That is a fascinating question. It is true that some Soviet era cigarettes were long on the filter and short on the tobacco, but that was for the practical reason that gloves and mittens were thicker.
I purchased some Bulgarian cigarettes in an East Berlin department store, back during the Cold War. I can attest that they were truly horrid. Now, this may just be luck of the draw (bad choice of brand), or merely a matter of taste. But I can say the same about the Gauloises cigarettes I purchased in Paris.
Back to the question of the Soviets, their agricultural endeavors in all fields were hampered for nearly half of the twentieth century by their enforcement of official programs that were based on harebrained (non-scientific) theories. Lysenko, who was head of their Academy of Agricultural Sciences, refused to believe in genetics, and embarked on catastrophic methods of crop development. Soviet agricultural leadership didn't see the scientific light until the mid 1960s. Whether or not this impacted their tobacco, I can't say.
Another issue is the blending use of Nicotiana rustica in Soviet cigarettes. The US cigarette industry simply doesn't use it, and never has, so far as I know.
But in most of the places that I've traveled in the world, the local people happily trade their domestic cigarettes for American brands. I attribute this not to quality, but to trends in smoking preferences. In Mexico, for example, prominently carrying a pack of Benson & Hedges cigarettes in one's shirt pocket seemed to be regarded as a symbol of enhanced status.
By contrast, on college campuses in the US during the 1970s, prominently carrying a pack of Dunhill or Balkan Sobranie cigarettes in one's shirt pocket was indeed a symbol of sophistication.
Bob