last two years. He stressed the mutual benefit derived by all national components from the major NATO naval exercises, and emphasized that, while these exercises provide the means for solving many inherent problems, they also indicate the substantial inadequacy of the forces presently earmarked for SACLANT when related to the mission entrusted to him.

Admiral McCormick, in a BBC address, had previously said:

The desperate days of World Wars I and II cannot be forgotten. Also I ask you not to forget the tremendous number of ships and aircraft which were finally required in both those wars to bring about the final days of victory. When I compare them to those I now see available to me, I cannot say that I am happy. We must continue to exert every pressure. . . to continue the planned build-up of NATO strength.

The increase and improvement, during the last five years, of the forces of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization have enabled them to come nearer to achieving their main object-to deter aggression. How much our growing defensive strength has already contributed to maintaining peace in Europe no one can measure precisely. One thing at least is certain, and that is that peace has been preserved.

NOTE. These figures are on the basis of the NATO definition of defence expenditures, and represent actual payments made during the calendar year. They may differ considerably from the amounts given in national budgets, which frequently relate to budgetary classifications differing more or less widely from the NATO definition, and which in some countries include substantial amounts which may be carried over for actual expenditures in subsequent years, in accordance with varying national budgetary practices. The figures are not limited to expenditures for the support of NATO forces, but include other defence expenditures as well. Figures for the United States and Canada include expenditures for the procurement of military equipment to be furnished as end-item aid to European NATO countries. Figures for European NATO countries do not include any allowance for the value of this equipment.

Economic and defence support aid is not included in the defence expenditures of the United States. The national currency counterpart of US economic and defence aid, to the extent used for defence purposes, is included in the defence expenditures of the recipient countries. [Footnote in original report.]

The table contains the figures as they were known on July 1, 1954. Since that date, the figures for some countries have undergone slight modifications. [Footnote in original report.]

2 Expenditures financed from US Special Military Support are included in the figures for both the United States and France. These amount to 60 million dollars (21 milliard French francs) in 1952 and 148 million dollars (52 milliard French francs) in 1953. The "TOTAL NATO" figures have been adjusted to eliminate double counting of these amounts. [Footnote in original report.]

ANNEX B

SOVIET ARMED STRENGTH

(as estimated in 1954)

Since 1947, the numerical strength of the Soviet ground forces has remained fairly constant at 175 divisions: but their mobility and fire-power have been greatly increased by mechanisation and modernisation of equipment. There are now 65 tank and mechanised divisions: the rifle divisions have been motorised and equipped with tanks and additional artillery. The Soviet potential in airborne troops has been considerably increased since World War II.

The number of satellite divisions has almost doubled since 1947, bringing their total to about 80 divisions.

The USSR, Eastern Germany and the East European satellites today have an aggregate of over six million men under arms. Approximately 42 million of these are in the ground forces. A high state of preparedness is maintained by a rigorous training programme. The USSR has a ready-made spearhead for a rapid advance into Western Europe. This is composed of 22 Soviet divisions in Eastern Germany. The bulk of these are armoured divisions with nearly a complete complement of tanks and self-propelled guns. Behind this spearhead there are an additional 60 Soviet divisions located in the Eastern European satellite countries and Western USSR. (This does not take into account satellite divisions).

The Soviet mobilisation system is tested periodically. It is estimated that, 30 days after mobilisation, the Soviet and satellite ground forces could number 400 divisions.

The numerical strength of the Soviet air forces in recent years has been constant at about 20,000 aircraft; but very considerable modernisation has taken place. In 1951, about 20 per cent of their fighters were jet types: by early 1954, almost all of their fighters were jet types. In early 1951, jet light bombers had not been introduced into operational units: by 1954, well over two-thirds of their light bomber force were jets. In the medium bomber category, the Soviets have, since 1951, doubled the number of Tu-4s (similar to the US B-29) in operational units. Still newer types of jet fighters have recently appeared. Newer types of medium and heavy bombers, including jet models, have also been observed.

The development of a comprehensive aviation training programme has substantially enhanced the capability of Soviet air power.

Up to 1951, the combat value of the satellite air forces was insignificant, and their aircraft were obsolete. By 1954, not only had their numerical strength been doubled, but nearly half of their fighters were jets. In addition their facilities have been improved, and training has reached a fairly satisfactory standard.

In the past three years the Soviets have about tripled the number of major airfields in Eastern Europe which will accommodate jet fighters. This construction is still proceeding, especial attention being directed to the provision of very long runways.

The growing complex of airfields throughout Eastern Europe, the aircraft control and warning systems and anti-aircraft artillery dispositions of the Soviet bloc are rapidly becoming capable of providing an effective air defence belt along the western perimeter of the USSR.

The Soviet navy has over 300 submarines in service of which about half are large or medium ocean-going types. The current large-scale naval construction programme lays emphasis on the continued production of large ocean-going submarines. Moreover, the surface forces include three battleships, 24 cruisers and 150 destroyers.

There are large stock-piles of sea mines, and the Soviet have considerable power of minelaying both by sea and air.

There have been remarkable developments in the fields of atomic, chemical and biological warfare, and of guided missiles.

The Soviet economy has maintained a level of military production which has proved sufficient not only to provide equipment and supplies for the Soviet and satellite forces, but also to increase their stockpiles. They have, for example, more than enough tanks, mortars, and anti-tank guns for some 300-odd Soviet divisions, and their stockpile of field artillery and anti-aircraft artillery is several times that required to supply those divisions. Production of these items is continuing apace.

55. MINISTERIAL SESSION OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC COUNCIL (PARIS): Communiqué, December 18, 19541

1. The North Atlantic Council, meeting in Paris in ministerial session under the chairmanship of Mr. Stephanos Stephanopoulos, Foreign Minister of Greece, completed its work today. It was attended by ministers of foreign affairs, defence, finance, economic affairs and defence production.

2. The Council noted the progress report by the Secretary General covering activities and developments in the organization during the past twelve months.

Ministers welcomed the extension of political consultation within the Council.

They noted with interest the steady progress in the infrastructure programmes and in emergency planning in the civil field, and recommended the continuation of these studies and of this work, in particular in civil defence.

The report referred to the dissemination of information about NATO and to the forthcoming publication of the Secretary General's five-year report.2 It also emphasized the value of the visits of parliamentarians, of the development of voluntary organizations interested in NATO, and of the tours of journalists to member countries. 3. In accordance with its regular practice, the Council exchanged views on matters of common concern in the international situation. The Council welcomed the efforts being made under the aegis of the United Nations for a worldwide agreement for a general limitation and control of armaments.

4. The Council agreed that Soviet policy, backed as it is by everincreasing military power, continues, in spite of some outward signs of flexibility, to be directed towards weakening and dividing the Western nations. Soviet policy contributes no constructive solution for ensuring world security and for maintaining the freedom of peoples. It provides no ground for believing that the threat to the free world has diminished.

The Council reaffirmed its will to build for peace on solid foundations of unity and strength. The Council noted with satisfaction the progress which has been made towards bringing into effect the Paris Agreements which it regards as an essential contribution to the unity of Europe, to the security of the free world, and thereby to the cause of peace.

3

5. The Council took note of a progress report submitted by the Military Committee. It noted with satisfaction that a request by SACEUR [Supreme Allied Commander Europe] had led to negotiations between the Netherlands and the United States, the recent completion of which will permit the establishment of a SHAPE [Supreme Headquarters, Allied Powers in Europe] air defence technical centre in The Hague at which scientists of all member nations will be able

1 Department of State Bulletin, Jan. 3, 1955, pp. 10–12.

2 See NATO: the First Five Years, 1949-1954; excerpt printed supra. 3 See supra, pp. 483-612 and 972-989.

415900-57-108