thedele delegati "8.The warfare anyothe arenot "9.Se provided delegati instrume whocons withth theopi instrum madeth couldb andrat "10.Del herbicid understa purpose "11.Del asamet applicabprovisions deaUng withthetwoelements ascontained intheAnnexof document CD/CW/WP.107, whichintheviewoftheChairman constitutes abasis forconsensus tobereachedafterfurther consultations. 114.Inthesecondpartofthesession, theOpen-ended Consultations considered thetworemaining elements, i.e.thequestion oftheprohibition oftheuseof herbicides asamethodofwarfare andthequestion ofverification oftheuse ofchemical weapons andoftheprohibition oftheuseofherbicides. 115.Sevenmeetiings oftheOpen-ended Consultations wereheldfrom18Juneto 5August1985. IIProhibition oftheuseofherbicides asamethodofwarfare anditsverifieatien 116.TheOpen-ended Consultations discus·sed theproblem concerning the prohibition oftheuseofherbicides asamethodofwarfare andhadconsidered theformulation ofsuchaprohibition contained intheannexofdocument CD/539 andtheinformal proposal oftheDelegation ofSw~densubmitted inJanuary 1985. 117.Inthecourseofthediscussions, theOpen-ended Consultations alsoconsidered theinformal proposals ontheprohibition oftheuseofherbicides submitted by thedelegations ofChina,Iran,Pakistan, SriLankaandUSSR,aswellasthe informal working paperssubmitted bythedelegation oftheNetherlands andby thedelegation ofSwedenon15July1985andtheworking papersubmitted bythe delegation ofPakistan indocument CD/CW/WP.l18 dated22July1985. 118.Thereisageneral understanding thattheuseofherbicides asamethodof warfare shouldbeprohibited; obviously suchaprohibition shouldnotpreclude anyotheruseofherbicides. Itisalsogenerally understood thatherbicides arenottobeconsidered aschemical weapons. 119.Several delegations wereoftheviewthatsuchaprohibition shouldbe provided intheconvention banning chemical weapons, whileseveral other delegations tooktheviewthatitcouldbeincorporated inaseparate legal instrumenE suchasaprotocol tobeattached totheconvention. Somedelegations whoconsidered thepossibility ofaseparate instrument dealingspecifically withtheprohibition oftheuseofherbicides attached totheconvention wereof theopinionthattheconvention mustexpressly providethattheseparate instrum instrument constitutes anintegral partoftheconvention. Suggestion wasalso madethattheseparate instrument wouldnotbeattached totheconvention; there couldbeprovisions inbothinstruments providing fortheirsimultaneous signature andratification. 1110.Delegations weregenerally oftheviewthataprovJ.sJ.on banning theuseof herbicides asamethodofwarfare shouldbecomplemented withaclear understanding thatherbicides meanchemical substances which,duetotheir purpose anddirecteffects, interfere withlifeprocesses ofplants. "11.Delegations feltthatfutureprovisions prohibiting theuseofherbicides asamethodofwarfare shouldnotbeinterpreted asinanyway applicable rulesofinternational lawpertaining totheuseofherbicides. -111-.. ... iOc .-:------iIlII1_~, ~",..c~.,..... ptil!§:,:"'.".J t:ir "I i"12.Inthisconnection, certain delegations wereoftheviewthattheexisting legalinstruments relating totheuseofherbicides shouldbeexamined to determine theiradequacy inprohibiting theuseofherbicides. Several other delegations tooktheviewthatthoseexisting legalinstruments donotadequately dealwiththeuseofherbicides. "13.Afewdelegations referred toanother aspectoftheproblem, namelythe question ofverification oftheprohibition oftheuseofherbicides. However, thequestion wasnotdiscussed forlackoftimeandneedstobefullyaddressed atthenextsession. "14.Chairman's informal suggestions onapossible wording: "Inviewoftheprogress madeinthediscussions intheOpen-ended Consultations, theChairman believes thatinordertofacilitate further progress, anattempt shouldbemadetoreflect themaintrendsofthediscussions sofarin asetofwording whichdoesnotconstitute afinaldraft. Forthatpurpose, and without prejudice totheposition ofdelegations, theChairman suggested the following wording whichshallnotbindanydelegations: "(1)EachStatepartyundertakes nottouseherbicides asamethodofwarfare; suchaprohibition shouldnotpreclude anyotheruseofherbicides. "(2)Forthepurpose ofthisConvention, herbicides meanchemical substances which,duetotheirpurpose anddirecteffects, interfere withlife
**Analysis**
The text discusses the prohibition of herbicides as a method of warfare, which suggests a connection to the use of chemicals and their impact on the environment. The text also touches on the verification of the use of herbicides and the need for a clear understanding of what herbicides are. This implies a focus on environmental and humanitarian concerns.

**Category**
Natural resources and environment, Humanitarian aid and relief