По мнению сэра Бейзила, советское руководство боялось, что его солдаты, увидев уровень жизни западных людей, предпочтут свободу и процветание тоталитарному рабству.
Далее на аглицком:
In non-violent resistance there can be fairly friendly contacts between the population and the troops, functionaries, etc. of the occupying power. This in itself has an effect, and the occupying power might easily feel apprehensive about the cohesion and the moral of its own forces.
It is sometimes said that what stopped the Russians overrunning Europe in the years after the Second World War was the atomic bomb. This argument fails to convince me. In 1946-7, when the Americans and the British demobilized, and for several years after, the Russians could have walked over Europe if they had wanted to. Except for atomic weapons, they had greatly superior military strength, and it must be remembered that the U.S.A. had at that time relatively few atom bombs and no hydrogen bombs. The more I went into the problem the more it seemed to me that what really deterred the Russians was thought of their troops mixing with the people of the West. They were frightened of their own people, and the evidence suggested that they were making a great effort to prevent them mixing and seeing the contrast between conditions in the East and the West. So they kept on shifting their officers and divisions around and did everything of this sort to avoid contact. The frequent interchange of formations, as well as of officers and officials, was most marked in East Germany, but was also reported from other satellite countries.
Liddell Hart B. Lessons from Resistance Movements – Guerrilla and Non-Violent // Adam Roberts (ed.) The Strategy of Civilian Defence: Non-violent Resistance to Aggression (Faber, 1967). P. 208.
P.S. Скорее всего, это влияние общения с перебежчиками.