text: community successfully abolishing an abhorrent class of weapons as in the successful example it would create of the universal approach which should characterize other deliberations of the Conference. We still believe, as we suggested earlier, that the Conference on Disarmament should take advantage of the political momentum by setting itself a deadline to conclude its negotiations on a chemical weapons convention. The fourth NPT review conference is scheduled to be held later this year. Though India has not subscribed to the NPT on account of its discriminatory character and is not a State party to it, it is useful to recall that India, along with seven other countries, sponsored one of the first resolutions on this subject in the General Assembly in 1965. The resolution, which identified a set of principles to guide the negotiations on an eventual treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, was adopted unopposed. One of the principles was that the treaty should be void of any loopholes which might permit proliferation by nuclear or non-nuclear Powers, and that the treaty should embody an acceptable balance of mutual responsibilities and obligations between nuclear and non-nuclear Powers. Unfortunately, the 1968 NPT failed to reflect either of these principles, and the apprehensions of vertical and spatial proliferation have been amply borne out. Even with the reductions under negotiation in the START talks, there will exist almost double the number of nuclear warheads that existed in 1968. It is relevant to recall that the NPT was not to be an end in itself but was meant to lead to the cessation of the nuclear arms race. It is in this spirit that India's action plan called for negotiations for a new treaty that would "give legal effect to the binding commitment of nuclear-weapon States to 
analysis: The text appears to be discussing international politics and disarmament, specifically the Conference on Disarmament and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). It mentions the abolition of weapons, the need for a deadline to conclude negotiations, and the principle of mutual responsibilities and obligations between nuclear and non-nuclear powers. This suggests that the text is related to international relations and diplomacy, rather than any of the other categories.