That way, I can respect the suggested five minute time allowance.

So we would like to express our doubt as to whether it is useful to discuss your proposal any further.

However, if your proposal does not fly, perhaps we could consider returning to the 2004 suggestion, which is still on the table as far as the United States is concerned.

We understand, Mr. Chairman, that your revised proposal sort of draws on the 2004 Chair's proposal I think it does a very able job of condensing and drawing on the work of last year's Georgian Chair.

Therefore, when I tell the Commission what I think will fly, it of necessity must be on an ad referendum basis, because what we submitted, Mr. Chairman, was your proposal from 8 July, as amended by the Non Aligned Movement.

I am prepared to drop that formulation in its entirety from the end of the sentence so that, as I understand your proposal, Mr. Chairman, it would read as it is written Recommendations for nuclear disarmament and non proliferation of nuclear weapons in all its aspects, in particular for achieving the objective of nuclear disarmament .

In response to your previous question as to whether your proposal as a whole would serve as a basis, we just heard a delegation state that it had difficulty with the proposal, especially agenda item 2, that it was proposing a completely new item and that it insisted on the addition of a third item.