Abstract
Contracts and similar written agreements can be notorious for containing unnecessarily difficult language. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons is no exception to this tradition. Due to the importance of many of the written agreements that apply to any individual, it is important to be able to read written agreements. While it may seem like the average person may never be able to understand a binding agreement, almost any document could be rewritten in a way that presents information in a clear and easy-to-read fashion. This paper will present and discuss the introduction of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. It will then explore a rewrite of the text that is designed to be universally understandable. By showing the simple steps followed to interpret the treaty for laymen, this paper will show the potential for developing simpler understandable binding agreements.
Fantasy, Contracts, and The Bomb
I once had the most fantastic dream. I found myself at my computer downloading software, and suddenly I was confronted by the program’s “Terms of Use and Service.” In this glorious sleeping vision, instead of skipping the entire passage and clicking “I Agree” I found myself reading and understanding every word of the contract. Now, it may seem that this dream was made of pure fantasy, but most binding documents theoretically have hidden within them actual coherent sentences. To make my starry-eyed dream a reality, we can examine together a perfect example of a jumble of words that (hopefully) has an underlying contractual meaning: The NPT.
NPT is shorthand for the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. This agreement is a cornerstone document of nuclear security, seeking to lead to nuclear disarmament and to prevent new weapons from being developed. According to the UN the NPT is the world’s most ratified disarmament agreement [1]. If you’re reading this article, it is almost certain that your country has internally decided that it is in your best interest to agree to this treaty. In an indirect way, the NPT may be a set of “Terms of Service” that you have agreed to follow without reading.
Because these documents creep into so many parts of our lives, it is important for writers and readers to learn how to take nuanced ideas and interpret them in a way that is more readable. From past experiences with documentation we have been conditioned to feel that important texts will always confuse readers without a law degree. By translating the introduction of the NPT into layman’s English, however, we can prove that it is possible to present the ideas of a contract in a way that clearly answers the question, “What have I signed up for?”
“We the undersigned...”
The English text of the NPT’s introduction consists entirely of the following half-sentence:
The States concluding this Treaty, hereinafter referred to as the Parties to the Treaty,
Considering the devastation that would be visited upon all mankind by a nuclear war and the consequent need to make every effort to avert the danger of such a war and to take measures to safeguard the security of peoples,
Believing that the proliferation of nuclear weapons would seriously enhance the danger of nuclear war,
In conformity with resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly calling for the conclusion of an agreement on the prevention of wider dissemination of nuclear weapons,
Undertaking to co-operate in facilitating the application of International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards on peaceful nuclear activities,
Expressing their support for research, development and other efforts to further the application, within the framework of the International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards system, of the principle of safeguarding effectively the flow of source and special fissionable materials by use of instruments and other techniques at certain strategic points,
Affirming the principle that the benefits of peaceful applications of nuclear technology, including any technological by-products which may be derived by nuclear-weapon States from the development of nuclear explosive devices, should be available for peaceful purposes to all Parties to the Treaty, whether nuclear-weapon or non-nuclear-weapon States,
Convinced that, in furtherance of this principle, all Parties to the Treaty are entitled to participate in the fullest possible exchange of scientific information for, and to contribute alone or in co-operation with other States to, the further development of the applications of atomic energy for peaceful purposes,
Declaring their intention to achieve at the earliest possible date the cessation of the nuclear arms race and to undertake effective measures in the direction of nuclear disarmament,
Urging the co-operation of all States in the attainment of this objective,
Recalling the determination expressed by the Parties to the 1963 Treaty banning nuclear weapons tests in the atmosphere, in outer space and under water in its Preamble to seek to achieve the discontinuance of all test explosions of nuclear weapons for all time and to continue negotiations to this end,
Desiring to further the easing of international tension and the strengthening of trust between States in order to facilitate the cessation of the manufacture of nuclear weapons, the liquidation of all their existing stockpiles, and the elimination from national arsenals of nuclear weapons and the means of their delivery pursuant to a Treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control,
Recalling that, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, States must refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations, and that the establishment and maintenance of international peace and security are to be promoted with the least diversion for armaments of the world’s human and economic resources,
Have agreed as follows: [2]
It is possible that the language used in this treaty sounds ceremonial and impressive to the average reader. It is even more possible that average reader skipped most of the text. A utilitarian translation of the passage would read:
The states agreeing to this treaty will be called the Concluding States in the rest of this document.
Because nuclear weapons are dangerous but nuclear energy is helpful, the Concluding States commit to obey these articles to ensure nuclear security:
Though this version is easier to understand, it seems to lack the fanfare that one of history’s most influential documents deserves. More importantly, it voids the introduction’s secondary function as a piece of persuasive writing. Attempting to convey the original spirit and statements of the original document, an untangled NPT introduction might read:
The States in agreement with this Treaty, referred to in this document as the Concluding States, realize that a nuclear war would bring devastation to all mankind. Every effort to avert the danger of such a war must be made for the security of all peoples. They believe that as the manufacturing of nuclear weapons continues to grow, the danger of nuclear war continues to seriously increase. This Treaty shall conform with the United Nations General Assembly’s resolutions to create an agreement to prevent the wider spread of nuclear weapons.
The Concluding States support research, development, and other efforts to effectively enforce International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards on peaceful nuclear activities. This enforcement will be upheld by using instruments and other techniques to safeguard the flow of both source and special materials that are used for nuclear reaction.
The Concluding States affirm that nuclear technology can be adapted peacefully with many benefits. This technology includes by-products from the creation of nuclear explosive devices. All Concluding States hold the entitlement to contribute alone or in co-operation to developing peaceful applications of atomic energy, and additionally deserve access to the fullest exchange of this scientific information.
The Concluding States seek to end the nuclear arms race at the earliest possible date, and intend together to support measures that work toward nuclear disarmament.
The Concluding States remember and seek to further the goals of the Parties to the 1963 Treaty banning nuclear weapons tests in the atmosphere, in outer space, and underwater. The intention of that Treaty was to encourage negotiations toward ending all nuclear weapons testing.
The Concluding States desire to contribute internationally to easing tension and strengthening trust. It is only by building this trust that the disarmament and the end of production of nuclear weapons will be made a possibility.
The Concluding States recall that, according to the Charter of the United Nations, States must not threaten the ownership of each other’s territories nor the sovereignty of each other’s governments. They recall furthermore that it is the duty of States to establish and maintain international peace and security in a way that preserves as much of the world’s human and economic resources as possible.
With all the above statements considered and held true, the Concluding States have agreed as follows:
This version of the NPT’s introduction is 22% shorter than the original, even though it is 17 sentences longer. To achieve this counter-intuitive outcome, the treaty must be stripped down entirely to its essential parts and then built up again using its original technical goals with a new rhetorical style.
The Bones
The technical goals of the NPT’s introduction have already briefly appeared above. Primarily, the introduction seeks to show that all following information will be part of a treaty between the States that agree to it. Secondarily, the introduction is persuasive, stating the reasons that the drafting states use to justify the document. The introduction also contains tertiary goals such as sounding ceremonial and defining the term “States Party to the Treaty.” These goals contain no inherent quality that prevents them from being communicated efficiently and understandably. The confusion in the original document arises from the rhetorical style employed.
After diagramming every sentence of the NPT and closely examining every word’s individual function in the document, an alternative form of subordination revealed itself as the most likely candidate for the document’s construction. The treaty only makes legislative sentences. The rationale behind these agreements is not in itself legislation. It is as if the authors found it unprofessional to state outright the “personal” feelings of states. Therefore, these statements of feelings could only be subordinate to the legislation, smuggled in as gerundive phrases. Or, if the treaty’s structure is not a result of this grammatical conspiracy, it may be equally likely that the authors felt more important when using longer sentences.
Whether by conspiracy or a mistaken sense of importance, this rhetorical strategy falls flat. The reader is not fooled into thinking that the treaty is avoiding listing the signers’ opinions, and as impressive as a 490 word sentence may be, a record length gives no assistance to clarity. Our working interpretation then seeks to employ the opposite strategy, presenting the information with an honesty and humility that should result in a more understandable and more convincing document.
A Look Under the Hood
The first tactic I used to clarify the treaty was shortening the length of sentences. In a shorter sentence a complete idea is expressed more quickly. This prevents the reader from having to suspend an incomplete idea in their mind for extended periods of time. The original introduction contains enough information for far more than the 17 complete thoughts that the edited version contains, yet grammatically it only possibly contains one complete thought, and syntactically is not even one full sentence.
The second tactic I used was the elimination or transformation of many prepositional phrases. For example, the original treaty states:
In conformity with resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly calling for the conclusion of an agreement on the prevention of wider dissemination of nuclear weapons...
This piece of a sentence contains 8 prepositional phrases in 26 words. In contrast, the edit says:
This Treaty shall conform with the United Nations General Assembly’s resolutions to create an agreement to prevent the wider spread of nuclear weapons.
This selection is a whole sentence, and in 23 words it contains only 2 prepositional phrases. All the information from the original selection is conveyed in the edit, and as a bonus it is even made clear what subject is conforming in the scenario.
A third tactic for clarifying is simply using less words. By sticking to only necessary words and phrases the following passage can be dramatically reduced:
Affirming the principle that the benefits of peaceful applications of nuclear technology, including any technological by-products which may be derived by nuclear-weapon States from the development of nuclear explosive devices, should be available for peaceful purposes to all Parties to the Treaty, whether nuclear-weapon or non-nuclear-weapon States,
Convinced that, in furtherance of this principle, all Parties to the Treaty are entitled to participate in the fullest possible exchange of scientific information for, and to contribute alone or in co-operation with other States to, the further development of the applications of atomic energy for peaceful purposes,
This part of the treaty seeks clarify that taking a pro-disarmament stance does not constitute eliminating nuclear energy production or other peaceful nuclear technologies. In fact, it seeks to promote these technologies. These ideas are expressed in the revised passage below:
The Concluding States affirm that nuclear technology can be adapted peacefully with many benefits. This technology includes by-products from the creation of nuclear explosive devices. All Concluding States hold the entitlement to contribute alone or in co-operation to developing peaceful applications of atomic energy and additionally deserve access to the fullest exchange of this scientific information.
This revision is four lines shorter than the original passage and expresses three complete thoughts. Even “Parties to the Treaty” has been simplified to “Concluding States” (although whether the change of phrase affects the legality of the document is a question for a different kind of expert). Most importantly in the original document, the subject of the described actions had been stated over 100 words earlier. Now the subject is directly adjacent to the action described, requiring far less mental suspension for the reader.
Nonlethal Suspense
When writing an (honest and straightforward) agreement, inevitably some ideas must be suspended in the reader’s mind. The signer will want to remember what conditions the contract binds. They will need to remember the context of the agreement to make an informed decision. They should not, however, be forced to remember a subject committing an action 400 words later.
We may be on the verge of accepting that binding agreements will only be legible to trained lawyers, but it still not too late to reverse the trend. Even the most rambling treaty can hide ideas that actually make perfect sense. With the right tools the hidden meaning can be extracted. By keeping sentences at a manageable length, minimizing the use of prepositional phrases, and removing unnecessary words or phrases a document can go from dull and unreadable to clear and understandable, and those are only few of the many possible strategies.
Documents like the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons follow a tradition of long winded legislation and contracts whose lack of clarity seem almost criminal. Reading through these jumbled works of prepositional spaghetti may make them seem untouchable, but with the right tricks up your sleeve, it can be as easy as nuclear science.
References
1. "Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT)." United Nations Office of Disarmament Affairs. www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/nuclear/npt. Accessed 6 Mar. 2017.
2. "Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) - Text of the Treaty." United Nations Office of Disarmament Affairs. www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/nuclear/npt/text. Accessed 6 Mar. 2017.