text: order to make progress on this subject in the Conference on Disarmament next year. Another issue on its agenda on which the Conference did no substantive work was that on the prevention of nuclear war, including all related matters. Like everybody else, the United Kingdom recognizes the vital importance of preventing war, including nuclear war. we would have welcomed discussion on this matter in the Conference on Disarmament, and we are ready to try again next year. Meanwhile, the First Committee can contribute towards that end. we are grateful for the report of the Secretary-General on the prevention of nuclear war. It is a good MLG/sm A/C.l/40/PV.ll 35 (Mr. Cromartie, United Kingdom) summary of the subject, and contains a valuable analysis of the common ground which does exist. While we are sceptical of the value and scope of unenforceable declarations of the sort advocated by some, we remain ready to discuss the subject and to consider what further practical and realistic ideas may emerge to reduce the danger of war, especially nuclear war. A'Ui/cw A/C.l/ 40/PV.ll 36 (Mr. Cromartie , United Kingdom) I have left to last one subject of great importance where there is a real prospect of a successful multilateral negotiation in.the Conference on Disarmament. Of the subjects on the agenda of the Conference by far the most substantive progress has been made on chemical weapons, that is to say on the negotiation of a convention on the complete prohibition of chemical weapons. We have celebrated this year the sixtieth anniversary of the Geneva Protocol of 1925 prohibiting the use of chemica l and biological weapons, which has been and remains of great value to mankind. We are all agreed on the need to butt.ress the Protocol by the conclusion of a convention on the complete prohibition of the possession, 
analysis: The text discusses international negotiations and agreements related to disarmament, specifically the Conference on Disarmament, and its agenda items such as preventing nuclear war and banning chemical weapons. The language used is formal and diplomatic, suggesting that the text is from a government or international organization. The focus is on international security and cooperation, rather than any specific economic, social, or cultural issue.