Denmark during World War II and the Holocaust: A Controversial Reality

Introduction: a unique occupation regime

Denmark was occupied by German troops on April 9, 1940, as part of Operation Weserübung. However, the Danish case became unique in the history of Nazi occupation in Europe. Until August 1943, Denmark maintained formal sovereignty, a functioning parliament, a government led by Social Democrat Thorvald Stauning, an army, and even King Christian X. This special status, known as the "model of collaboration" or "policy of conciliation," defined the country's specific position and influenced the fate of Danish Jews.

The "1940-1943 Model": cooperation and compromise

The German command was interested in maintaining the Danish economy as a source of agricultural products (meat, butter) and uninterrupted industrial operations. Denmark received the status of a "model protectorate." In exchange for political loyalty and economic supplies to Germany, Danish authorities retained control over internal affairs. In the first years of occupation, there was no martial law introduced in Denmark, no racial laws in their German version were in effect, and the small German administration barely interfered in everyday life.

Interesting fact: According to a widespread but historically unconfirmed legend, King Christian X, in solidarity with Jews, allegedly wore a yellow Star of David. There was never a real decree on the wearing of stars in Denmark. However, the king did exert private pressure on the government to protect Jewish citizens, and his daily horseback rides through Copenhagen without heavy security became a symbol of Danish calm and dignity.

The turning point of 1943: from cooperation to resistance

The situation changed sharply in the summer-autumn of 1943. Dissatisfaction with the occupation grew, sabotage acts became more frequent, and Germany's military defeats at Stalingrad and in Africa changed the strategic picture. On August 29, 1943, German authorities presented the Danish government with an ultimatum demanding the death penalty for saboteurs and stricter measures. The government refused and was dissolved. German Reich Commissioner Werner Best declared a state of emergency. The Danish fleet was partially sunk by its own crew to prevent it from falling into German hands. A new phase began — the period of open resistance.

The rescue operation for Jews: a collective achievement and its reasons
The most famous page in Danish Holocaust history was the rescue of the overwhelming majority of the Jewish population in October 1943. Having received information from German diplomat Georg Ferdinand Duckwitz about the impending night of October 1-2, a raid, Danish underground, with the support of many ordinary citizens, organized an unprecedented operation.

For several weeks, about 7,200 Danish Jews and 700 of their non-Jewish relatives were secretly transported by fishing boats across the Great Belt to neutral Sweden, which agreed to accept them. About 470 Jews fell into the hands of the Nazis and were deported to the Theresienstadt ghetto. Notably, thanks to the constant pressure of Danish authorities and the Red Cross, most of these prisoners survived the war.

Unique factors of success:

The absence of deep antisemitism: In Danish society, there was no mass Jew-hatred. Jews (less than 0.5% of the population) were well integrated, considered Danes of Jewish faith.

Civil disobedience: Thousands of people participated in the operation — from police officers warning of raids to doctors hiding people in hospitals and ordinary fishermen risking their lives.

Special status of Denmark: Even in 1943, the Germans acted here more cautiously than in the East, trying to avoid open violence and mass unrest that could disrupt economic supplies.

Example: One of the fishing boats, "Eger," under the command of Erik Krejær, made numerous dangerous crossings through the strait in a few nights, transporting hundreds of people. Similar stories were numerous. Swedish diplomat Raoul Wallenberg, who saved Jews in Budapest, was later inspired by the Danish example.

The dynamics of memory and historical assessments

Denmark's war historiography has gone through several stages:

The post-war myth of a "united people-resistor," where the emphasis was on the heroism of the rescue of Jews and the Resistance movement, while downplaying the period of cooperation from 1940 to 1943.

A critical revision in the 1960s-1980s, when historians began to study compromises and economic cooperation between Danish authorities and businesses with the Nazis.

A modern comprehensive approach, recognizing both sides: pragmatic cooperation, which preserved the country from destruction, and mass civilian mobilization for the rescue of fellow citizens, which became possible precisely due to the preserved structures of society.

Interesting fact: Danish Jews in Theresienstadt continued to receive food and medicine packages from the Danish government and the Red Cross. In 1944, to dispel rumors about death camps, the Nazis even allowed an inspection visit by a delegation of the Danish Red Cross and Danish officials to Theresienstadt, which was previously "cleaned up" and turned into a "model ghetto" for display. Although this visit was a propaganda action, it indirectly contributed to the survival of prisoners.

Conclusion: the paradox of the Danish experience

Denmark's history during the war represents a paradox of pragmatism and humanism. On one hand, the country went to unprecedented compromise with the occupier, which allowed it to avoid casualties and destruction in the first years. On the other hand, it was precisely the preserved institutions of civil society, a sense of common responsibility, and national solidarity that allowed to organize an unprecedentedly effective rescue operation at a critical moment.

The Danish Holocaust case is unique not only for its low percentage of victims but also for demonstrating that even under conditions of total occupation and terror, the active position of society and the state can be a decisive factor in saving human lives. This experience continues to be studied as an example of how legal culture, social cohesion, and civic courage can stand up to the destruction machine.

Permanent link to this publication: