18.5. Doubts expressed about accuracy of NATO estimates of Soviet strength {discussion in record of 99th meeting of the Military Representatives Committee with NAC in Wash., IMS, NATO}:
{4} Intelligence Working Group prepared estimate in two parts: for NAC and high-level planners, and for working levels, to be available to NAC by fall
{11} "[France's A.] Parodi stated that he had difficulty in understanding how the Soviet Union could make an effort of the magnitude presented to the Council, since this country had suffered a great deal of destruction and her industrial revival was rather recent."
hard to see Russia capable of such effort as he had recently seen in Norfolk
Asked whether estimate of 175 divisions accurate, and whether these comparable to W
"If the Soviet Union was making this enormous effort, was it possible to measure it in terms of industrial capacity, compared with that of the West?"
If it is true that the Soviet Union had been making enormous armament effort, wouldn't recent developments [troop cuts] indicate that it could no longer afford that?
{12} US Col. J.A. McFarland (chairman of the Standing Group Intelligence Committee): committee depended on national staffs for intelligence data and sources
Fr. Gen. Jean Valluy (chairman, Military Representatives Committee): 175 divisions mentioned everywhere, but these not comparable to ours
"Although these divisions could not compare with ours, in our calculations we had
added everything we found at the enemy's disposal and arrived at figures which might appear somewhat exaggerated."
Still, the Russians predisposed by the Soviet system to "total obedience," like "Chinamen" in Korea, in any case the figures are the "best approximations of reality"
McFarland: NATO has no intelligence on Soviet scientific trends in regard to the development of nuclear weapons
Others doubted Soviet weaponry sufficiently advanced technologically