SOVIET ARMS PROCUREMENT WAS FLAT FOR 6 YEARS, TWO AGENCIES NOW AGREE

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP99-01448R000301210022-8
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 22, 2012
• Sequence Number: 22
• Publication Date: February 26, 1985
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/08/22 :CIA-RDP99-014488000301210022-8
ARTY-_~ APFE~R~D BALTIMORE SUN
~( P~~~ ~~~ 26 February 1985
~~e~ ~~ ~r~ur~~er~t ~~s f1a.~
~ ~~~ 6 s, t~? ~~~ies n~~
Y _ _ aye
i3y Vernon A. Guidry, Jr.
ashirrbtnn Bur-..au of The Sun
WASIfiu'VGTON -Soviet spend-
; ine to buy tanks shins planes and ''~
j other ir.:piements of war was virtu-
ally flat between 1977 and 1983. both
the Ce~u al Intelligence Agency and .
t!+e TJefer~e Inteili.eence P..~ercv now
agree, say U.S. government analysts.
But the Defense Intelligence
P~gencv is estimating that 1983 saw
a substantial increase in this pro- ;
cerement spending, while the CIA ;
says its figures so far indicate a
much more modest iump.
These disputes are usually car- ',
rigid out behind the shield of hi h se- '
curity c ass ication, but they have
become public because of a series of
disclosures h the CIA that seem to
undermine assertions a' tra-
tion p0 'cv-makers of a relentless
Soviet military buildup.
Last year, it was disclosed that
the CIA pad reduced its estimate of
over 'Soviet military spending in-
c_e~:mz procurement and other im-
Portant categories of scending such
as research and development. -
The agency said that it appeared
that its previous estimate of an in-
crease of 4 percent or 5 percent a
yeaz was incorrect The correct fig-
ure was closer to 2 percent a year, . ;
the agency said, suggesting that this
was still .substantial, since Soviet
spending was already high.
The new round of controvers
prey the figures was occasioned by '
release ast week_of the coney ion-
~~ al,testunony of Robert Gates de 'ut
[-a.rec r o - - -an c airman of the
inter-a enc National ~,enr?e,
-enci . .Gates said, among eth-
er thanes, -t viet military pig.
cerement had been stagnant tinre
" zs7s.
At a Pentagon briefing yesterday,
reporters were told that the Defense
Intelligence Agency, which is part of
the Defense Department, now agrees
with this assessment. The briefing
was held on condition that speakers
be described only as government
analysts. They were able to~.alk au-
thoritatively for both CIA and DIA
viewponts.
At the same time, the Pentagon
.released a statement by Mr. Gates in
which he said his testimony "is being
misread and misused."
It was not made clear to what
Mr. Gates referred. It was Pentagon
critic Senator William Pro~ire (D,
Wisc.) who released the testimony
with a statement of his own hat
said: "It is time for Washington to
take official notice that'Soviet mili-
tary procurement has been stagnant
':for the- past seven pears and to stop
acting like nothing has changed."
Pentagon spokesmen said they
could not recall incidents in which
'Defense Secretary Caspar W. Wein-
berger had discussed the essentially
flat procurement estimate in talking
.about the Soviet military buildup.
Anal is at the briefing contend-
ed at o and CIA ezyg~~
to see Soviet procurement eacend-
itures increase again and cautioned
that estimating Soviet spending was
a difficult task.
Nevertheless, when pressed for
figures, the analysts revealed that
the two agencies were at wide vari-
ance is their current estimates of
what happened in 1983, supposedly
the pivotal year for procurement
spending.
The CIA estimate is that the dol-
lar value of viet 'tare procure-
went egcenditures increased 1 cer-
cent or 2 cercent from 1982 to 1983,
while the DIA estimate placed the
increase at from 5 percent to 8 per-
cent. i
The analysts said disagreement ~'
stemmed largely from differing esti- '
mates of when new weapons would
be put into production. i.:oscow is
fielding or is about to field new in-
tercontinental missiles; submarines,
interceptor aircraft and other sys-
terns, including aground-based laser
system, according to the analysts.
DIA estimated the same increase .
for procurement from 1983 to 1984
but the CIA has made no estimate
or 1984, according to the analysts.
Moieover, DIA appareatIv has no
figure comparable to the CIA's esti-
ma e o cercen overa tru tary
spending from 1976 to 1983. The DIA
-figure for a same period is 5 per-
cent ayear, but the analysts insisted
that the different methods used in
arriving at the' figure made mean-
ingful comparison impossible.
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/08/22 :CIA-RDP99-014488000301210022-8