text: always firmly stood for the complete prohibition and thorough destruction of chemical weapons, so as to free mankind once and for all from the danger and threat posed by such weapons of mass destruction. It is well known that China is a non-chemical-weapon State that neither possesses nor produces chemical weapons. The Chinese people fell victim to such weapons in the past, and even today such weapons abandoned by foreign aggressors during the war are discovered from time to time on our territory. In their utmost abhorrence of chemical weapons and chemical warfare, the Chinese people are determined to contribute to the early realization of a world free of chemical weapons. We wish to reiterate that the objective of the CW convention is to ensure the unconditional, complete prohibition and thorough destruction of chemical weapons and their production facilities, and a total and lasting ban on the production and use of chemical weapons. We also propose that pending the conclusion and entry into force of the convention, all chemical-weapon States should unconditionally undertake not to use or produce chemical weapons, while all other States refrain from the development, production and acquisition of chemical weapons. It is gratifying to note that with the development in the international situation, some headway has been made in the field of disarmament. A series of important initiatives by the international community has generated good momentum for banning chemical weapons. The Faris Conference of January 1989 adopted a Final Declaration which reaffirmed the validity of the 1925 Geneva Protocol and urged the banning of the use of chemical weapons and acceleration of the ongoing negotiations on the CW convention. This was followed by the Canberra Government-Industry Conference against Chemical Weapons in September, which also provided a powerful political impetus for reaching the objective 
analysis: The text appears to be discussing international politics and disarmament, specifically the prohibition and destruction of chemical weapons. The language used is formal and diplomatic, suggesting a government or international organization as the author. The text references international conferences and agreements, indicating a focus on global cooperation and governance.