Sizing Up the Enemy

By WALTER ISAACSON

The U.S. details the "lengthening shadow" of Soviet power

The Soviet threat. It is the driving force behind the Administration's major rearmament program and NATO's embattled effort to base nuclear missiles in Western Europe. So, as the 1984 defense budget heads toward a showdown in Congress and Deployment Day for Europe's new missiles approaches, the Pentagon last week once again emphasized in stark terms the menacing force the West must counter. "The facts are clear," warns a new Defense Department document. "The lengthening shadow of Soviet military power cannot be wished away or ignored."

The report, which was presented at a press conference by Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, contains a mixture of good news and bad. "I think we have begun to catch up," said Weinberger. One source of comfort: the production rate of many major Soviet weapons has tapered off slightly, at least for now. But the study also shows that in every category of armaments, from missiles to submarines to aircraft, the Soviets are continuing their drive for new offensive systems. "They seem to aim at world domination," said Weinberger. "We need sufficient and credible military capabilities to counter the threats arrayed against us."

Agreeing with the implications of the Pentagon report, President Reagan stressed Moscow's relentless development of greater offensive capabilities. "In little over a year, they have begun testing new models in almost every class of nuclear weapons," he said in a statement accompanying the study. "They are dramatically expanding their navy and air force, are training and equipping their ground forces for pre-emptive attack, and are using their military power to extend their influence and enforce their will in every corner of the globe."

The Pentagon's pamphlet, titled Soviet Military Power, was prepared by the Defense Intelligence Agency. It revises and brings up to date a similar study released in September 1981. That initial survey grew out of a secret "threat assessment" presented to NATO defense ministers. So startling were its findings that White House advisers and allied leaders prevailed on the Defense Department to declassify much of its contents in order to dampen disarmament sentiment in Western Europe and the U.S. The new edition focuses on Soviet strides since then. Among them:

>The Soviets have begun flight-testing two new models of ICBMs while improving the accuracy and hardening the silos of existing ones. "The Soviets have deployed more highly accurate MX-like ICBM warheads in each of the past three years than are contained in our entire MX program," said Weinberger. "They possess the ability to destroy a large percentage of our own Minuteman ICBMs in their silos, while still providing a substantial, and largely invulnerable, reserve."

>The first Soviet Typhoon-class nuclear submarine has completed its sea trials and is now in the Northern Fleet. Each of its 20 ballistic missiles carries from six to nine nuclear warheads with a range of 5,000 miles. "It can fire from the security of Soviet home waters and hit targets in North America, Europe and Asia," said Weinberger. Construction of a second Typhoon has just been completed.

>While continuing to produce 30 Backfire*bombers a year, which if equipped with in-flight refueling could be used in a nuclear strike against the U.S., Moscow has begun to develop a new strategic jet dubbed the Blackjack to complement its older Tu-95 Bear long-range bombers.

>Even as negotiations are under way in Geneva to limit intermediate-range nuclear missiles, which Reagan has suggested eliminating entirely as part of his zero-option proposal, the Soviets have continued to build up their arsenal of intermediate-range SS-20s. Since 1981 the number of SS-20 launchers has risen from 250 to 351. "More than two-thirds are presently located within range of NATO," the Pentagon report states.

> In 1981 the Soviets had two Kiev-class diesel-powered aircraft carriers. Now a third Kiev is at sea, and a fourth has just been built. In addition, the Soviets will soon begin work on their first large nuclear-powered carrier.

>In 1980 the Soviets developed the T-80 tank, which is a modified T-72 with additional side armor. Since then, 1,900 of these tanks have rolled off Soviet assembly lines.

One striking aspect of the report is how closely the Soviet developments parallel the weapons strategy pursued by the West. One of the two new ICBMs being tested by Moscow, for example, is similar in size and range to the proposed MX; the other is mobile, similar in concept to what some analysts have proposed for the U.S. The Soviets are also trying to counter U.S. naval superiority with a nuclear carrier resembling the Nimitz and missile-carrying nuclear submarines comparable to the Tridents. The Blackjack bomber is intended to fill the role proposed for America's B-1B. Two new fighter jets being developed by the Soviets, the MiG-29 Fulcrum and Su-27 Flanker, are to contain high-tech radar and weapons-guidance avionics like those in U.S. F-14s and F-15s.

The buildup is costing the Soviet Union about 15% of its G.N.P, according to the report, up from about 13% reported 1 1/2 years ago. The cumulative dollar equivalent for the decade, says the Pentagon, is about 80% higher than U.S. defense spending, which constitutes 6% of G.N.P. Although a fortnight ago the CIA lowered its estimate of the annual growth in Soviet military spending from about 3% a year to 2%, a substantial change and one that the Pentagon does not agree with, both agencies do agree that the slight dip in the rate of weapons production reflected in last week's report is only temporary. Explains Weinberger: "They have completed various series of weaponry and are switching over to a new series. They never stop; they have not stopped for 21 years. Whatever the precise growth rate is, the report amply documents the disparity in the number of weapons produced by the superpowers in the past decade.

For all its military might, Moscow has become badly mired in its attempt to subdue rebel forces in Afghanistan. The Pentagon study estimates that the Soviets now have 105,000 troops there, up 30,000 since the invasion three years ago. It also charges that they have violated international treaties by using chemical weapons and "scorched-earth tactics." The Soviets have even deployed their brand-new Su-25 Frogfoot attack plane, designed to provide close air support in battles. Nevertheless, they have been unable to control the Afghan countryside. Says the study: "After more than three years, the Soviets find themselves embroiled in a counterinsurgency campaign that cannot be won with current force levels."

Weinberger used his briefing to stress the need for passing the Administration's 1984 defense budget intact. "Without the MX missile, the Trident submarine and the B-1 bomber, we will be accepting permanent nuclear inferiority," he said. Weinberger's campaign to win congressional approval for his spending plans will be long and difficult. At a meeting earlier in the week, Republican leaders of the Senate Budget Committee urged Weinberger to accept significant cuts. Chairman Pete Domenici of New Mexico has indicated that the proposed increase in spending of 10% after inflation may have to be sliced in half. But the Administration has remained firm, and no formula for a compromise has emerged in the Senate. In the face of this impasse, Domenici postponed further deliberations for a week.

The glossy 107-page Soviet Military Power, which is filled with photographs and artistic renderings of the latest Kremlin hardware, met with mixed reviews. The Soviet news agency TASS, which called the 1981 report "a barrage of irresponsible verbiage," predictably dismissed it as "the second edition of a lie." Some Administration critics on Capitol Hill, including Democratic Senators Edward Kennedy and Gary Hart, accused the Pentagon of "scaremongering" to defend its budget. But the public release of the comprehensive survey of Moscow's military might is a compelling reminder of the very real threat facing the West. It sets a sober context for the continuing debates over U.S. defense spending and NATO strategy. --By Walter Isaacson. Reported by Bruce W. Nelan/Washington

-Nicknames for Soviet planes are assigned by NATO officials. Bombers are dubbed with words beginning with B, such as Blackjack and Backfire, and fighters are labeled with an F, sometimes bizarrely, as in Foxbat and Frogfoot. The MiG and Su designations refer to two major Soviet design bureaus and honor the late Engineers Ar-tem Mikoyan, Mikhail Gurevich and Pavel Sukhoi.

With reporting by Bruce W. Nelan/Washington This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.