Heads of State or Government therefore find it unaccepEable EhaE the security of all St,ates and the very survival of nankind should be held hostage to the security int.erests of a handful of nuclear-weapon StaEes. Measures for the prevention of nuclear war and of nuclear disarnament must take into account the security interests of nuelear-weapon and non-nuclear-weapon States alike and ensure that Ehe survival of rnankind is nol endangered. They rejected all theories and concepts pertaining to the possession of nuclear weapons and their use under any circumstances" (A/35/L32'9/L5675 and Corr.l and 2, annex, sect,. I' para. 28). 3. The report of the Conference on Disarmament on its 1984 sessLon lA/39/27) submiEted to the General Assenbly at its thirty-nint,h session, brings out clearly tbe reasons why the sole mult,ilateral negotiating body in the disarmament field was unable to begin consideration of the item on t.he prevention of nuclear war. In the circumstances, Ehe Argentine Government welcomed General Assembly resoluEion 39/L48 P of 17 December 1984, which, recognizing the insufficiency of existing measuresr reguested the preparation of a report. on possible steps to expedit.e effective action for the prevention of nuclear !{ar. 4. It is our hope that the report will provide an overview of Lhe guestion of the prevention of nuclear war and that it witl conEain the views you have reached on an issue of such overriding importance and universal concern.A/40/ 498 Engl ish Page 27
**Analysis**
The text discusses the prevention of nuclear war and disarmament, highlighting the security concerns of both nuclear-weapon and non-nuclear-weapon states. It seems to focus on the international relations and diplomacy aspects of this issue, rather than any specific economic, environmental, or scientific aspects.

**Category**
International relations, Science and technology