18 Apr 05:56 PM

Closed question
Question about English (US)

could you please check my translation on mistakes?
The US nuclear non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) has served the world community well. Nevertheless, the Treaty is clearly in a state of near crisis. The NPT countries are trying to tighten the non-proliferation regime. The IAEA is seeking stricter inspections and new restrictions on the proliferation of nuclear technology... At the same time, a coalition of more than 60 countries led by the United States agreed to put measures to prevent egaln supply of nuclear materials, These are necessary and important steps. But they will not help in any way to solve the deeper problem - the crisis of the current system of non-proliferation of injuries. The question that haunts parties to the NPT, including those who are able to obtain nuclear weapons, is the following: does the Treaty commitment of all parties, primarily the United States, the principles of safety. This Treaty has always been internally contradictory. The initial deal - the commitment of the five officially recognized nuclear-weapon States to gradually disarm in exchange for the renunciation of nuclear weapons by other countries - proved illusory. And the prospect that the US and, as it was at that time, the Soviet Union, would begin nuclear disarmament has never been quite real. Double standards were later manifested in how the West reacted calmly to the nuclear activities of Israel, India and Pakistan.

Read more comments

English (US)
Similar questions