text: negotiations have lasted a quarter of a century. We politicians have the duty to ask: why so long? Why haven’t the problems been resolved? Why can't chemical weapons match the success of other arms control negotiations? Are these talks dead on their feet or are they going somewhere? Those of us around this table must believe there is hope, and that it lies here in the Conference on Disarmament, the only forum for global arms control negotiations. We look to multilateral diplomacy to deliver the goods. The United Kingdom view can be stated simply. Anything less than world-wide agreement on chemical weapons would not address the whole problem. But it is not simply a question of negotiating more productively here. There are practical problems which require detailed investigation by member States. CD/PV.564 4 (Mr. Waldegrave, United Kingdom) Of course, I am aware of the enormous efforts made in the Conference on Disarmament to resolve the extremely difficult problems presented by chemical weapons. I do not underestimate the commitment and will to succeed of those involved here. One thing is very clear. We must not take the easy way out: we must not follow the example offered by the Biological Weapons Convention of an agreement without effective verification. If a declaratory agreement could meet our concerns, we could agree on a text today. But that would leave the underlying security concerns about chemical weapons unaffected and unresolved. So, in approaching these talks, we are seeking reassurance that all parties will abide by the terms of the convention. That reassurance must be clear and reliable. For this reason in our view verification is the top priority. An effective verification regime is crucial for the convention to work. And challenge inspection is the key to effective verification. There are 
analysis: The text discusses the negotiations on chemical weapons and the need for a verification regime to ensure the effectiveness of the convention. It highlights the importance of multilateral diplomacy and the need for a worldwide agreement to address the issue. The language used is formal and diplomatic, suggesting that the topic is of a high-level international nature.