397. The international com'mity, through the united. Nations, has on n'any occasionsexpressed. its opinion that the achievement of internationar iecuritv requlres theultinate elinination of al-l nuclear r.reapons. Even if the risk of nuclear war verevery sma1l, it ruould be a dangerous gambre with internati.onal security to rry rolive in a worLd furJ- of nuclear weapons for a ronger period of time. As, moreoverthere is no €luarantee that tlre risk of r^rar can be avoided., the need for nucleardisarma-ment is inperative. rn this connexion, it is important to recalr that theGeneral Asser0bl_y, at its tenth special session, calfed upon a-ll States" inparticular the nuclear-veapon States, to consider u" =oon as possibte variousproposals d.esigned to secure the avoidance of the use of nuclear \"reapons, theprevention of nuclear war and related objectives, where possible throughinternational agreements, and thereby ensure that the survivaf of manhind is notendangered. The particular responsibility of the nuclear-rzeapon States has alsobeen recognized in article vr of the Treaty on the Non- prori ferat ion of llucleari'Ieapons (ceneral Assembr-y resolution 23?3 (rzrr) annex) ,rricrr staies, "Each of the Parties to the Treaty und.ertakes to pursue negotiatronsin good faith on effective neasures relating to cessation of the nucleararns race at an early date ancl to nuclear rlisarmarnent, and on a treatvon general and compl-ete rlisarmament und.er strict and. effective internationalcontrol. " 398' rf there is no progress towards nuclear d.i sarmalaent the nuclea,l' a.rms racewiLl- go on. Some States may then clain it justifiable to try to acquire anucLear capability to d.eter massive attacks against their civilian populations aslre]-l as to defend th€mselves in a conventional nilitary conflict. 399. It is consid.ered lihefy by many that the system of securjty,,,hich is inherentin the strategic relationship bertveen the super powers based as it is on anuclear "balance of terror'', has discouraged them for over three decades frominitiating railitary conflict directly l'/ith each other. rt is al-so assumed that ithas prevented regional conflicts in which either night be involved to escalate toglobar nuclear conflict. This has not, hor'rever, prevented either super-pover fromnaJor involvement in large- scale conventional military conflicts on a subgloballeve1. It is even suggested that ccnfidence in the efficacy of the mutual-strategic deterrence at the global levet may have had the effect of diminishinginhibitions about super-Por,rer involvement in certain regional conflicts.
**Analysis**
The text appears to be discussing the importance of international cooperation and disarmament in the context of nuclear weapons. It highlights the need for the ultimate elimination of nuclear weapons and the risks associated with their proliferation. The text also touches on the strategic relationship between superpowers and its impact on international security. Given the focus on international relations, security, and disarmament, it seems likely that the text falls under the categories related to international cooperation and conflict resolution.

**Category**
International trade, Humanitarian aid and relief, Science and technology