THE CPSU UNDER BREZHNEV - PART II

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 84
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 13, 2004
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: March 12, 1976
• Content Type: IM

I ~- -
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100266001-7
intelligence Report
The CPSU Under Brezhnev - Part II
Confidential
2 8
CI 76-10019
No. 0371/76
March 12, 1976
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
 25X1 Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
 25X1
Approved For Release WkWAPMAIbMT00353RO001 00260001-7
THE CPSU UNDER BREZHNEV
Part II: The Party Apparatus
March 12, 1976
Part I of this memorandum analyzed the mass membership of the CPSU that
General Secretary Brezhnev inherited from his predecessor, Khrushchev, what Brezh-
nev has made of it, and what problems he, in turn, will leave for his successor. Part II
addresses the subject of the party bureaucracy-the full-time party officials who are
paid from party funds and who form a discrete hierarchy in the Soviet body politic.
Summary
The party bureaucracy that Brezhnev inherited from Khrushchev was a rela-
tively lean and certainly a hungry one, considering the growth in party membership.
It was also confused and disturbed. The insecurity bred of Stalin's bloody purges
had been replaced by career insecurity engendered by successive reorganizations,
frequent personnel shakeups, lateral transfers from one region to another, and a new
party statute requiring a periodic turnover in office holders. Serious questions had
been raised publicly about the party officialdom's role in Soviet society, tensions
were rising between the center and regional party officials, and generational frictions
were emerging.
Brezhnev and his colleagues on the Secretariat have for the most part confined
their efforts to undoing Khrushchev's organizational experiments and to reassuring
the party veterans. The Central Committee apparatus in Moscow is now organized
very much along functional or branch production lines that prevailed under Stalin.
The basic regional structure of the nationwide party apparatus--tinkered with and
restructured by Khrushchev so that it became a spiderweb of overlapping functions
and jurisdictions-has been reaffirmed, and its chain of command clarified.
Party officials at all levels have enjoyed an unprecedented period of job
security, not only because the turnover requirement has been lifted, but also because
cadres policy has emphasized stability and continuity. Lateral transfers, common
under Khrushchev, have been the exception, and vacancies have as a rule been filled
This is the second of two Intelligence Reports on the CPSU prepared by the Office of Current
Intelligence i consultation with the Office of Political Research. Comments and queries may be
directed to
Approved For Release 208 1Pr-i WT?AT00353R000100260001-7
 Approved For Release 20 41 1511g:FAp FIEAT00353R000100260001-7
by promotion from within the appropriate party organization. Local party organ-
izations have, in fact, been taken to task for "too much" turnover of their officials,
and Moscow-while giving lip service to the wisdom of promoting deserving young
officials-has insisted on a "proper" combination of "senior experienced cadres with
;rung workers."
Veteran party officials have been reassured not o dy by secure tenure but by
J_larification" of their role vis-a-vis the government. The distinction between the
two, which had begun to blur under Khrushchev, has been sharpened and thL party
officials' traditional role of exhortation and "control" has been reaffirmed. Dan-
;erous new ideas-- for example. that a party official hould be chosen for some
expertise other than Marxism-Leninism-have been quashed.
No change is ever completely erased, of course, and Khrushchev's influence is
still visible in an increased concern with information flow within the party--up,
down, and laterally-often with an added fillip of potentially revisionist "socio-
'ogical research." There is also continuing evidence of concern about "collectivity"
Of decision-making and "internal party democracy." Flint these are code words
heavily laden with implications for Kremlin politics is not in dispute. Nevertheless,
Central Committee pronouncements on the subject do:o have an additional valid
existence as a record of the general instructions issued to all party officials,
regardless of their individual awareness of hidden signil icance. And the subject has
been repeatedly discussed in public in the past 1 1 years.
Exact figures on the total size of the full-time paid ipparatus are hard to come
by now. In 1971 at the 24th Congress, Brezhnev coyly cbdmed that there had Peen a
'O-percent reduction "during the past 14 years," carefully including in his time
frame the Khrushchev period when the number had indeed been cut by 30 fo 40
Percent. Nevertheless, changes since 1964 in party regulations and straightforward
Organizational measures establishing new positions provide considerable evidence to
support the conclusion that the size of the total party appartus has burgeoned under
Khrushchev's successors.
The educational level of party officials has continued to rise, although at a
dower rate than under Khrushchev. Not surprisingly, considering the reaffirmation
of the traditional role of the party official, the number of professional party
Workers-those who essentially made their careers in the party as opposed to those
who started in production and later transferred to narty work--has increased
significantly except in the Central Committee apparatus- Even there, professional
party workers are believed to hold at least 60 percent of the posts.
The post-Khrushchev period has also produced a group of office-holders who
are older and have more years of party membership to their credit and longer tenure
as members ofthe ruling elite than the people holding office in October 1964 had at
that time. On the other hand, there has been a drop in the number of those whose
party membership or tenure in the elite dates back to the earlier periods in the
party's history. There have been few significant changes in the ethnic composition of
the group holding office at this level.
Approved For Release (2QO I/'I FC1Af7P85T00353R000100260001-7
 Approved For Release,, Q04LQf~1 1cI 1 I 5T00353R000100260001-7
The long period of cadres stability has had some political consequences. Career
tenure and promotion from within have diminished the importance of patronage ties
to the top. With no visible stick to brandish to replace Stalin's purges and
Khrushchev's constant shakeups, Moscow must depend on other conventional politi-
cal tools to ensure its leadership, leaving it vulnerable to the pressures of special
regional and institutional interests. Moreover, the longer an official stays in one
region, the more he will reflect the interests of that region, a problem that Moscow
periodically worries aloud about in warnings against "parochialism." Fresh
approaches to problems of long standing have been difficult to sell because some-
one's ox will inevitably be gored in a change. Finally, there is some evidence of
malaise among younger party officials, who are bored with the "old ways" and
stifled by a lack of "headroom."
In Soviet history, periods of "change" have alternated with those of "sta-
bility." Khrushchev's tenure was one of "change" in reaction to the immobility of
the later Stalin years. Brezhnev in turn has opted for "stability" in reaction to
Khrushchev's restless years. The next long-term General Secretary of the CPSU
Central Committee may well be confronted with rising pressures for "change" in the
party as well as in other institutions in the Soviet Union.
Approved For ReleaseQ"&Ii~F O,]tb5T00353R000100260001-7
 Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
 Approved For Release -C0 EV11i)EIXWdALT00353R000100260001-7
1. The Apparatus under Khrushchev
In October 1952 the 19th Party Congress announced that the size of
the party bureaucracy had been somewhat reduced since the 18th Congress
in March 1939, even though the party membership had almost tripled since
then.' The Soviet leadership nevertheless demanded further reductions, and
the initial post-Stalin period brought a 24.7-percent reduction in the staff of
the CPSU Central Committee.' It was Party Secretary Suslov, however, not
First Secretary Khrushchev, who praised this development at the 20th
Congress, held in February 1956.3 It was also Suslov who called for a
reduction in the number of paid party workers assigned to the regional party
organizations-a cutback that had its main impact on city and rayon staffs,
accounting for almost 90 percent of the professional party workers assigned
to the various local units. Khrushchev was lobbying for a CPSU Central
Committee Bureau for the RSFSR, a new organ that would improve control
over the local party units in the Russian Republic, but would also increase
the size of the central party bureaucracy. When it came to the local units
Khrushchev was for the preservation of the status quo, particularly at the
rayon level.4
Khrushchev had his way on the RSFSR Bureau, but only brief success
in preserving the status quo in the staffing of the local party committees.
The following years brought a large reduction in the number of local units
entitled to full-time professional staffs. (Table I) Meanwhile, CPSU Central
Committee resolutions adopted in 1956 and 1957 ordered a 25- to 30-percent
cutback in the staffs of the union republic, kray, and oblast party com-
mittees, a 15- to 20-percent reduction in those of the rural rayon party
committees, and a 10- to 15-percent reduction in those of the city and urban
rayon party committees.5 Between January 1956 and October 1961, the
number of "responsible workers" assigned to local units was reduced by 25.2
percent and the number of "technical workers" by 22.7 percent.6
The number of paid party officials in late 1961 was, however, still very
close to the 1939 figure.' Consequently, the drive to curb the size of the
professional staff was reinforced by an amendment to the party statutes at
the 22nd Congress in October 1961. In the past, primary party organizations
with more than 100 members had been entitled to have at least one official
exempted from his regular duties at his place of work in order to be able to
conduct the business of the primary party organization." The number of
such units had increased from approximately 6,650 in January 1956 to
almost 15,000 by October 1961.9 Under the 1961 amendment only primary'
party organizations with 150 or more members could qualify for a full-time
officiall? This amendment probably reduced the number of full-time party
jobs by another 10,000.
Approved For Release I1Jf)]P -'Fq T00353R000100260001-7
 Approved For Release Q ki )bW T00353R000100260001-7
this conclusion is based on an assumption that less than 40 percent of
the primary party organizations with more than 100 members in late 1451
had more than 150 members at that time. It aha_, seems likely that the
number of units with 100 to 1 50 members could grow faster during the early
1960s than the number of primary party units with more than 150 members.
Renovation-A Permanent Bloodless Purge
Another amendment to the party statutes at the 22nd Congress limited
the number of consecutive terms that a person could serve on any party
body, or in any elective post in the party bureaucracy (exceptions could be
made, but apparently were to be few and far betrw een-especially outside
Moscow)." At least one fourth of the people elected to the CPSU Cent-al
Committee and its Presidium at each congress were in be new faces who had
not served on those bodies during the previous term of office. Similar quotas
were established for the regular elections at the union republic, kray, oblast,
okrug, city, rayon, and primary party organizations. At least one third of
those elected to union republic central committees.. kray party committees,
and oblast party committees, and at least half of those elected to okrug, ci y,
and rayon party committees were to be newcomers, as were half of those
elected to committees or bureaus of primary party organizations.
These quotas made it easier to bring new blood into the hierarchy, and
meant less job security for those already holding off ice. Still another amend-
ment to the statutes at the 22nd Congress made party officials more
accountable to those who had elected them by providing guidelines for their
removal from office iz
The moves to curb the power of the professional staff were accom-
panied by increased reliance on unpaid volunteers to perform duties that had
in the past been handled only by the paid functionaries. The early 1960s
brought a large increase in the number of people making up the part, T's
elective "aktiv"-especially at the primary party organization, shop party
organizations and party group levels. (Table II) This increase probably began
in the late 1950s.
The increase in the number of shop party organizations and party
groups between January 1956 and October 1961 more than offset the
decrease in the number of primary party organizations during that period.
An amendment to the party statutes at the 20th Congress in 1956 had made
it possible for shop party organizations to be established at enterprises,
institutions, collective farms, etc., where the primary party organization had
more than 50 party members and candidate members, rather than 100
communists on its rolls. The same amendment also had made it possible for
party groups to be formed in shops, brigades, etc., where the shop party
organization had more than 50 party members and candidate members,
rather than 100 such communists.
Approved For Release P1kg1ffJT00353R000100260001-7
 Approved For Release EbM1?J1 Wt T00353R000100260001-7
It also was in the late 1950s that there was a sharp increase in the
number of people given assignments as non-salaried party workers-
instructors, lecturers, or members of the various standing commissions of the
regional party organizations. The number of people given such assignments
increased rapidly after a CPSU Central Committee resolution was adopted on
the subject in September 1958 13 In the succeeding three years, more than
80,000 nonstaff instructors were added to the rolls of the union republic
central committees and the kray, oblast, city, and rayon party committees,
and more than 90,000 communists were taking part in the work of the
special commissions and councils attached to those party organizations 14
The practice of giving such assignments to unpaid volunteers not only
enabled the authorities to keep a lid on the size of the professional staff but
also provided a means of making fuller use of the expertise of the increas-
ingly sophisticated rank-and-file party members. Meanwhile, salaried party
officials also were acquiring a greater measure of sophistication. (Table III)
Their level of education rose even faster than that for the party membership
as a whole. The post-Stalin increase in party officials with a higher education
meant an increase in engineers, agronomists, economists, etc. Contrary to the
trend during the Stalin years, relatively few were generalists who had
graduated from the Higher Party School in Moscow or a regional party
school, but had never attended any other institution of higher learning.
A Regional or a Production Branch Structure
In the late 1950s, economic management was reorganized on a regional
basis, making it all but certain that there would be changes in the party
bureaucracy, but these were slow in coming. The CPSU Secretariat was
divided into two parts-one for the Russian Republic, and the other super-
vising matters in the union republics. The Central Committee apparatus
remained organized along "production branch" lines, however, with indi-
vidual departments for the various sectors of the economy.
A number of measures were taken to tidy up bureaucratic arrangements
at the local level. CPSU Central Committee resolutions during 1956-1958 did
away with the Political Administrations of the railroads, militia, merchant
fleet, and the machine-tractor stations-all of which had reported directly to
the CPSU Central Committee apparatus in the past. 15 Henceforth, the party
organizations in those fields were to be under the supervision of the appro-
priate regional party committee. Another resolution in August 1956 abol-
ished the network of party organizers at the most important industrial
enterprises and put the party organization at those sites under the super-
vision of the party committee for the rayon in which they were located.16
These steps contributed to some devolution of authority downward to
the lower echelons of the party bureaucracy, but the reorganizations in 1962
Approved For Release 1?OJNaJII3 1 9J1FA 00353R000100260001-7
 Approved For Release # 1b i&) k4IT00353R000100260001-7
were in the direction of a recentralization. In March 1962, a reorganization
of the management of agriculture brought into being a network of special
party organizers attached to newly created collective :'arm/state farm produc-
tion administrations and responsible to the appropriate party committee at
the Oblast, kray, or union-republic level. In July 1962, the rural rayon party
committees were subordinated to the party organisers, and the first secre-
taries of these rayon committees began to serve as their deputies.
The recentralizing trend received another boost. at the November 1902
CPSU Central Committee plenum, when the party bureaucracy was divided
into two parts-one for industry; the other for agriculture." Henceforth, all
party organizations at industrial enterprises, construction sites, transpor-
tation and communications facilities, etc., were to be supervised by a
hierarchy of industrial party committees. Party organizations at collective
farms, state farms, and other agricultural enterprises were to be supervised
by a similar hierarchy of agricultural party committees. Most rural rayon
party committees were abolished, with their authority transferred to the
agricultural production administration party committees, which were respon-
sible to the appropriate Oblast or kray agricultural party committee. The
latter had their parallel in the Oblast or kray industrial party committees
with jurisdiction over the city, urban rayon, and industrial zone party
committees in their area.
No figures are available on the impact of this reorganization, but it
probably led to a further reduction in the number of paid workers assigned
to the local party units--perhaps by as much as 10 percent. The increase in
the number of kray and obhst party committees was more than offset by
the decrease in the number of city party committees and in the number of
administrative units-collective farm/state farm part; committees, industrial
zone party committees, and rayon party units. (Table 1) It is noteworthy
that there was an increase in the number of full-time officials assigned to the
staffs of the local party units when the November 1962 reorganization was
undone shortly after Khrushchev left office' 8
The first point at which these separate hierarchies came together was at
the union-republic level, where there was to be one central committee and
one presidium. It was the CPSU Central Committee Secretariat and its
bureaucracy in Moscow that once again gained by this reorganization.. Three
new CPSU Central Committee Bureaus were established with jurisdiction
over agriculture, heavy industry and construction, and chemical and lig.1t
industries. Two new CPSU Central Committee Commissions were set un-
one to supervise party staffing and other organizational questions; the other
to oversee ideological work. A Central Asian Bureau was created to supervise
party work in Uzbekistan, Tadzhikistan, Kirgizia, and Turkmenistan, and a
'Transcaucasian Bureau was formed to coordinate party work in Armenia,
Approved For Release 0~'Ii ~~IP T00353R000100260001-7
 Approved For Release 2K/1b'IJCA0353R000100260001-7
Azerbaydzhan, and Georgia. Meanwhile, the RSFSR Bureau found the scope
of its jurisdiction narrowed with the creation of two other new CPSU
Central Committee Bureaus-one to supervise industry in the Russian Repub-
lic; the second to direct agricultural work there.
Blurring of Party and Government Roles
The 1962 reorganizations were apparently intended to increase the
specialized production expertise of the party bureaucracy, with the rationale
that this would improve its supervision of economic production. They also
made for more duplication within the party, however, and did little to lessen
the friction between party and government officials. As the party officials
acquired more expertise in any given field, they tended to duplicate the
work of those directly responsible for production in that sector of the
economy. Their Soviet critics charged that these more expert party officials
had a tendency to get sidetracked from their party role as political leaders
responsible for teaching Marxism-Leninism, controlling personnel appoint-
ments, and checking on plan fulfillment. Differentiation between the roles of
party and government officials became increasingly blurred.
This blurring was epitomized in November 1962 in the creation of a
Committee of Party-State Control, subordinate to the CC/CPSU Secretariat
(Khrushchev- l st Secretary) and to the USSR Council of Ministers
(Khrushchev-Premier). The Committee was chaired by Party Secretary
Shelepin, who doubled as a USSR Deputy Premier from November 1962
until December 1965. The local units also were chaired by people who were
both party secretaries and deputy premiers (or the equivalent) of the
corresponding echelon of the party and government bureaucracies. These
officials were the only people in the USSR who simultaneously held execu-
tive posts in the party and the government. Although there is no direct
evidence that they exercised control over the party bureaucracy as well as
over the government and economic agencies, the committee's title implied
that they did.
The 1962 reorganizations were also intended to reduce the power of
the entrenched regional party leaders-especially those at the union republic,
kray, and oblast levels. They added materially to the exasperation and
uncertainty of those satraps, however, without effectively reducing their
power. The 1962 reorganizations were a major factor contributing to the
erosion of Khrushchev's support among his colleagues on the Presidium and
in the CPSU Central Committee. Other issues also contributed to his ouster
in October 1964, but the importance of the 1962 reorganizations is pointed
up by the fact that their undoing was one of the first steps undertaken by
the post-Khrushchev leadership.
Approved For Release 2Q I j j 1 j00353R000100260001-7
 Approved For Release(26O /IFS)-R:&4bk 5T00353R000100260001-7
In sum, the Khrushchev years were marked by attempts to adjust ti-e
party to the requirements of an advanced industrial society. The party
became more pragmatic and opened the doors to the idea that other areas of
expertise might be at least as important as Marxism-Leninism. Its bureau-
cratic structure was rearranged to correlate with the new government stru
Lure managing the economy, and the roles of the two institutions--by long
established practice kept separate--began to merge. Moreover, while tl-e
party membership was growing rapidly in size and in sophistication, both fl-e
numerical strength and the power of its full-time professional staff were
reduced. Finally, career officials were kept on their toes by successive
reorganization schemes and by intensive use of lateral transfers from oblast
to oblast, rather than by Stalin's bloody purges. As a result, there was a
weakening of the forces making for unity within the party and against those
outside its ranks, and the groundwork appeared to have been laid for further
changes spelling a major transformation in the power and character of the
party.
Approved For Release G2""fWlb ` QX1 5T00353R000100260001-7
 Approved For Release 20 I ~AMPA!tT00353R000100260001-7
1. "Report of the Central Auditing Commission of the All-Union
Communist Party (of Bolsheviks)"; Pravda; October 7, 1952; p. 2.
2. "Report of the Central Auditing Commission of the CPSU to the
20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union-Report of
Comrade P. G. Moskatov" in Pravda; February 16, 1956; pp. 1-2.
3. "Speech of Comrade M. A. Suslov at the 20th Congress of the
Communist Party of the Soviet Union" in Pravda; February 17, 1956; pp.
8-9.
4. "Report of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the
Soviet Union to the 20th Party Congress-Report by Comrade N. S. Khrush-
chev" in Pravda; February 15, 1956; pp. 1-11.
5. "On a Reduction of the Staffs of Obkoms, Kraykoms, and Central
Committees of Communist Parties of Union-Republics." Resolution of the
CPSU Central Committee dated March 21, 1956; Spravochnik Partiinogo
Rabotnika, First Edition, 1957, p. 406. "On Changes in the Structure and
Staff of the Apparatus of Rural Raykoms of the Party." Resolution of the
CPSU Central Committee dated September 19, 1957; Spravochnik
Partiinogo Rabotnika, Second Edition, 1959, p. 545. "On Several Simplifi-
cations of the Structure of the Apparatus and a Reduction of the Staffs of
Gorkoms and Urban Raykoms of the Party." Resolution of the CPSU Central
Committee dated October 11, 1957; Spravochnik Partiinogo Rabotnika,
Second Edition, 1959, p. 546.
6. "Report of the Central Auditing Commission of the CPSU to the
22nd Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union-Report by
Comrade A. F. Gorkin" in The 22nd Congress of the Communist Party of
the Soviet Union, Stenographic Report, Vol. I, p. 137 (Moscow, 1962).
7. Partinaya Zhizn No. 24, December 1961, p. 12.
8. "Statutes of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union," adopted
at the 19th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in 1952,
Article 59. (Foreign Language Publishing House, Moscow, 1953).
9. These figures are based on the percentage figures for the primary
party organizations with more than 100 members in Partinaya Zhizn No. 1,
January 1962, p. 54.
-7-
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
CONFIDENTIAL
 Approved For Release 2 )t7Q$/'j4)Jl K,-'IR11Pf5T00353R000100260001-7
10. "Statutes of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union," adopted
at the 22nd Congress of the Communist Party of th:_, Soviet Union in 196 1,
Article 56; The 22nd Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union:
A Stenographic Report, Vol. 111, p. 351 (Moscow, 19' 2).
I L "Statutes of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union," adoptt,d
at the 22nd Congress of the Congress Party of the Soviet Union in 1961,
Article 25; The 22nd Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union:
A Stenographic Report, Vol. 111, p. 344 (Moscow, l9f~2).
12. "Statutes of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union," adopted
at the 22nd Congress of the Communist Party of th,, Soviet Union in 196 1,
Article 26; The 22nd Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union:
A Stenographic Report, Vol. 111, pp. 344-345. (Mosc(lw, 1962).
13. "On a Further Broadening of the Rights of the Central Committers
of the Communist Parties of Union-Republics, of the Kray Party Commit-
tees, of the Oblast Party Committees, of the City Party Committees, of the
Rayon Party Committees, and of the Primary Party Committees in Deciding
Organizational-Party and Financial-Budgetary Questions.- Spravochnik Par-
tiinogo Rabotnika, Second Edition, 1959, pp. 555-55t).
14. Kommunist No. 7, May 1962, pp. 61-64.
15. "Concerning the Abolition of the Political Administrations for
Railroad Transportation," Resolution of the CPSU Central Committee
adopted on March 21, 1956. "Concerning the Abolition of the Political
Administrations of the Militia." Resolution of the CPSU Central Committee
adopted on June 5, 1956. "Concerning the Political Organs of the USSR
Ministry of the Maritime Fleet," Resolution of the CPSU Central Committee
adopted on April 12, 1957. "On the Further Development of the Collective
Farm System and a Re-organization of the Machine-Tractor Stations," Reso-
lution of the CPSU Central Committee adopted on February 26, 1953.
Spravochnik Partiinogo Rabotnika, First Edition, 1 ??57, pp. 405, 408-409,
436-439; and Second Edition. 1959, pp. 154-160.
16. "Concerning the Party Organizations of the CPSU Central Commit-
tee," Resolution of the CPSU Central Committee adopted on August 1 7,
1956, Spravochnik Partiinogo Rabotnika, First Edition, 1957, p. 429.
17. "Concerning the Development of the Economy of the USSR and a
Re-organization of Party Leadership of the National Economy," A Reso-
lution of the Plenum of the CPSU Central Committee concerning the Report
by Comrade N. S. Khrushchev, adopted on November 23, 1962. Spravochnik
Partiinogo Rabotnika, Fourth Edition, 1963, pp. 191-200.
.,8-
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
(X)NF'LI)FN'I'IAI,
 Approved For Release 06I"-)b 1 T00353R000100260001-7
18. "Report of the Central Auditing Commission of the CPSU to the
23rd Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union," The 23rd
Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union: Stenographic Report,
p. 114. (Moscow, 1966).
Approved For Release 84 ?Lj ;G ~Q
K P~8f5T00353R000100260001-7
 Approved For Release 0bMk1Dkbh(-VbA&To0353R0001 00260001-7
II. The Party Apparatus Since Khrushchev
Back to Regionalism
Khrushchev's successors lost little time in undoing the 1962 party
reorganization. A month after Khrushchev's ouster at the October 1964
plenum, another plenum was held to approve a reunification of the party
bureaucracy at the oblast and kray levels.' The agricultural production
administration party units were reorganized into rayon party committees,
and the industrial zone party committees were done away with. As a result,
all civilian party committees within a kray, oblast, okrug, rayon, or city were
again under the jurisdiction of the local party committee.' Once again,
regional party leaders were to be generalists, not specialists. (Table I)
The November 1964 plenum apparently also approved the abolition of
the special agencies that had been set up within the CPSU Central Commit-
tee apparatus after the November 1962 plenum. These included the Central
Committee Bureaus for agriculture, heavy industry and construction, and
chemical and light industry; the corresponding bureaus for agriculture and
for industry and construction under the RSFSR Bureau; and the two Central
Committee Bureaus overseeing party work in the four Central Asian and
three Transcaucasian republics. They also included the two Central Commit-
tee Commissions that had been created in late 1962 to supervise party
staffing and other organizational questions and to oversee ideological work.
References to them in the Soviet media ceased; their chiefs began to be
identified in new posts; and the Central Committee departments that had
been absorbed into these bureaus and commissions at the time of their
formation reappeared.
In September 1965, another of Khrushchev's innovations-the organiza-
tion of government management of the economy on a regional basis in th-.
sovnarkhozy-was abolished and the centralized production branch minis-
tries in Moscow re-established. Since the Central Committee departments
were still organized essentially in parallel on a production branch basis, few
changes were required at that level.
Consequently, when the 23rd Congress opened in March 1966, the
organizational structure of the CPSU Central Committee was once again very
similar to what it had been before Khrushchev had tinkered with it. The only
major structural innovation that remained was the Bureau for the RSFSR,
and that was to be dealt with shortly. The "Party Organs" departments had
been renamed "Organizational-Party Work" departments, but continued to
have the primary responsibility for the more sensitive appointments and for
overseeing the day-to-day operations of the party, the Komsomol, and th-,
Approved For Release t2' 0)"t/If )]PJ4'g1PA8J5T00353R000100260001-7
 Approved For Releasee"W'-(IA1'RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
trade unions. A few departments supervising sectors of the economy had
been split to improve their efficiency, and departments that had disappeared
into commissions reappeared, though with no major change in the role
played by the party officials involved. (See Charts A and B)
Limited Personnel Shakeup in the Central Apparatus
The initial changes in the structure of the CPSU Central Committee
apparatus were accompanied by a personnel shakeup, but it was not as
extensive as the one that had been carried out in the initial post-Stalin
period.
No more than two or three of the men who headed one of the dozen or
so departments existing at the time of Stalin's death in March 1953 still held
the same job a year and a half later. Six or seven departments existing in
early 1966 had no chief at that time, in most cases because the department
was about to go out of business, but in one or two instances because the
Soviet leadership was unable to agree on who should have the job. The
separate departments for the RSFSR were abolished after the 23rd Congress,
in connection with the abolition of the RSFSR Bureau. The vacancies in the
"Administrative Organs" and "Finance and Planning Organs" departments,
however, appear to have been left unfilled because the top leaders could not
agree on a nominee for the post.
Meanwhile, the heads of at least 12 of the some 30 to 40 departments
had remained unchanged, and four others had been transferred from one to
another department. Three former chiefs had been brought back, and five
deputy chiefs-all with several years of service in the apparatus-had been
promoted. Only five or six of the men heading a department had not been
officials of the central party bureaucracy in the past, and less than half of
the 12 to 15 new appointees appeared to have a close working relationship
with any of the top Soviet leaders.
Job Security for Regional Leaders
The period leading up to the 23rd Congress was also marked by a
greater measure of job security for the regional party leaders. In the RSFSR
only 16 of the top 78 posts changed hands during the interval between
Khrushchev's ouster and the opening of the 23rd Congress.' More impor-
tant, perhaps, was the result of the RSFSR changes-half of the reassigned
incumbents were subsequently moved into jobs that were at least as prestig-
ious as the ones they had left. By way of contrast, during the comparable
period leading up to the 22nd Congress in 1961, there had been 45 similar
reassignments-in 30 of which the incumbent was transferred to a less
important job or retired.
Approved For Release tOO b fffFkIT00353R000100260001-7
 Approved For Release 2(X04/ I5I:ItA '61I8 t00353R000100260001-7
The rate of turnover was higher in the minority republics with 49 of the
113 top party officials changing jobs, but only 23 w /r j1,RIfF AF 5T00353R000100260001-7
1. XXI V Syezd Kornmunisticheskoi Partii Sovet kogo Soyuza: Steno-
r,raficheskii Otchet; Moscow. 1971; Vol. I, p. 123.
2. 1. V. Kapitonov, Partina_va Zhizn No. 4, February 1975, p. 14.
3. K. U. Chernenko (Chief of the CPSU Central Committee's General
Department), Voprosy Istorii KPSS No. 9, September 1 )71, pp. 3-18.
(4-
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
CONFIDENTIAL
 Approved For Release fOQ6E( '&?-bI WdAtT00353R000100260001-7
Local Party Committees Entitled to Full-Time Professional Staffs: 1952-1965
Oct. 1.952
Jan. 1956
Oct. 1961
Jan. 1963
Jan. 1965
Union-Republic Central Committees.....
15
15
14
14
14
Kray Party Committees ................
8
8
7
14
7
Oblast Party Committees ...............
167
146
136
218
133
Okrug Party Committees ...............
36
10
10
10
10
City Party Committees ................
544
554
602
738
Urban Rayon Party Committees ........
. 4
485
343
1 , 057
396
Rural Rayon Party Committees.........
,886
J
4,248
3,202
2,434
Collective Farm-State Farm Production
Administration Party Committees ....
...
...
...
1,634
Industrial Zone Party Committees.......
...
...
...
348
The figures for 1952 are from "Report of the Credentials Commission of the 19th Congress of the
All-Union Communist Party (of Bolsheviks) Report of Comrade N. M. Pegov" in Pravda;
October 9, 1952; p. 6. The figures for 1956 and 1961 are from Partinaya Zhizn No. 1, January 1962,
p. 52. The figures for 1963 are from Yezhegodnik, Bolshoi Sovetskoi Entsiklopedii, 1964, p. 14. The
figures for 1965 are from Partinaya Zhizn No. 10, May 1965, p. 17. The figures for 1963 reflect the
situation immediately after the re-organization in late 1962; those for 1965 reflect the situation after
the undoing of that re-organization, a step taken only a month after Khrushchev left office in
October 1964.
-65- Chapter I
Approved For Release~QQWf fpKF 5T00353R000100260001-7
 Approved For Releasq;0n) 9gf5 ; l3f485T00353R000100260001-7
't'able 11
The Elective "Aktiv" and the Network of Party Organs: 1952-1965
O(-t. 1951
Members and Candidate Mini tiers of th, I l'SIi
Central Committee and Central Auditing orn-
mission ...................... ..... ...... 273
ilernbers and Candidate Memhers of 1 nion-
11epublic Communist Party Central ( omniii-
tees and of Bray, ()blast, Okrug, ao,i
Rayon Party (ommittees, and of the :,editing
Commissions of those party organizat.: 'i,-
ilernbers of Party Committees and Bue'aoe of
Primary Party Organizations and Shop Party
Organizations, Secretaries arid Deput, Secre-
taries of those party organizations, and Party
....
Group Organizers.......... . . . . . . .
Inion-Republic Party Organizations... to
rirav Party Organizations ............... ... 8
Oblast Party Organizations............ ... 161
()krug Party Organizations ... ..... .. 36
f'iiy Party Organizations..........
rban Rayon Party Organization;.... ... r. I s'
oral Rayon Party Organizations....
ollective Farm n-state Farm Production 'tdratni,-
iration Party Organizations ........ ..
Industrial Zone Party Organizations .......... .
Primary Party Organizations ......... .. . . 35), 3115
=hop Party Organizations ............ . .. . 52,154*
Party Groups ....................... .. . . 112, 150*
Jan. [956
1)ct. 1961
J011. 1965
318
395
439**
:;)6,06()
328.000
I 100,000
2,600,000
15
14
14
8
7
`I
110
136
133
10
I()
10
554
602
738
i 483
343
396
1,218
3,202
2,434
:351, 249
296, 444
311, 907
76,058
187,000
267,481
122,243
174,001)
329,613
*The figures on shop party organizations anr_ party groups in [9.12 ai. for January of that year,
not October, but there probably was relatively- little change in the numb, of such party organizations
airing that ten month interval.
**'Ch(, figure for the CPSU ('entral Committee and Central Auditing I'orrimission member'hip in
January 1965 actually is the number of pi ogle elected to those bodies atliee 23rd Congress in March-
April 1966. It would appear to be a fairic accurate reflection of the no,mbe;r of people operating at
that level of the hierarchy in early 1965, rowever, far more so than the ' igure for October 1961.
The figure for the elective "aktiv" in 1'1.52 i, from Pra,de, October 15 9;,2, pp. 1 2: the fitrnre lot
1956 is from Pravda, February 26, 1950, p 1: tit figures for 1961 are from I'en1da, Novemher I. 1961.
2, and Partinrtya 'Lhizn No. 1, Januarv 1962, pp. 53-54; the figure - for 1965 are from Pravda.
c
April 9, 1966, p. 2, and Partinaya Zhizr, No. 10, May 1965, p. 17. 'Cb' figures for the network of
part., organs in January 1952 are from I'arten.aya Zhizn No. 14, July 1'173, p. 23; those for October
1952 are in "Report of the Credentials Commission of the 19th Congress it the All-Union Communist
Party of Bolsheviks; Report of Comrade N. Al. Pegm." in Pravda I)etober 9, 1952, p. (i. I'he
Figures for 1956 are in Partinatia Zhizrt No. 1, January 1962, p. 52, :and f urtinaya Lhizn No. 11.
Judy 1973, pp. 21 23. Those for 1961 are in i'artinaya Lhizn No. I, Jan rrr} 1962, pp .52 :i4. 7 hip?
fur 1965 are in F'artinaya Zhlen No. I), Alav 1965, pp. I" 17.
-66- Chapter l
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
(',O rI7IDENI'IAL
 Approved For Release 62F/JE)-k'5T00353R000100260001-7
Education Levels of Party Officials: 1952-1966
(on January 1 of the corresponding year)
Incomplete Incomplete
Higher Higher Secondary Secondary Elementary
Date Education Education Education Education Education
A: Secretaries of Union-Republic Central Committees, Kray Party Committees,
and Oblast Party Committees
1952 ....................... 67.7%
10.1%
17.8%
3.7%
0.7%
1956 ....................... 86.0
6.6
6.3
1.1
1961 ....................... 92.0
4.0
3.9
0.1
1966 ....................... 97.0
1.9
1.1
...
1952
.......................
18.4%
43.9%
25.5%
9.2%
3.0%
1956
.......................
25.7
52.9
17.3
3.7
0.4
1961
.......................
67.8
24.2
7.7
0.3
...
1966
.......................
89.4
7.4
3.2
1952
.......................
9.3%
4.7%
27.3%
29.3%
29.4%
1956
.......................
11.4
7.9
29.5
30.6
20.6
1961
.......................
19.7
7.3
37.9
24.8
10.3
1966
.......................
28.3
5.9
43.3
18.1
4.4
-67- Chapter I
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
CONFIDENTIAL
 Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
THE CENTRAL PARTY MACHINE
13 OCTOBER 1964
(EVE OF KHRUSHCHEV'S OUSTER)
FIRST SECRETARY
N. S. Khrushchev
SECRETARIES
L. I. Brezhnev
F. R. Kozlov N. V. Podgorny M. A. Suslov
BUREAU FOR
BUREAU FOR
ORGANIZATIONAL-
COMMISSION CHEMICAL AND
INDUSTRY AND
AGRICULTURE
PARTY QUESTIONS
LIGHT INDUSTRIES
CONSTRUCTION
CHAIRMAN
CHAIRMAN CHAIRMAN
CHAIRMAN
CHAIRMAN
V. N. Titov
L. F. Ilichev P. N. Demichev
A. P. Rudakov
V. I. Polyakov
DEPARTMENTS OF
PARTY ORGANS
IDEOLOGICAL CHEMICAL INDUSTRY
DEFENSE
AGRICULTURE
COMMISSIONS
V. N. Titov?
L. F. Ilichev? ?
INDUSTRY
V. I. Polyakov?
AND BUREAUS
PRAVDA LIGHT AND FOOD
I. D. Serbin
AGRICULTURAL
P. A. Satyukov INDUSTRY AND TRADE
HEAVY INDUSTRY
RAW MATERIALS
KOMMUNIST P. I. Maksimov
PROCESSING
V. P. Stepanov
MACHINE BUILDING
INDUSTRY
V. S. Frolov
M. G. Lushin
CONSTRUCTION
A. Ye. Blryukov
TRANSPORTATION AND
COMMUNICATIONS
K. S. Simonov
OTHER
DEPARTMENTS
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE MAIN POLITICAL ECONOMIC LIAISON WITH INTERNATIONAL
V. N. Malin ORGANS DIRECTORATE, COLLABORATION COMMUNIST AND P. N. Ponomarev?
SCHOOLS AND
INSTITUTES
BUREAU FOR
THE RSFSR
G. G. Abramov G. I. Voronov N. G. Ignatov M. A. Yasnov
V. S. Tolstikov N. G. Yegorychev G. V. Yenyutin
BUREAUS OF
ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
G. P. Frantsev
CHAIRMAN
FIRST DEPUTY CHAIRMAN N. S. Khrushchev FIRST DEPUTY CHAIRMAN
A. P. Kirilenko
MEMBERS
BUREAU FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF BUREAU FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF
FOR THE RSFSR
AND THEIR
DEPARTMENTS
N. R. Mironov SOVIET ARMY WITH SOCIALIST WORKERS PARTIES
AND NAVY COUNTRIES OF SOCIALIST
CHAIRMAN
A. P. Kirilenko?
IDEOLOGICAL
M. 1. Khaldeyev
PARTY ORGANS
N. A. Voronovsky
HEAVY INDUSTRY,
TRANSPORT AND
COMMUNICATIONS
S. A. Baskakov
MACHINE BUILDING
CHEMICAL INDUSTRY
V. D. Belyayev
CONSTRUCTION
A. V. Gladyrevsky
LIGHT AND FOOD
INDUSTRY AND TRADE
P. K. Sizov
OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANS FINANCE AND PLANNING ORGANS?
DEPARTMENTS V. I. Laputin ?
FOR THE RSFSR
INSTITUTE OF MARXISM-LENINISM HIGHER PARTY SCHOOL
P. N. Pospelov N. R. Mitronov
CENTRAL ASIAN BUREAU
CHAIRMAN
V. G. Lomonosov
AGRICULTURE RSFSR
CHAIRMAN
L. N. Yefremov?
IDEOLOGICAL
V. 1. Stepakov
PARTY ORGANS
M. A. Polekhin
AGRICULTURE
I. S. Pankin
AGRICULTURAL RAW
MATERIALS PROCESSING
INDUSTRY AND TRADE
A. I. Tyasto
SOVETSKAYA ROSSIYA
K. I. Zarodov
CHAIRMAN
G. N. Bochkarev
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
 Approved For Release 2t)'6 41061'1 ? i>A=RDP83T00353R000100260001-7
THE CENTRAL PARTY MACHINE
15 FEBRUARY 1966
CADRES ABROAD DEFENSE INDUSTRY HEAVY INDUSTRY
A. S. Ponyushkin? I. D. Serbin A. P. Rudakov?
SECRETARIES
P. N. Demichev N. V. Podgorny A. N. Shelepin M. A. Suslov D. F. Ustinov
Yu. V. Andropov I. V. Kapitanov F. D. Kulakov B. N. Ponomarev A. P. Rudakov
FIRST SECRETARY
L. I. Brezhnev
DEPARTMENTS ORGANIZATIONAL- GENERAL PROPAGANDA
PARTY WORK ? AND AGITATION
I. V. Kapitonov? V. I. Stepakov
SCIENCE AND ADMINISTRSTIVE MAIN POLITICAL
EDUCATIONAL ORGANS DIRECTORATE,
INSTITUTIONS ? SOVIET ARMY
S. P. Trapeznikov AND NAVY
A. A. Yepishev
TRANSPORT AND FINANCE AND LIGHT AND FOOD TRADE AND AGRICULTURE
COMMUNICATIONS PLANNING INDUSTRY EVERDAY SERVICES F. D. Kulakov?
K. S. Simonov ORGANS? P. K. Sizov Ya. I. Kabkov
SCHOOLS AND
INSTITUTES
BUREAU FOR
THE RSFSR
FIRST DEPUTY CHAIRMAN
A. P. Kirilenko
MEMBERS
DEPARTMENTS
FOR THE
RSFSR
PRAVDA KOMMUNIST CULTURE
M. V. Zimyanin A. G. Yegorov V. F. Shauro?
ECONOMIC LIAISON WITH INTERNATIONAL
COLLABORATION COMMUNIST AND D. P. Shevlyagin?
WITH SOCIALIST WORKERS PARTIES
COUNTRIES OF SOCIALIST
? COUNTRIES
Yu. V. Andropov?
V. S. Frolov INDUSTRY A. Ye. Biryukiv
V. M. Bushuyev
FIRST DEPUTY CHAIRMAN
L. N. Yefremov?
G. G. Abramov? N. G. Ignatov V. A. Karlov V. S. Tolstikov
G. I. Voronov M. A. Yasnov N. G. Yegorychev G. V. Yenyutin?
ORGANIZATIONAL- PROPAGANDA CULTURE SICENCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE SOVETSKAYA
PARTY WORK AND AGITATION ? EDUCATIONAL ORGANS ROSSIYA
? M. 1. Khaldeyev INSTITUTIONS V. I. Laputin V. P. Moskovsky
HEAVY INDUSTRY, MACHINE BUILDING CHEMICAL CONSTRUCTION FINANCE AND LIGHT AND FOOD
TRANSPORT AND I. I. Kozlov INDUSTRY? A. V. Gladyrevsky PLANNING INDUSTRY AND
COMMUNICATIONS V. D. Belyayev? ORGENS? TRADE?
S. A. Baskakov 2 2
AGRICULTURE
V. A. Karlov
Chart B
-71 - Chapter II
Approved For Release 2Q~4(O~11,5e, ~ IQ;F 17)PFItTO0353R000100260001-7
 Approved For Release'X1p1Q/r~L~ N4-'IRJ$5T00353R000100260001-7
Table I
The Network of Party Organs: 1956-I975
Jan. 1)56
I)rt. 1961
Jan. 1965
Jan. P,66
Jan. 1971
.Ian. 1975
I niou-Hr public .............
1,
14
14
1
14
14
hrav and ()Mast ............
151
143
140
1'.r
148
154
I tkrug..
10
IO
10
10
lO
('iris ... . ......
5:51
60'2
-38
7....r
7)10
...
1 Than district ...............
141
:-.1:3
S96
4 is
448
li-ural radon .................
1,218
3,202
2,134
2,5'1
2,810
2,853
Primary Organizations ....... 351 , 219
296, 114
311 , 907
326, 8's,
369, 695
386, 000
Shop Organizations.......... 7(5 ,0.58
187,00))
267, 18I
287, 2. ti
352,871
391,000+
J'a,rty Groups........ ....
122,213
171,000
:329,613
351 ,4c2
443,233
515,000
1'rimarv and Shop Party
("ornmittees-. .............
...
1!,000
20,128
21,7 1
31,000
35,000
'l'hc figure., for 195ti arc in I'artin.aye Zh.a.-n. No. 1, January 195(2, p. 52, 5, no Partinaya Zhizrt No. 14,
,July 1973, pp. 22-23. Those for 1961 arc in Partinaya Zhizri No. I, Jane tr,: 1962, pp. 52 54. I hose
for 1965 are in Parlinaya Zhizn No. 111, M t. 1951.2, pp. 15 I7. t'hose for 966 are in Partinaya Zhizn
14, July 197:3. pp. 21 2:3. 't'hose for 14571 arc from the reports by 1 I. lirezhnev and by I. V.
Sapitonov at the 24th Congress (AA If' ;iyenl Komrnunzstiche.skoi Part, Noi'etskogo Soyuza: Steno-
q,aJ'ich.ezkii (itchet; A1osrow, 1971: ~ of I, pp. 117 1'26 and :330 336) and iron Partinaya Zhizn No. 14,
,July 1973, pp. 21 23. l'he figures for 1975 are from 1. V. hapitono . t'arlinaya Zhizn No. 4,
Fehruarv 1975, pp. 11) 19; and V. A Pelrovichev, in No. 11, June 19, 1, pp. 15 24.
A: Size of Primary Party Organizations
Number of
%leto bers Jan. 1956 .Ian. 1961 Jan. 1965 fan. 1966 Jan. 1171 Jan. 1973 Jan. 1975
14. ....... _ ((2.243.7'%, 39.9'%. 10.0o 40. N. 40.5% 40.6'%.
I45 49.. _ ...... 9* ?:3.8 4:3.5 43.3 12 41.8 41 .3
;1o100..........J 8.I 10.5 Ii).7 11 11.5 11.8
101 ........... . 1.9 1.1 6.1 (1.0 6 1 6.2 6.3
B: Average Membership of Primary Organizations
ludustrial
Enterprises.38 57 7t, N . A 87 s9 91
onstruetion
Sites........... 26 3: 12 N, A 39 39 -10
State Farms ...... 25 6s 7 5 N; A 72 69 1
I'ollective Farms. 13 :33 40 N.'A 48 49 1
5cicntific
Institutions... 45 70t x6 V1,A NiA VIA 9}
*21.4 percent had 15 25 members; 14.:5 percent had 26 100 member
"*']'his figure is the average for state and collective farms combiner . rhe 1975 figures dirt not
provide a separate figure for each.
']'his figure is an approximation- based on the- figures for July 1961 .nd January 1962.
Cho figures for 1956 are from Po.rlinaya Zhu-n. No. 1, January 1962. Tb es' for 1961, 1966, and 1973
rtr' from Partinaya Zhizn No. 14, July 197:3. 'T'hose for 1965 are from Partinaya Zhizn. No. 10, May
1965. 't'hose for 1971 are from Pariinmle .Ntrsilelslvo: Uchebnoye Posot,,.)t? (N- Petrovichev, chief
editor) Aloseow, 1971; p. 188. Those for 1975 are from N. Petroviehev' article in Partinaya Zhizn
No. 11, June 1975.
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
CONFIDENTIAL
 Approved For ReleascCW1I35T00353R000100260001-7
Table III
Party Personnel Changes: April 1966-December 1975
Apr. 1966-- Apr. 1971 Aug. 1973- Apr. 1971-
Mar. 1971 Jul. 1973 Dec. 1975 Dec. 1975
CPSU Central Committee ................ 8/30
Russian Republic (RSFSR) ............... 35/78
Union-Republics Total ................... 72/153
Armenia .............................. 0/6
Azerbaydzhan ......................... 6/7
Belorussia ............................ 6/12
Estonia .............................. 3/6
Georgia .............................. 3/8
Kazakhstan ........................... 9/21**
Kirgizia .............................. 4/7
Latvia ............................... 4/6
Lithuania ............................ 3/6
Moldavia ............................. 4/6
Tadzhikistan .......................... 3/8**
Turkmenistan ......................... 4/9**
Ukraine .............................. 16/32
Uzbekistan ........................... 7/l7**
1/30 4/30 5/30
13/78 11/78 22/78*
33/157 45/161 71/161*
3/6 4/6 6/6*
0/7 1/7 1/7
4/12 3/12 6/12*
0/6 0/6 0/6
6/8 5/8 8/8*
5/25** 6/25 11/25**
2/9** 3/9 5/9**
1/6 4/6 4/6*
0/6 2/6 2/6
0/6 1/6 1/6
1/8 3/9** 4/9**
0/9 3/11** 3/11**
8/32 6/32 14/32
3/17 4/18** 6/18* **
*Instances where the figures in the April 1971 -July 1973 and August 1973- December 1975
columns do not add up to the figures in the April 1971 -December 1975 column are due to a position's
having changed hands more than once during the post-congress period.
**The number of positions in the column represents the total at the end of the period in question.
The number of changes, however, does not include the election of new first secretaries in newly-
created oblasts. There were three in Kazakhstan and in Turkmenistan, and one in both
Tadzhikistan and Uzbekistan during the April 1966 March 1971 period. There were two both in
Kazakhstan and in Kirgizia during the April 1971-July 1973 period; and two in Turkmenistan, and
one in both Tadzhikistan and Uzbekistan during the August 1973-December 1975 period.
The number of positions in the CPSU Central Committee apparatus includes all department chiefs
and their equivalents, or the first deputy chief in instances where a department is headed by a
CPSU Secretary or has been allowed to operate for a considerable length of time without any chief.
The RSFSR posts include the first and second secretaries of the Moscow and Leningrad Oblast and
City Party Committees, and the first secretaries of the other kray, oblast, and autonomous republics
within the RSFSR. The union-republic posts include the first, second, and other secretaries of the
republic party central committees, the first secretaries of any oblast or autonomous republic party
organizations within the republics, and the first secretaries of the city party organization in the
republic capitals.
-73- Chapter II
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
CONFIDENTIAL
 Approved For Release i06/i6/'1W?E'F1dAIT00353R000100260001-7
Table I
The Elective "Aktiv": 1961-1973
lfcmhere and Candidate Members of t .1u
I'SI Central Cornrnittee and Central
auditing Commission ..................
blenrbers and Candidate Members of Union-
Republic Communist Party Central ('om-
cnittees and of Krav and Oblast. Party
Committees. and of Auditing ('omrnis,sions
of those part. organizations............
VI tubers and Candidate Members of Okrug,
City, and Itavon Party Committees. and
of Auditing ( 'orn in issions of those party
organizations .............. ..... ...
'vierrrbers of Party Committees and Party
Bureaus, Secretaries and Deputy Secre-
aries of Primary fart} Organizations ...
i'tubers of Party Committees and Party
Bureaus, Secretaries and Deputy Secre-
taxies of Shop Party Organizations, and
party Group Organizers ................
I )et.. 1961
apr. 1966
.1 pr. 1971
J
an. 1973
:395
1:39
477
495t
306,000*
{ 25,200
...
25,400
, :325, 000
...
363, 200
1
797 , 000
1,800,000*
2.650,000'1
t ...
1 ,
`401 .00(1
*'I'he figures for 1961 lump the ' aktiv' at thy- union-republic, kray, an,l oblast levels together with
t he "a.ktiv" at the okrug, city. and rayon levels. '[hey also give a comb ued figure for the "aktiv" at
he primary and shop party organizations and at party groups.
**'I'lre figures for 19611 lurnp the "aktiv" at the primary organization h .(If together with the "aktiv
at shop organizations and party groups
t1'his figure represents an educated guess. based on the increase in su,-h people during the intervals
between previous congresses.
The figures for 1961 are from Pravda, 'N'ovember 1, 1961, and from A, inoya Zhizn No. 1, ,1anuar,
1962. Those for 1966 are from Kornmuni.s( No. 15, October 1967, and f;e,rn Partinaga Zhizn No. 13,
.July 1973. Those for 1971 and 1973 also are from Partimt,tga Zhizn V:, 14, July 1973.
Members and Candidate Members of Union-Republic Central Committees, and
of Kray, Oblast, Okrug, City, and Rayon Party Committees
Elect l in late Elected in late
1967 :erly 1966 197(1 earls 1971
'workers and Peasants ...... . .. . .. . . . . . ....... . ... ;':. fi'? 38 3e%a
lleads of Enterprises in Industry, Transport, Communieatinny,
Construction and Sovkhozes.... _ . x 122
i;ngineering-Technical Workers and Fanning Specialists.... 1.4 6.3
!'arty Officials ................. . .... - ............ h 16.:3
Local Soviets' Officials ............ .. . ... .......... . .... 7 10.4
:acrence, Education, Culture, and PubIie- Health Officials and
ipeciali..sts ........................ ............. . ..... ,,ti 7 :1
Others (those svr%ing in awned fort',", I,ensioners, hou.se,yives,
:itudent,s, ete....... ..... ........ t 1 9,5
Women .. .... ............ 3
-74- Chapter VII
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
CONFIDENTIAL
 Approved For Release ObWOVI M, tK-I'1bftI5T00353R000100260001-7
Education Levels of Party Officials: 1956-1973
Incomplete Incomplete
Higher Higher Secondary Secondary Elementary
Education Education Education Education Education
A: Secretaries of Union-Republic Central Committees, Dray Party Committees,
and Oblast Party Committees
Jan. 1956 ...................
86.0 %
6.6%
6.3%
1.1%,
Jan. 1961 ...................
92.0
4.0
3.9
0.1
Jan. 1966 ...................
97.0
1.9
1.1
Jan. 1971 ...................
98.9
0.3
0.8
Jan. 1973 ...................
99.2
0.1
0.7
Jan. 1956 ...................
25.7%
52.9%
17.3%
3.7 %
0.4 %i
Jan. 1961 ...................
67.8
24.2
7.7
0.3
Jan. 1966 ...................
89.4
7.4
3.2
Jan. 1971 ...................
96.4
2.9
0.7
...
...
Jan. 1973 ...................
97.7
1.9
0.4
...
...
Jan. 1956 ...................
11.4 %
7.9%
29.5%
30.6 %%
20.6 %,
Jan. 1961 ...................
19.7
7.3
37.9
24.8
10.3
Jan. 1966 ...................
28.3
5.9
43.3
18.1
4.4
Jan. 1971 ...................
38.5
5.4
44.8
10.3
1.0
Jan. 1973 ...................
42.1
4.7
44.4
8.2
0.6
- 75 - Chapter VII
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
CONFIDENTIAL
 Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
Education of Top Party Officials
vt lL1 1'La1 Aca flit ll',. 1'ti ........ ..
i llll-l'1I1\
'leachers College, Pedagogical Irist,, 1,I.c .....
Military Acaden,'\ .........................
Higher Part i School ............ .... ...
of which, attentieti only a (15111
incomplete Higher Lone....
Education I'nkno\cn .......... ....... ..
**The. RSFSR posts are the first and second seer, rary slots in the ;Moscow and Leningrad cite and ,blast party organizations, ruin the first secretary slots ii
the other krays. oblasts, and autortou,ous ri~ptiblice within the RSFSR. The 1964 group excludes the Oblast units abolished in Deccniber 1961,
tThe Union-Republic posts include the first and second secretaries of the 14 union-republic party organizations, the first secretaries of the party organization,
in each capital city. and the first secretaries of any Oblast or autonomous republic party organizations within the union-republics. 'lh? also Oct the the part,,
a-cretaries for ideology agriculture. atnd industrc' and any other republic ventral committee secretaries. in Belorussia, liazakh.tan, the Ukraiut. and
i zbekistan.
~nunnt.'r High, r P,; b, Z,1I'u"i, ii1, clur_ c~.'it,,, of Of lf,c i,rrt dv ,uit rii:vu w tLl rtc
nas halt no chief for a cuniluerapl~' .tngtl, .1 line.
I. PSl Central
Ruc5ian Republic
Cali hitter*'
HSISR**
..
:_'U. S bnn . -
25
32 ,
2n - 33.3
29 25 ki
;12
2 i 1
_I - 26.9
o(,
i0. i J=in.u
n-
7.,
ti- 7,7
13 --i0.6
?
.,.I
2i-l Ii. i
Si; - ...i
6.7 9=311.0
3=
3.9
5= 6.4
121=11.7
16-1'2.2
23=1(I.0
30=12.0
2 =
6. 7 1- 3.3
1
1.3
1= 1.3
1 0.5
0- 0.0
1= 1.7
2- Il.,,
5
16. 7 2 6 ..
17 =
21 .5
12 = L5. 4
43 03 1
33 = 35 . 2
65 = 2h. 2
47 - 19. ,
5
in. 7 1 J.3
14
15.0
4}=11.6
27 17.1
125 13.7
40 20.0
2S 11.a
1 3.3 1 3.3
5-
6.4
I 1.3
2 1 6
1- 1.5
5 3 5
3 1.3
I -- :3.3 4=13.3
() =
0.0
2= 2,6
7- 5.7
25=19.1
5= 3.5
31=13.0
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
 Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
Career Backgrounds of Top Party Officials
Oct. 1964 Dec. 1975 Oct. 1964 Dec. 1975 Oct. 1964 Dec. 1976 Oct. 1964 Dec. 1975
A: Type of Career
Professional Politician ...................... 22= 73.3% 16= 53.3% 60= 77.0% 60= 77.0% 86= 70.0% 86= 65.7% 168= 72.8% 162= 68.0%
Technocrat ................................ 8= 26.7 11= 36.7 18 = 23.0 11 = 14.1 30 = 24.4 21 = 16.1 56 = 24.2 43 = 18.0
Specialist .................................. 0- 0.0 0 = 0.0 0 = 0.0 0 = 0.0 0 = 0.0 0 = 0.0 0 = 0.0 0- 0.0
Unknown ................................. 0= 0.0 3= 10.0 0= 0.0 7= 9.0 7= 5.7 24- 18.3 7= 3.0 34 = 14.2
B: Specific Jobs or Areas of Employment
CPSU Central Committee ................... 30=100.0% 30=100.0% 19= 24.4% 14= 18.0% 15= 12.2% 17= 13.0% 64= 27.8% 61= 25.6%
Regional Party Leader ...................... 5- 16.7 7= 23.3 78 = 100.0 78 = 100.0 123-100.0 131 = 100.0 206 = 89.3 216 = 90.8
USSR Council of Ministers .................. 6= 20.0 4= 13.3 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 3= 2.4 1= 0.8 9= 3.9 5- 2.1
USSR Supreme Soviet Official ............... 1= 3.3 1= 3.3 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 1= 0.4 1= 0.4
Republic Government Official ................ 2= 6.7 3= 10.0 1 = 1.3 0- 0.0 35 = 28.5 33 = 25.2 38 = 16.5 36 = 15.1
Chairman, Regional Government ............. 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 34 = 50.0 27 = 34.7 30 = 24.4 23- 17.6 64 = 27.8 50 = 21.0
Remained at home during war ............... 18- 60.0 15 = 50.0 49= 63.0 52 = 66.7 73- 59.3 54 = 41.3 140 = 60.8 121 = 50.8
Served at front during war .................. 9- 30.0 11 = 36.7 29 = 37.3 26 = 33.3 49- 39.9 45 = 34.3 87= 37.8 82 = 34.4
Fought with partisans in war ................ 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 4 = 5.1 2= 2.6 10= 8.2 5= 3.8 14 = 6.1 7= 2.9
Political officer during war .................. 4= 13.3 3= 10.0 3= 3.9 0= 0.0 9= 7.3 2= 1.5 16 = 6.9 5= 2.1
Professional soldier ......................... 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 1= 1.3 1- 1.3 1= 0.8 0= 0.0 2= 0.9 1= 0.4
Service with KGB, MVD, etc ................ 4= 13.3 2= 6.7 2= 2.6 2= 2.6 1 = 0.8 6= 4.6 7= 3.0 10= 4.2
Service with Ministry of Foreign Affairs (out-
side East Europe or Socialist Bloc) ......... 2= 6.7 2= 6.7 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 1= 0.8 1= 0.8 3= 1.3 3- 1.3
Service with Ministry of Foreign Affairs in East
Europe or Socialist Bloc .................. 4- 13.3 4- 13.3 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 0- 0.0 0= 0.0 4= 1.7 4= 1.7
Work in Education Field .................... 1= 3.3 7= 23.3 10= 12.8 11 = 14.1 25 = 20.4 20 = 15.3 26 = 11.3 38 = 15.9
Work in Agitprop Field ..................... 10= 33.3 10= 33.3 4= 5.1 4- 5.1 17= 14.8 21 = 16.0 31- 13.5 35- 14.7
Komsomol Official .......................... 3= 10.0 1 = 3.3 7= 9.0 12 = 15.4 24 = 19.5 39 = 29.8 34- 14.8 52 = 21.8
Trade Unions Official ....................... 2= 6.7 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 1 = 1.3 7= 5.7 4= 3.1 9- 3.9 5= 2.1
Involved in Scientific Research ............... 0- 0.0 0= 0.0 2= 2.6 3= 3.9 2= 1.6 8- 6.1 4= 1.7 11 = 4.6
Involvement in Arts & Letters ............... 0- 0.0 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 0- 0.0 1= 0.8 1= 0.8 1 = 0.4 1 = 0.4
'c3
Farm Production ........................... 4= 13.3 6= 20.0 30 = 38.6 30 = 38.6 39 = 31.8 44- 33.6 73 = 31.7 80 = 33.5
co
Industry (no specific area) ................... 2= 6.7 0= 0.0 12 = 13.3 14 = 18.0 30 = 24.4 23- 17.6 44= 19.1 37- 15.5
Industry, heavy ............................ 7= 23.3 5= 16.7 11 = 14.1 10= 12.8 7= 5.7 12- 9.2 25 = 10.9 27 = 11.3
Industry, consumer goods ................... 2= 6.7 3= 10.0 0= 0.0 2= 2.6 5= 4.1 4- 3.1 7= 3.0 9= 3.8
Transportation & Communications ........... 2= 6.7 1 = 3.3 2- 2.6 7= 9.0 8= 6.5 7- 5.3 12 = 5.2 15 = 6.3
Economic Planning ......................... 1= 3.3 2= 6.7 0= 0.0 1= 1.3 4= 3.3 2= 1.5 5= 2.2 5= 2.1
Little Information Available ................. 5= 16.7 4= 13.3 2= 2.6 7= 9.0 2= 1.6 16 = 12.2 9= 3.9 27 = 11.3
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
 Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
Age, Length of Party Membership, and Tenure in Ruling Elite
CPSU Central Committee* Russian Republic (].ISFSR)** Union-Republicst Total CPSU Officials
Oct. 1964 Dec. 1975 Oct. 1964 Dec. 1975 Oct. 1964 Dec. 1975 Oct. 1964 Dec. 1975
A: Age of Party Leaders
Average age ............................... 53.5 61.0 53.0 55.5 49.10 52.67 51.0 54.9
-40 ..................................... 2= 6.7% 0= 0.0% 1= 1.3% 0= 0.0% 15= 12.2% 2= 1.5% 18= 7.8% 2- 0.8%
41-50 ..................................... 8 = 26.7 2 = 6.7 38 = 48.8 25 = 32.1 58 = 47.2 43 = 32.9 104 = 45.1 70 = 29.3
51-60 ..................................... 16 = 53.5 9 = 30.0 37 = 47.5 29 = 37.3 40 = 32.5 50 = 38.2 93 = 40.3 88 = 36.9
61-65 ..................................... 2= 6.7 10= 33.3 2 = 2.6 14 = 18.0 4 = 3.3 9 = 6.9 8 = 3.5 33 = 13.8
66- ....................................... 2= 6.7 6 = 20.0 0 = 0.0 4 = 5.1 0 = 0.0 2 = 1.5 2 = 0.9 12 = 5.0
Unknown ................................. 0= 0.0 3= 10.0 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 6= 4.9 25= 19.1 6= 2.6 28= 11.7
B: Length of Party Membership
Joined party before 1917 .................... 2= 6.7% 1 = 3.3 `Yu 0= 0.0% 0= 0.0% 2= 1.6% 0= 0.0% 4= 1.7 1 = 0.4 %
1924 ................... 2= 6.7 1= 3.3 1= 1.3 0= 0.0 2= 1.6 0= 0.0 5= 2.2 1= 0.4
1931 ................... 9= 30.0 6= 20.0 12= 15.4 2= 2.6 11= 8.9 0=: 0.0 32= 13.9 8= 3.4
1937 ................... 13= 43.2 9= 30.0 21 = 27.0 4= 5.1 19- 15.5 1- 0.8 53 = 23.0 14- 5.9
1942 ................... 22 = 73.3 17= 56.7 55 = 70.7 25 = 32.1 65- 52.9 18 = 13.8 142- 61.5 60- 25.2
1946 ................... 26 = 86.7 23 = 76.7 74 = 95.0 46- 59.0 99- 80.6 55= 42.0 199 = 81.2 124- 52.0
1953 ................... 28 = 93.3 26 = 86.7 77 = 98.8 61 = 78.3 112= 91.0 85 65.1 217 = 94.0 172 = 71.0
1956 ................... 29 = 96.7 27 = 90.0 78 = 100.0 68 = 87.0 116- 94.2 99 96.8 223 = 75.8 194 = 81.3
1959 ................... 29= 96.7 27 = 90.0 78 = 100.0 71= 91.0 117 = 95.1 105== 97.2 224 = 80.3 203 = 85.1
1962 ................... 29 = 96.7 27 = 90.0 78 =100.0 72= 93.3 117 = 95.1 110= 84.0 224 = 97.2 209 = 87.5
Oct. 1964 ................... 29 = 96.7 27 = 90.0 78 = 100.0 72 = 92.3 117 = 95.1 110 == 84.0 224 = 97.2 209 = 87.5
Unknown ................... 1= 3.3 3= 10.0 0= 0.0 6= 7.7 6= 4.9 21== 16.0 7= 3.0 30= 12.6
Party member for over 50 years .............. 1 = 3.3% 1 = 3.3% 0 = 0.0% 0 = 0.0% 0 = 0.0% 0 == 0.0% 1 = 0.4% 1 = 0.4%
for over 45 years .............. 2= 6.7 4= 13.3 0- 0.0 2= 2.6 2= 1.6 1 0.8 4= 1.7 7= 2.9
for over 40 years .............. 2= 6.7 9= 30.0 1= 1.3 4= 5.1 7- 5.7 1 0.8 10= 4.3 14= 5.9
for over 35 years .............. 6 = 20.0 14 = 46.7 8 = 10.3 13 = 16.7 20 = 16.3 8 == 6. 1 34 14.7 35 = 14.7
for over 30 years .............. It= 36.7 21 = 70.0 21 = 27.0 4l = 52.7 23 = 18.6 46 - 35.2 55 = 23.8 108 = 45.4
for over 25 years .............. 12= 40.0 24 = 80.0 24 = 30.8 53= 68.0 91 = 74.0 74 = 56.7 127 = 55.0 151 = 63.3
for over 20 years .............. 24 = 80.0 27 = 90.0 66 = 84.7 67-- 86.0 108 = 87.9 95 = 72.7 198- 85.9 189- 79.4
for over 15 years .............. 26 = 86.7 27 = 90.0 76 = 97.5 72 = 92.3 115- 93.5 106 == 81.1 217- 93.9 205 = 86.2
for over 10 years .............. 27 = 90.0 27 = 90.0 78 = 100.0 72= 92.3 117 = 95.1 110 = 84.0 222 = 96.2 209 = 87.7
for over 5 years ............... 28 = 93.3 27 = 90.0 78 = 100.0 72= 92.3 117 = 95.1 110 = 84.0 223 = 96.6 209 = 87.7
Unknown .................... 2= 6.7 3= 10.0 6= 0.0 0= 7.7 6= 4.9 21-= 16.0 8= 3.5 30= 12.6
C: Tenure in Ruling Elite
Joined Elite before 1924 ..................... 1= 3.3% 0= 0.0% 0= 0.0% 0= 0.0% 0= 0.0% 0= 0.0% 1= 0.4% 0= 0.0%
1935 ..................... I = 3.3 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 1 = 0.4 0 = 0.0
1942 ..................... 4= 13.3 2 = 6.7 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 3= 2.4 0- 0.0 7= 3.0 2- 0.8
1946 ..................... 4= 13.3 2= 6.7 1 = t." 0= 0.0 4- 3.3 0= 0.0 9= 3.9 2= 0.8
1953 ..................... 7= 23.3 4= 13.3 11 = 14.1 4= 5.1 19- 15.5 3= 2.3 37- 16.1 It= 4.6
1956 ..................... 8= 26.7 4= 13.3 18 = 23.1 4= 5.1 30 = 24.4 7= 5.3 56- 24.2 15 = 6.3
1959 ..................... 13= 43.3 8= 26.7 51 = 65.5 7- 9.0 45- 36.6 20 15.3 109 = 47.2 35- = 14.7
1962 ..................... 23 = 76.7 It= 36.7 64 = 82.0 25 = 32.1 78 = 63.3 23 = 17.6 165 = 71.4 59 = 24.8
Oct. 1964 ..................... 30 = 100.0 15= 50.0 78-100.0 30 = 38.6 123-100.0 40 = 30.6 231 = 100.0 85= 35.6
Apr. 1966 ..................... 19= 63.3 37 = 47.5 47 = 35.8 103- 43.2
Jan. 1969 ..................... 22 = 73.3 44- 51.5 57 = 43.5 123 = 51.6
Apr. 1971 ..................... 25 = 83.3 57 = 73.1 79- 60.3 161- 67.6
Aug. 1973 ..................... 27 = 90.0 69= 88.5 98= 74.9 194 = 81.2
Jan. 1976 ..................... 30-100.0 78 =100.0 131 =100.0 239= 100.0
Elite member for over 50 years ............... 0- 0.0 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 0 = 0.0 0= 0.0 0- 0.0 0= 0.0 0- 0.0
for over 45 years ............... 1= 3.3 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 0- 0.0 1= 0.4 0= 0.0
for over 40 years ............... I= 3.3 0= 0.0 0- 0.0 0= 0.0 0- 0.0 0- 0.0 1 = 0.4 0= 0.0
for over 35 years ............... 1 = 3.3 1 = 3.3 0 = 0.0 0= 0.0 0- 0.0 0= 0.0 1 = 0.4 1 = 0.4
for over 30 years ............... 1= 3.3 2= 6.7 l 1.3 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 0= 0.0 2= 0.9 2= 0.8
for over 25 years ............... l- 3.3 3 10.0 1 = 1.3 1 - 1.3 1 = 0.8 1 = 0.8 3- 1.3 5= 2.1
for over 20 years ............... 4= 13.3 3- 10.0 1 = 1.3 4= 5.1 3- 2.4 3= 2.3 8- 3.5 10= 4.2
for over 15 years ............... 5= 16.7 10= 33.3 2= 2.6 10- 12.8 6= 4.9 16= 12.2 13= 5.6 36= 15.1
for over 10 years ............... 6= 20.0 15 = 50.0 12 = 15.4 31 = 39.8 20- 16.3 40 = 30.6 38 16.5 86- 36.1
for over 5 years ............... 12 = 40.0 25 = 83.3 34 = 50.0 51 = 65.5 41 = 33.3 69- 52.7 87 = 37.7 t45= 60.9
*The CPSU Central Committee posts are held by the heads of the individual departments, or the first deputy chief in the event that the department is headed by a CPSU Secretary,
or has had no chief for a considerable length of time.
**The RSFSB. posts are the first and second secretary slots in the Moscow and Leningrad Oblast and City party organizations, and the first secretary slots in the other krays and
oblasts or autonomous republics within the RSFSR.
tThe Union-Republic posts include the first and second secretaries of the 14 union-republic party organizations, the first secretary of the party organization in each republic capital
city, and the first secretaries of any oblast or autonomous republic party organization within those republics. They also include the party secretaries for ideology, agriculture, and in-
dustry (and any other republic central committee secretaries) in the four largest union-republics-Belorussia, Kazakhstan, the Ukraine, and Uzbekistan.
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
 Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100262001-7
Table VII
Ethnic Representation Among Top Party Officials
CPSU Central Committee Russian Republic (RSFSR)
Oct. 1964 Dec. 1975 Oct. 1964 Dec. 1975 Oct. 1964
A: Nationality Representation
Russians .................................. 19= 63.3% 13= 43.3% 59= 75.9% 49= 62.9% 19= 15.5% 26= 19.9%
Ukrainians ................................ 0 = 0.0 0 = 0.0 8 - 10.3 10= 12.8 38 = 30.9 29 = 22.1
Belorussians ............................... 0 = 0.0 2 = 6.7 0 = 0.0 0 = 0.0 12- 9.8 6 = 4.6
Kazakhs .................................. 0 = 0.0 0 - 0.0 0 = 0.0 0- 0.0 8 = 6.5 13= 10.0
Uzbeks .................................... 0 = 0.0 0 = 0.0 0 - 0.0 0 = 0.0 12 = 9.8 10 = 7.7
Armenians ................................. 0 = 0.0 0- 0.0 0- 0.0 0- 0.0 4- 3.3 2 = 1.5
Azerbaydzhanis ............................ 0 = 0.0 0 = 0.0 0 = 0.0 0 = 0.0 3 = 2.4 3- 2.3
Estonians ................................. 0 = 0.0 0 = 0.0 0 - 0.0 0 - 0.0 3 = 2.4 2 = 1.5
Georgians ................................. 0 = 0.0 0 = 0.0 0 = 0.0 0 - 0.0 3 = 2.4 2 = 1.5
Kirgizi .................................... 0 = 0.0 0 = 0.0 0 = 0.0 0 - 0.0 2 = 1.6 4 = 3.1
Latvians .................................. 0 = 0.0 1 = 3.3 (1= 0.0 0 = 0.0 1 = 0.8 2 = 1.5
Lithuanians ............................... 0 = 0.0 0 = 0.0 0 - 0.0 0 - 0.0 2 = 1.6 2 = 1.5
Moldavians ................................ 0 = 0.0 0 - 0.0 0 = 0.0 0 = 0.0 1 = 0.8 2 = 1.5
Tadzhiks .................................. 0 = 0.0 0 - 0.0 0 - 0.0 0 = 0.0 3 = 2.4 3 = 2.3
Turk mens ................................. 0 - 0.0 0 = 0.0 0 - 0.0 0 = 0.0 1 = 0.8 4 = 3.1
Oo Others .................................... 0 = 0.0 0 = 0.0 11 = 14.1 12 - 15.4 4 = 3.3 2 = 1.5
Unknown ................................. 11 = 36.7 14- 46.7 0= 0.0 7= 9.0 8= 6.5 19 = 14.5
Major Other Outside Major Other Outside
Nationality Natives Nationality Unknown Nationality Natives Nationality Unknown
- - - - - - - - - --- - - - -
B: Republic Leadership
Russian Republic (RSFSR) ..................
59= 75.9%
11-
14.1%
8=
10.3%
0=
0.0%
49=
62.9%
12=
15.4%
10=
12.8%
7=
9.0%
Armenia .................................
3 = 100.0
0=
0.0
0=
0.0
0=
0.0
2=
66.7
0=
0.0
1=
33.3
0=
0.0
Azerbaydzhan ............................
B
l
3= 75.0
0=
0.0
1=
25.0
0=
0.0
3=
75.0
0=
0.0
1 =
25.0
0 =
0.0
e
orussia ...............................
E
12= 92.3
0=
0.0
1=
7.7
0=
0.0
6=
50.0
0=
0.0
3=
25.0
3-
25.0
W
stonia .................................
Geor
ia
3=100.0
0=
0.0
0-
0.0
0=
0.0
2=
66.7
0-
0.0
1=
33.3
0=
0.0
'
g
. ....... .....................
3= 60.0
1=
20.0
I=
20.0
0-
0.0
2=
40.0
0-
0.0
1=
20.0
2-
40.0
,-+
Kazakhstan ..............................
7= 28.0
1=
4.0
13 =
52.0
4 =
16.0
13 =
52.0
0 =
0.0
9-
36.0
3 =
12.0
.................
_
50.v
v-
0.0
t-
66.i
V=
V.U
1=
16.7
1-
16.7
Latvia ........ .. ........................
1 = 33.3
0-
0.0
2 =
66.7
0 =
0.0
2-
66.7
0 =
0.0
1 =
33 3
0-
0.0
Lithuania ...............................
2 = 66.7
0-
0.0
1 - 33.3
0 =
0.0
2 =
66.7
0 =
0.0
1 =
33.3
0 =
0.0
Moldavia ................................
1 - 33.3
0 =
0.0
1 = 33.3
1 =
33.3
2 =
66.7
0 =
0.0
1 =
33.3
0 =
0.0
Tadzhikistan .............................
3 = 75.0
0 =
0.0
1 = 25.0
0 =
0.0
3 =
50.0
0 =
0.0
2-
33.3
1 =
16.7
Turkmenistan ............................
1 = 33.3
0 =
0.0
1 = 33.3
1 =
33.3
4 =
50.0
0 =
0.0
2-
25.0
2 =
25.0
Ukraine .................................
30 = 91.0
0 =
0.0
2 = 6.1
1 =
3.0
27-
84.8
0 =
0.0
3 =
9.4
2-
6.3
Uzbekistan ..............................
12 = 70.6
0 =
0.0
2- 11.8
1 =
5.9
9 =
50.0
2 =
11.1
2 =
11.1
5 =
27.8
Total .................................
142 = 71.3
13-
6.5
36- 18.1
8=
4.0
132=
63.1
14=
6.7
39 =
18.7
26 =
12.4
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
 Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7
Confidential
Confidential
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP85T00353R000100260001-7