text: some participants are not prepared to look for reasonable ways out of the deadlock which, incidentally, they created themselves . One such deadlock, although not the only one, has been brought about and continues to exist because of the insistence by the United States on total verification, which goes far beyond the framework of a convention on chemical weapons . The Soviet Union is convinced, as Mikhail Gorbachev emphasized at his meeting with members of the French Parliament on 3 october, that agreement on reliable verification of a chemical weapon ban can certainly be achieved. We have placed on the negot.ia ting table our proposals for a system of control over the destruction of chemical weapon stockpiles , including the permament presence of international inspectors at specialized facilities, and for working out rigorous restrictive and verification measures to prevent the illegal manufacture of chemical weapons or their components by civilian enterprises. However , it should be noted specifically that the search for agreements on verification, as well as on other aspects of the problem, implies a willingness to take into account the legitimate interests of the other party and abandonment of discrim inatory approaches. There is ~s yet no reason to conclude that the United States is acting in this spirit. Moreover, it is our impression, and one which is NR/ve A/C.l/40/PV.S 28 (Mr. Petrovsky, USSR) shared by others, that the United States, by putting forward proposals that are clearly unacceptable, evidently intends to bring about a deadlock in the negotiations and then to embark upon the implementation of the United States Army's $10 billion chemical rearmament programme. The United States Administration's plans to begin mass production of binary chemical ~eapons, to l;>e deployed at what the United States regards as potential 
analysis: The text appears to be a diplomatic communication discussing a specific issue in international relations, namely the negotiation of a convention on chemical weapons. The language used is formal and technical, indicating a focus on policy and diplomacy rather than any of the other categories. The text also references specific proposals, programs, and initiatives, suggesting that it is concerned with international relations and politics rather than any of the other categories.