SOVIET DEFENSE SPENDING

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP83T00966R000100040021-4
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 20, 2016
• Document Release Date: April 3, 2007
• Sequence Number: 21
• Publication Date: June 18, 1982
• Content Type: MEMO

Approved For Fj~ease 2007/041:~^RDP83T00966?~000100040021-4
j~ /
;(/ c.Gc ~ ~iJt-~n~t O
THE DIRECT?R OF +GEO\ITRAL IhiTEl9.lGEt3CE
I~iEMORANDU~~1 FOR
FROM
SUBJECT
DDI 5060-82
18 Junt-' 1982
Director o.f Soviet Analysis
Soviet Defense Spending
1. For at least the last two years there have been
recurrent references in Agency and interagency publicatior:s
to Soviet defense spending having grown at an average annual
rate of 4?l~ for the last 10 or more years, and projections
that such a rate of grocath will be maintained :~ox_- tl~e necir
future at least. The implications of such a growth rate for
the Soviet economy are clearly drawn and shoc?~ni to be fairly
drastic, especially if the GNP grows at only 2% per annum,
as is also projected.
3. Zn studying these papers, I have been struck by the
fact that the curves showing Soviet defense spending trends,
e.g., the figures on p.p, iv and 11 of publication (a)
above, and Figure 1, page 2 of publication (b) above appear
to be 1_ir.ear with time, rather than exponential. In fact, a
fairly good fit (by eye) is ?provided b~,~ tl-ie straight line
relationship from pub]_ir_.ation (b)
Experd.itures = 27 + ~ .08 (Y-1959)
(in Billion Rubles)
where Y is the year.
In other words, the Soviets spent 27 billion rubles on
defense in 1959, and have increased that by 2.08 billion
ALL Pl1Rt~GRAPHS
ARE SECRET
 Approved For F~lease 2007i04~IC:l~~-RDP83T00966R000100040021-4
rubles per year. In estimated dollar casts, the relation-
ship is, from publication (a),
Expenditures = 150 + 5.56 (Y-1971)
(in Billion Dollars)
~+. If this interpretation, or some other linear, but
more precise, version of the best fit, is valid there ought
to be some reexamination of the projected Soviet defense
growth rate and its implications for the Soviet economy. I
would be pleased to hear your comments.
5. Attached is my best fit for the curves described.
cc: DDI
C/NIC
SRP:tb
Distribution:
Original - Addressee
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
- DDI
- C/NIC
- DDI Registry
- SRP File
- SRP Chrono
- S RP
- S RP
-2-
SECP.ET
Approved Far Release 2007/04104 :CIA-RDP83T00966R000100040021-4
 f.:eneral 6?xpenditnre "Trends
"Total Spend'rr>tq
/~ttal)'SIS Of t11C 1Ct'ClS and trends in total Soviet
defense expenditures ' bctwccn 1951 and 1980 reveals
three distinct periods (zcc fit;urc 1 j. (t!)
lietwcen 195! and 1955, the trend in defe.nc cr.pcndi-
tur'es was clurninated by a dr;unatic increase in 1955
because of large aircraft procurement progrJms for
air defense and strategic: attack. Ut.tring this period,
the Soviet armed forcer wcrc structured primarily for
the type of combat experienced during World War 1 f
and wcrc cha ractcrinrl by Ltrgc t:.tctical aviatiort Qnd
ground farces forntatiuns. tt~)
During the mid- :tad late lc)Sttz, the Soviet force
strUCtUre bC~;an lU Uh;lnt'C 111 rCtipl)rISC lQ an el'l)lvlrtf!
nuclear doctrine. fanph;.tsis shifted from the rrwinte-
nancc of iar~,e gcncraf purpose farces to smaller forces
equipped with newly ileveiop:'d missiles anti ~Lcam-
lincd fur tl:c rtucicar baUlcficld. Military rnanpuwcr
was cut back substantially, and ;ut absolute reduction
in Suvict military outlays occurred, which amounted
to almost 4 percent a year. js)
This declining trend was reversed in 1960 as Soviet
defense expenditures began two decades of stcadv
increases, The years 19(,0-(,5 represent the. highest.
gruuth years, rcl7ccting growing resource commit-
ments to f:DTdcl'., space programs, and strategic
forces. During this ,~rcriod, dcfcnsc was growing at
abr.,ut 8 perc:cnt a year cc?Itilc the rate of ccc,numic
growth had declined to bctwccn -) and 5 percent
annually because of a slowdown in industrial produc-
tivity and the disastrous h;?rvcst of 1963. tu)
' The ;:nalytiis in this rttnn l is i~a:.cd un a broad deliniliun of Suvicl
defense expendltures ?hirh includes rtetivities that the tir_rviers may
deti;?tc as dr.fcnsc related but which arc not included within the US
definition of dcfcn