These are some sentences taken from the article I came across on www.inosmi.ru. I did the following:
1. I read the Russian sentence and then tried to translate it into English.
2. Then I compared my translation to the original sentence in English and pasted the original sentence (they are in square brackets) directly below my variant of translation.
It’s hard work but I find it helpful in polishing up my English.
These are the links to both Russian and original articles:
Earlier this month the president Barack Obama visited Moscow and reached a provisional agreement to reduce the number of nuclear and conventional weapons by both sides.
[Earlier this month, President Barack Obama visited Moscow and signed a preliminary agreement aimed at getting both countries to reduce their nuclear and conventional weapons systems.]
But the Russians, meanwhile, are playing a tricky game.
[But the Russians are playing a clever game.]
Their reduction proposal will not have impact to their defense in anyway.
[The "cuts" they propose wouldn't actually affect their defenses at all.]
Obama promised that USA would reduce the number of their strategic carriers, which are capable of getting both nuclear and conventional charges, up to 500-1100 (according to the current deal, USA can have 1600 carriers).
[Obama has promised that the U.S. will reduce its number of strategic force launchers -- the systems that deliver both nuclear and conventional weapons -- to between 500 and 1,100 (the United States is permitted 1,600 launchers under a current treaty).]
Moscow has also promised the same but it means a little since the number of Russian rockets will be diminishing without even any treaty.
[Moscow matched that commitment, but that's not saying much, since the number of Russian weapons is going to plummet with or without a treaty.]
By 2017-2018 Russia most likely will have less than half of its 680 working launchers, which it currently has, - said Keith Payne – Russia, which GDP is even lower than that of California, is facing the dilemma: how to keep up with the USA taking into account its deteriorating strategic launchers.
["By 2017-2018 Russia will likely have fewer than half of the approximately 680 operational launchers it has today," arms control expert Keith Payne recently testified before Congress. "With a gross domestic product less than that of California, Russia is confronting the dilemma of how to maintain parity with the U.S. while retiring its many aged strategic forces."]
Obviously, the pawns to sacrifice – weapons that do not even exist or not operational – is a good way in exchange to America’s reduction of essential weapons.
[One way, of course, is to sacrifice some pawns -- the non-existent or inoperable weapons -- to take out vital American weapons.]
In short, the Russians have agreed to cut their launchers which they will have to dismantle anyway.
[In short, the Russians agreed to "cut" weapons they were going to have to retire anyway.]
The Russians do not conceal the fact about the state of their arsenals.
[The Russians haven't made their declining stockpiles much of a secret.]
According to Payne, the commander of Russian missile army Nicolay Sokolovcev said in an interview to Moscow news agency Interfax that under the agreement made by Russian leaders, no one missile that had not reached use-by date would not be dismantled.
[Payne notes that Nikolay Solovtsov, the man in charge of Russian missiles, recently told Moscow Interfax-AVN Online that "not a single Russian launcher" with "remaining service life" would be withdrawn under the agreement reached with Russian leaders.]