Примеры использования Existing arsenals на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
Existing arsenals of nuclear weapons alone are more than sufficient to annihilate the entire population of the world.
At the same time, we cannot disregard the importance of reducing and dismantling existing arsenals of all such weapons.
In conclusion, let me point out that the existing arsenals of weapons of mass destruction pose a serious threat to international peace and security.
Newspapers and specialized publications widely report figures on the existing arsenals, including nuclear arsenals. .
The huge existing arsenals of conventional weapons and the danger they constitute for mankind put these weapons on a par with weapons of mass destruction and require the same close attention.
Люди также переводят
Steps should be taken to re-examine andfurther reduce existing arsenals of strategic and sub-strategic nuclear weapons.
Some nuclear-weapon States had reported disarmament measures that they had taken, butthey should also disclose more about their existing arsenals.
Other worrisome trends, such as efforts to modernize existing arsenals and to create new types of nuclear weapons.
I turn now to a number of the substantive measures that the Commission recommends to reduce the risk of the proliferation of nuclear weapons and the dangers of existing arsenals.
Nuclear-weapon States bear the responsibility to reduce existing arsenals, and some progress has been made in this respect.
We fully recognize the risks of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, yetwe cannot disregard the importance of reducing and dismantling existing arsenals of all such weapons.
Substantive progress in nuclear disarmament is even more crucial now after the events of 11 September, when the existing arsenals of nuclear weapons could fall into the hands of terrorists and cause untold damage and suffering.
Fully agrees with the assessment that the application of new technologies for a qualitative improvement of weapons systems was seen as detracting from the efforts to reduce and eliminate the existing arsenals; 3/.
Since a legally binding international instrument had never been ratified, existing arsenals continued to pose a threat to mankind.
Accordingly, we urge the nuclear-weapons States to accept their responsibility in halting the development and manufacture of nuclear weapons andnuclear material and in dismantling existing arsenals.
Nevertheless, we expect further progress towards deeper cuts,taking note of the fact that the number of nuclear warheads in existing arsenals is roughly the same as when the NPT entered into force in 1970.
Once existing arsenals are eliminated, States parties need to ensure that the Convention continues to remain an effective tool against proliferation, having due regard also to new scientific and technological developments.
FMCT would also be an instrument of nuclear disarmament andarms limitation since it would make it impossible to go beyond existing arsenals of warheads or stocks of weapons-grade fissile material.
First, there was the concern that modern technology should assist rather than hinder the positive trends initiated by the end of the cold war andthat application of new technologies to the qualitative improvement of weapon systems detracted from efforts to reduce and eliminate existing arsenals.
It is not the direct purpose of the“cut-off”, any more than it is that of the CTBT, a treaty which France and Great Britain were the firstnuclear-weapon States to ratify, on 6 April, to reduce existing arsenals; the“cut-off”, the CTBT and global nuclear reductions are three distinct but complementary objectives.
But in accordance with the underlying bargain of the Treaty,non-nuclear States had refrained from the development of nuclear weapons in return for binding commitments by the nuclear States to eliminate their existing arsenals.
The manifestation of a resolute global determination to eliminate all existing arsenals of weapons of mass destruction within an agreed time-frame would provide a clear objective and lend credence and add dynamism to the international efforts against the production and proliferation of these deadly weapons.
Unfortunately, there had been no substantial developments since 2005 in the field of nuclear disarmament, andnuclear-weapon States were currently pursuing programmes to develop or replace their existing arsenals and delivery systems.
Further to those commitments and Ecuador's decision in that respect,253,273 anti-personnel mines from our existing arsenals and around some 4,621 anti-personnel mines and 65 anti-tank mines have been destroyed. It is not an easy undertaking, as is well known, and so we require from the international community an extension and greater cooperation if we are to eliminate this devastating weapon from our territory once and for all.
Repeated mention has been made of the fact that, after a lengthy deadlock, the Conference on Disarmament adopted its programme of work, which includes the beginning of negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty that is fully verifiable and which, in Mexico's opinion,should also cover existing arsenals.
The nuclear Powers, on the other hand, had not fully honoured their commitments to end all nuclear testing, to pursue good-faith disarmament negotiations to halt the nuclear arms race, to stop production of nuclear weapons,to reduce existing arsenals, to dismantle nuclear warheads and their delivery systems and, lastly, to conclude a treaty on general and complete disarmament.
The Colombo Declaration of the recently concluded tenth summit of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation(SAARC) urged the Conference on Disarmament to“commence negotiations on a comprehensive, universal and non-discriminatory instrument prohibiting the use orthreat of use of nuclear weapons as well as eliminating such weapons in existing arsenals.”.
It was the responsibility of the international community to enable other regions to make better use of their peace dividend by seeking appropriate solutions to the disarmament problem in the broadercontext of peace and international security and through concerted action to eliminate existing arsenals and the threat of the use of more sophisticated weapon systems.
The reactivation of concrete proposals concerning nuclear disarmament, PAROS or negative security assurances would be extremely useful at this time, along with the impetus achieved in possible negotiations on an agreement on the prohibition of the production of fissile material for the manufacture of nuclear weapons or other explosive devices,during which account must be taken of the concerns of States in relation to verification and existing arsenals.
International public opinion, organized civil society and the majority of the Member States of the United Nations have undertaken and taken a variety of initiatives with a view to the total elimination of nuclear weapons, in what is starting to resemble a general mobilization for the delegitimization of such weapons, the demonstration of the anachronistic nature of the doctrines which underpin them andthe awakening of a new consciousness that existing arsenals continue to represent a threat to the very survival of mankind.