text: (Mr, PatsavQVt USSR) effectiveness, and the importance of avoiding incentives to acquire chemical weapons, are taken into account. Moreover, this proposal stimulates States possessing chemical weapons to become original parties to the convention. Finally, with all due respect to those who have criticized this proposal, 1 would like to say that I do not in any way share their perception of attempts to impose some sort of Soviet-American diktat , or a wish on the part of the two countries to force their decisions upon other participants in the negotiations. The bilateral agreement clearly states that the two sides have agreed to introduce the proposal - and I stress, the proposal - at the Conference on Disarmament. And this, of course, is the legitimate right of every participant in the negotiations. For our part, we are satisfied with this joint approach and we will champion its advantages in our future work. At the same time, we consider it essential to step up efforts to solve the problem of the universality of the future convention. In this connection, I should like to return to the statement adopted by the NATO foreign ministers at Turnberry, and specifically the passage in which the members of the North Atlantic bloc state their intention to be among the first to sign the future convention. We welcome that declaration. Of course we also welcome the even more far-reaching statements made here by Sweden and Finland concerning their readiness to become original participants. We have great hopes that during the summer session of the Conference, the multilateral negotiations on chemical weapons will acquire new dynamism, which, unfortunately, they have sometimes been lacking in recent times. Strictly speaking, not much remains to be done, and it is important to lay a solid 
analysis: The text discusses the negotiations on chemical weapons, the importance of universality of a future convention, and the role of major powers in promoting the treaty. The language used is formal and diplomatic, indicating a high-level discussion on international relations. The text does not mention economic development, natural resources, agriculture, industry, transport, communication, health, education, employment, or humanitarian aid, which are more concrete and tangible topics. Instead, it focuses on international diplomacy, security, and disarmament.