after the war. It could be interesting to mention the Landstorm somewhere, though, since it had only been disestablished in 1932.
Furthermore, the Danish Army relied on a lot of volunteer recoil rifle-corps. These were disallowed by the 1937 military law. They were in effect a type of Home Guard, though they were very well trained and often had better equipment than the ordinary army, as they were often made up of well-off middle class people, who could afford to buy good equipment for themselves. Why not also have some focuses / events centered around the volunteer units, where you can decide on whether to dissolve or expand them? Christmas Møller was an avid and active member of Akademisk Skyttekorps. Below you can see him and future Foreign Minister Gustav Rasmussen at the final farewell-parade of the unit:
View attachment 1000803
---
Denmark had built large fortifications around Copenhagen prior to World War I, and during World War I it had built a strongly-fortified line known as the Tune Line. This line, though not entirely seen as effective by Danish officers, was crucial in convincing the Germans not to attack Denmark in 1917, when the German naval leadership was pushing very hard for such an operation. The Germans feared that this line was still in use in 1940, and almost abandoned their planned occupation of Sjælland because of this. Why not have some focuses related to the re-establishment of the Tune Line? It would go well with Colonel Bennike's planned last stand on Sjælland.
---
These are just some of the things I noticed, and some comments off the top of my head. This is a bit short and simplified, but I'd be happy to expand a bit on these topics with more nuance, though.
I know that some of these things might be covered in the up-coming ahistorical dev diary, but I think that many of these things are important to mention, so that Denmark can be given some appropriate love - just like Sweden, Norway and Finland will be given. I definitely feel like Denmark is a bit of a quick fix compared to the other countries so far, which is a shame since Denmark was actually in the war - unlike Sweden. And Denmark was a lot more complex than it is shown here. Denmark is a country which could plausible have a pro-Allies democratic path (Møller), a pro-neutrality democratic path (Stauning), a begrudging pro-German democratic path (Hedtoft / Scavenius) and a monarchist path (Højgaard Circle, as well as the possibility of the King taking personal power).
