text: About plenary meetings: there are two many of them. At the beginning of the winter session, as a rule there is a great rush of speakers, which is an argument for keeping to the present practice for that period, say for two CD/PV.563 8 (Mr. Batsanov. USSR) weeks. During the rest of the time, except, perhaps, for the last two weeks of the summer session, there could be formal plenary meetings once a week. That would make it possible to hold more informal meetings. But here again, I think, we should not chase after figures. The Soviet delegation suggests that thought should be given to how to increase the yield from this informal "pre-negotiating" form of work which - if it is well organized - would make it possible to have a frank exchange of views on the positions, concerns and security factors lying at the basis of States' approaches. In our view, it would be helpful if the informal meetings on any given topic were held during specifically agreed periods of time as well. The work at them could be guided not by the regular President of the Conference, but by a specially designated co-ordinator. Finally, the main question: what should the Conference deal with? Should the agenda be changed? This is perhaps the most difficult question. On the one hand, especially taking into account the way we implement it in practice, the present agenda may seem obsolete. However, I would not be in a hurry to draw practical conclusions. The agenda is quite comprehensive. I am sure that many things, although not everything, can be done within the framework of the present agenda. Some of the items, for example, nuclear test ban and chemical weapons, are sufficiently concrete. Others, however, are extremely broad. Take, for example, nuclear disarmament. What is there to talk about 
analysis: The text discusses the organization and agenda of international meetings, specifically the frequency and format of plenary sessions, and the importance of informal "pre-negotiating" meetings. It also touches on the topic of what issues should be addressed by the conference. There is no mention of economic development, natural resources, agriculture, forestry, fishing, industry, transport, communication, health, education, employment, humanitarian aid, or culture. The focus is on the process and structure of international diplomacy, which suggests that the category should be related to international relations or global governance.