Wow, this is quite a complex paragraph you've written. I think the level of grammar exhibited here might be beyond your current level of English proficiency. (That is not a criticism of you!) But I will attempt to rewrite the paragraph in an equivalent level of English, as a native speaker might write it: How do you define the term "passive defense", and what does it encompass? In fact, there are two ways to define the term. The traditional definition--such as the one used in executive legislation (Article 11, Paragraph 121 of the current 5-year scheme)--includes all measures undertaken to reduce vulnerability, as well as increase military response, to foreign threats. This definition implies not only preventative measures, but also the use of weapons to deter any potential threat; this is the definition currently approved and used by the government. The second definition--the new definition that we are proposing--is a purely "passive defense", in the literal sense. We would like to see a truly "passive" defense, without the need for offensive, but deterrent, weapons. I hope that Google Translate will help with that, but it's pretty complicated, and I'm afraid there will be some poor translations. I'm not even certain that I understood exactly what you were trying to say, because, again, it's a rather advanced level of English, and a somewhat technical topic But good luck!