Documents / FOIA release

Warsaw Pact Forces opposite NATO, NIE 11-14-79, Volume II, the Estimate, CIA/NFAC, 31 January 1979

Central Intelligence Agency · 201 pages · text from the file's own layer

This is Volume II of National Intelligence Estimate 11-14-79, Warsaw Pact Forces Opposite NATO, issued by the Director of Central Intelligence and dated January 1979. The National Foreign Intelligence Board concurred with it. It was the first comprehensive estimate of Pact forces facing NATO since 1971. It covers Pact doctrine, the ground, air, naval, nuclear and chemical forces, command and control, and campaign plans for war in Europe. It judges that Central Europe would be the decisive arena, and it lists Pact weaknesses in pilot training and antisubmarine warfare. The document contains no UFO material.

  • p. 11 …Forces in the Moscow, volga, Ural, and Turkestan Military Districts could be used against NATO or…
  • p. 27 …initiate such use, although the possibility cannot be entirely excluded. DIA, NSA, Army, Navy, and Air…
  • p. 28 …DIA and Navy estimate that six to 10 reserve submarines could be brought to operational status…
  • p. 29 …CIA, State, NSA, and Navy estimate that the performance characteristics, deployment patterns, training programs, and exercise…
  • p. 30 …DIA, NSA, Army, Navy, and Air Force hold that the Soviets might choose to attack with…
  • p. 31 …Likelihood of Soviet Use of Nuclear Weapons at Sea Before Their Use on Land. Navy judges…
  • p. 56 Aviation (VTA) were used simultaneously, only one increasing amount of complex equiprnent entering the fully equipped…
  • p. 70 …but Aeroflot's 160 AN-12s could be used to lift heavy During peacetime, these Cubs…
  • p. 79 designed primarily for use against large-area targets, and speeds and maximum ranges of from 80…
  • p. 82 …The Pact navies must seek out Bear D aircraft. The Kiev can also receive targeting Western…
  • p. 84 …The Pact countries can concentrate ASW forces and use Pact navies maintain the bulk of their…
  • p. 85 …NATO placed on resources by the Soviet Navy's other mis- decision not to deploy carrier…
  • p. 87 …Thus the Pact would German Navies are capable of transporting less than probably commit few bombers…
  • p. 88 …As of 1975, however, weapons are also carried by many of the Soviet Navy's only…
  • p. 90 …that the expanded use of Frontal Aviation is regarded as only a partial solution to the…
  • p. 92 …submarines would be likely to be used to strike targets in NATO Europe, and the 150…
  • p. 96 …long-range bomber with the capability to strike US From Liepaja, G-II class submarines fitted…
  • p. 100 …the Directorof Naval Intelligence, Department of the Navy. The longer range and radius values in the…
  • p. 113 …Aboard ship the Soviets currently use a scheduled inspection 249. The Soviet Navy has the capability…
  • p. 114 …In addition, the Navy has the option of using merchant communications circuits for command and control…
  • p. 115 …In addition, the Soviet Navy could station an there, railroads and poor-quality highways extend to…
  • p. 122 …Some common computer programs are being used for logistics and battle management sup- 13. In wartime…
  • p. 145 Top Table IV-4 Warsaw Pact General Purpose Naval Forces Estimated To Be Available for Use…
  • p. 146 …German some extent by a shuttle using conventional landing Navies, plus mobilized merchant ships. Assault forces…
  • p. 147 …If the amphibious assaults sary to use far larger forces to escort convoys than were canceled…
  • p. 148 …Eastern Europe and the USSR by the US 6th sweeping NATO's mines or of successfully…
  • p. 152 …follow with strikes using air-to-surface missiles (ASMs),- The Bulgarian and Romanian Navies. Does not…
  • p. 154 …Many have air defense missiles which can be used in an antiship 143. Some believe " that…
  • p. 156 …Soviet Northern Fleet would be used to available LRA and Navy bombers. But we do not…
  • p. 158 …forces were optimized for maximum D-day impact, however, the Soviet Navy would give NATO early…
  • p. 159 …They probably Missile Cruisers 6 would attempt to use these submarines to intercept Cruisers ... 1 Missile…
  • p. 164 …mansk area can be covered by the long-range cruise missiles of the Soviet Navy's…
  • p. 165 …and conventionally armed area air defense against US and UK attacking aircraft missiles, thereby reducing the…
  • p. 168 …the Soviets would use aircraft mainly in battlefield strikes in close proximity to Pact forces, presumably…
  • p. 176 …This aircraft, which is optimized for short-haul Soviet Navy will produce a force with improved…
  • p. 177 …titanium hulls are used, the operational depth limit could reach about 600 meters. According to one…
  • p. 179 …Soviet Navy inventory of Polnoeny-class medium landing ships may also be planning to use the…
  • p. 180 …The Soviet Navy needs a long-range SAM mid-1980s. for defense beyond 20 nm, as…
  • p. 186 …Nonetheless, the would view the presence of US carriers operating in Soviets clearly regard the US…
  • p. 187 …The Soviet Navy maintains a small force in the to Middle Eastern oil were to become…
  • p. 188 …Cuban military contribution in support of Navy also uses port facilities in Benin and Angola but…
  • p. 200 …T s copy is for the iormation and use of the recipient and of persons under…
oT~rret_ .
Tsushima, Tsugaru, and La Perouse Straits to provide this view believe that the Soviets would consider it
fleet commanders with surveillance of the major necessary to deploy attack submarines and conduct air
passages into the Sea of Japan. reconnaissance within the western Pacific out to 1,000
to 1,500 nm from the USSR to maintain their readiness
13. The possibility of becoming embroiled in a two- to attack major US naval surface forces, especially
front war against the United States, Japan, and China carriers. The holders of this view believe that Soviet
in the Far Fast while fighting NATO in Europe would attacks at the onset of hostilities against any carriers
weigh heavily in Moscow's decision whether to initiate operating in this area are likely because the Soviets
combat operations in the Pacific. Nonetheless, the would view the presence of US carriers operating in
Soviets clearly regard the US Pacific Fleet as a proximity to areas from which they can launch attacks
dangerous adversary to be kept outside of striking against the USSR as a military threat of sufficient
distance of the USSR. Soviet sea control capabilities gravity to require an early Soviet counteraction. The
against US carrier and amphibious task groups are holders of this view, furthermore, believe that the
considerable in the area within about 1,000 to 1,500 Soviets would not consider such actions against US
nautical miles of the USSR. US naval forces based out forces in the Pacific, by themselves, as directly causing
of Japan ordinarily are located in areas where Soviet wider hostilities with China or Japan.
sea control operations would be likely. If military
considerations alone pertained, the Soviets almost cer- 16. All agree that once hostilities began in the east a
tainly would strike US forces within 1,000 to 1,500 nm main task of the Pacific Fleet would be the establish-
of the USSR. ment of sea and air control in the waters adjacent to
the Soviet Union-the Sea of Japan, the Sea of
14. There is disagreement within the Intelligence Okhotsk, and the Pacific off Petropavlovsk-and
Community, however, regarding the extent to which limited sea denial tasks against carrier and amphibious
larger, strategic considerations would influence initial task groups in the approaches. Operations outside
Soviet naval actions in the Pacific during a war in those waters would depend in large part on US
Europe. According to one view,' the possibility of strategy, and on whether the USSR was simultaneously
avoiding general two-front conflict would be para- at war with China or involved with supporting the
mount. Moscow would seek to avoid conflict in the Far North Koreans in a war on the Korean Peninsula.
East because the prospects for early victory are far
from certain, but the risks of involving massive 17. The Soviets would be concerned about any US
amounts of men and equipment are great. Until it combat aircraft based at airfields in Japan (including
believed conflict were unavoidable, such as if a US Okinawa). Aircraft from these bases would pose a
carrier task force entered the Sea of Japan or ap- major threat to the Soviet fleet operating in the Sea of
proached to within its striking range of the USSR, Japan and to naval air reconnaissance and ASW
Moscow probably would direct its forces to assume a missions. The Soviets undoubtedly would bring strong
posture of preparedness for conflict which would fall pressure on Japan to deny the United States the use of
short of provoking conflict. Nonetheless, it would be these bases during a war and undoubtedly there would
difficult, in the context of a war with NATO, for the be strong Japanese domestic pressures as well. If these
Soviets to control events in the Far East, and it seems pressures were successful, the Soviets would probably
likely that they would be unable to avoid hostilities take no military action against the bases. If it appeared
there. that they would be used to mount an attack on the
USSR or its military forces, the Soviets would almost
15. According to an alternative view,- the Soviets certainly strike them.
would not seek to avoid a conflict with the United
States in the Pacific to such an extent that they would 18. The Soviets do not have the capability to mount
refrain from attacking any US naval forces entering large-scale ground force attacks in the Aleutians and
the Sea of Japan, the Sea of Okhotsk, or the ap- the Alaskan mainland. US surveillance, missile track-
proaches to Petropavlovsk. Additionally, the holders of ing, and air and naval facilities located in Alaska
would . be attractive targets for airstrikes during a
conflict in the Pacific. In deciding whether to attackThe holder of this view is the Central Intelligence Agency. these targets, however, the Soviets would have to
The holders of this view are the Director, Bureau of Intelli-
gence and Research, Department of State; the Director, Defense weigh the risks attending any attacks on US soil, and in
Intelligence Agency; the Director, National Security Agency; and any event such targets probably would not receive
the Director of Naval intelligence, Department of the Navy. high priority
A-3
lop

Not linked to a story yet.

About this file

FOIA release, from the cia-readingroom collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is under it. 201 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.