neighbourhood. And all this because supposedly over the past two decades the USSR has been rapidly building up its armed forces, while the United States, allegedly, has been sitting cross-handed as its armed forces declined. True, the Soviet Union did strengthen its defence capability. Faced with a feverish United States effort to establish military bases near Soviet territory, to develop ever new types of nuclear and other weapons, the USSR was compelled to do so in order to eliminate the United States military superiority for which Washington is now pining so much. The military-strategic parity attained has deprived the United States of the possibility of blackmailing us with the nuclear threat. This parity is a reliable guarantee of peace, and we shall do everything to preserve it. As to the allegations that the United States has done nothing in the past 20 years, only naive people can believe that. For confirmation let us turn to some most important facts. It is known that a strong qualitative breakthrough was achieved in United States strategic forces precisely during that period. Suffice it to say that the United States installed multiple warheads on its ballistic missiles. And it did so despite our repeated calls to re­ nounce this move in order to avoid a new spiral of the race in missile weapons. If the President had taken the trouble of looking into the dossier on the talks, he would have seen for himself that it was really so. What happened as a result will be convincingly shown by the example that, after such re-equipment, each missile on a United States submarine acquired the capability of hitting 14 targets at a time. And every submarine carries 16 such missiles. Their total yield is equivalent to that of almost 500 nuclear bombs similar to the one dropped on Hiroshima. 
**Analysis**
The text appears to be a speech or statement from a high-ranking official or politician, likely from the Soviet Union or Russia. The language used is formal and diplomatic, and the topic is military and strategic relations between the USSR and the United States. The text does not mention economic development, natural resources, or environmental issues, and it is not focused on specific industries or sectors. Instead, it seems to be discussing the buildup of military forces and the need for strategic parity.

**Category**
International relations, Defense and military affairs