 Good morning, everyone. I'm Kristen Lord, Acting President of the United States Institute of Peace. It's my great pleasure to welcome all of you here today, and especially His Excellency Ambassador Tsui Tengkai, the Chinese Embassy delegation, and everyone who's joined us here today in the room and also virtually. The United States Institute of Peace is an independent, nonpartisan institution created by the United States Congress. Our mission is to prevent, mitigate, and resolve violent conflicts around the world. We do this by engaging directly in conflict zones and also by providing analysis, education, and resources to all those who share our mission of working for peace. This week, starting today, USIP will be co-hosting the Sixth US-China Project on Crisis of Wellington Cooperation, which they mercifully call PCAC, a track 1.5 dialogue that seeks to foster recurring channels of communication on key issues of common concern and interest between our two nations. PCAC was established in 2008 with two of our good partners, the China Institutes for Contemporary International Relations, known as KICKR, and also Fedon University, both of which have representatives here today. Through this partnership, we seek to foster deeper mutual understanding of evolving political, security, and economic issues that could have significant unintended consequences for Sino-US relations. Ambassador Tsui Tengkai, it's my pleasure to welcome you to USIP, and I very much look forward to our discussions over the next two days. And now it's my pleasure to turn the podium over to our distinguished Chairman of US Institute of Peace, Steve Hadley. Good morning, everyone. Thank you for being here. It is my honor to introduce Ambassador Tsui Tengkai. He will give an address on US-China cooperation in peace and security issues, and then we'll have an opportunity to answer some questions from me and then from the audience as well. Ambassador Tsui Tengkai became ambassador of the People's Republic of China to the United States in April of 2013. He has a distinguished career. I don't think anybody has had a career better preparing them to be a diplomat than has the ambassador. It's a long list. He has been Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs. He's been China's ambassador to Japan, Director General of the Department of Asian Affairs in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. He's been Director General of the Policy Research Office, Minister Counselor of the PRC's Permanent Mission to the United Nations, Spokesman for the Information Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Counselor to the Department of International Relations. He has played every position on the field for his government. He has post-graduate degrees from Johns Hopkins University and from Shanghai Normal University. No one could be better prepared for his current assignment as Chinese ambassador to the United States. We, as a country, are lucky to have him posted here, and we at the United States Institute of Peace are fortunate to have him with us here today. Mr. Ambassador. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Hadley. I hope I will live up to our expectations. And good morning, everybody. It's really a great pleasure for me to be here at the United States Institute of Peace this morning. Let me thank the Institute for inviting me here. And my thanks would also go to your organizing partners from China, the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, and Fudan University. My last visit here was on the occasion of Vice Premier Lu Yantong's visit to the Institute. And right at this podium, she gave a very good speech about China's reform and about relations between China and the United States. And that was a highlight of her visit. So let me express my appreciation to the Institute for your outstanding efforts to bring together the best minds of both countries for a better mutual understanding and closer cooperation. The US-China project on crisis avoidance and cooperation is a joint venture on track 1.5 to develop policy, ideas, and mechanisms on key issues of common concern and interest. So let me commend the participants from both countries for your commitment and contributions to this important relationship. As you are well aware, the term crisis in the Chinese language is wei ji. It has two characters. The first means dangers. The second one means opportunities. So I think that the key to our success in avoiding crisis is to turn dangers into opportunities for cooperation. And this is particularly true in today's world. And this is particularly true for managing the relationship between our two great countries. Because in addition to the complexities of our bilateral relations, we are witnessing fast and profound changes in the world with foreseeable and unforeseeable challenges almost every day. It is clear that no country can confront all these challenges single-handedly. If members of the international community could have the vision, wisdom, determination, and will to work together, we will be able to seize the opportunities and make a better world for all. And if not, we would probably be overwhelmed by one crisis after another. And all of us may end up as losers. I think this is the big picture against which our leaders set the goal for China and the United States to work together to build a new model of major country relationship. President Xi and President Obama made that decision at sunny lands last June. And they have reaffirmed it in their subsequent communications, including at their most recent meeting at the Hague less than three weeks ago. There is clarity in the vision of our two presidents. And there is certainly consistency in their commitment to that goal. And guided by this goal, and thanks to the joint efforts by both sides, China-U.S. relations are moving forward in a steady way, despite issues and problems every now and then. It's becoming increasingly evident that this new model of relationship is the right choice for the two countries. And having said this, I have to recognize there still exist misunderstandings and misperceptions. Some may question the intentions behind the concept. Others may have doubts about its real effect. And still others may believe that this is not attainable. So let me try to clarify a little bit. The new model of relationship is based on full recognition of the new realities of the world. There is such interdependence and connectivity in today's world. The relations among countries, and perhaps especially among the major countries, are no longer a zero sum game. And 19th century solutions can no longer work to solve 21st century problems. And indeed, many of them even failed in the 19th century. Likewise, Cold War legacies, whether mental or material, are stumbling blocks rather than building blocks if our goal is to build a 21st century world order. So new realities call for new ways for countries to interact with each other, and hence new models of a relationship. The new model of a relationship stresses mutual respect. China and the United States have very different historical heritage, cultural traditions, political and social systems, and are at very different stages of economic development. These differences are the outcome of centuries of historical evolution, and they are not subject to our tinkering. We have to understand and respect them. Mutual respect also means respecting each other's core interests and major concerns. It is only natural that countries should have their own respective interests. Mutual respect of such interests is a very prerequisite for stable relationship and meaningful cooperation. Disregard of it would only lead to conflict and confrontation. And I have to stress here that such respect is not a favor given by one side to the other. It is a reciprocal process. It is a two-way street. Positive approach will have positive response. Negative attitude will probably get a similar reward. So you reap what you sow. The new model of a relationship is a framework for cooperation. China and the United States are already cooperating in so many areas. We are working together on international regional security issues, on non-proliferation, counterterrorism, cross-border crimes, Karim Peninsula, Iranian nuclear issue. We are working together on global economic governance, international finance, economic growth, and economic restructuring. We are working together on climate change, clean energy, infrastructure building, disease control, education, and people-to-people exchanges. We are working together at international, regional, national, and local levels, and bilaterally and multilaterally. So with the new model as a framework, all this will have a clear sense of direction. We have greater incentives, closer coordination, and produce even more tangible results for our two peoples. The new model of a relationship necessitates a constructive approach towards our differences. It's quite clear we do have a lot of differences between us. We have to be frank and direct in discussing the differences and constructive and pragmatic in managing them. For some differences, we could try to turn them into potentials of complementarity. For others, we could try to gradually narrow them down. And for those differences that are bound to be with us for a long, long time, we should make sure that they do not disrupt the overall relationship. And we should always keep in mind that our common interests far outweigh the differences. And our closer and growing cooperation in areas where we can work together will enable us to handle and manage the areas where we differ. And we have to be careful that we never lose sight of the big picture. And we do not give anyone the illusion that they could take advantage of and manipulate our differences. And last but not least, the new model of a relationship aims at a win-win outcome. Naturally, this is a win-win outcome first and foremost for our two countries. But it is certainly not confined to that. Our bilateral cooperation also benefits others in the world. This year marks the 35th anniversary of the normalization of relations between China and the United States. Looking back, we can see clearly that China's reform and opening up and the normalization of relations between our two countries have made significant contributions to stability and prosperity in Asia-Pacific and the world at large. This has already been proven by the history of the last three or four decades. And the new model of a relationship is not a G2. Actually, it represents our best efforts to respond to the transformation that has taken place in the world. As we witness the rise of a good number of other countries, especially developing countries like the BRICS, or to borrow Mr. Farid Zakaria's term, the rise of the rest. We are also witnessing more and more players on the international scene and the emergence of a more balanced international structure. It's quite certain that this new model will contribute to this process. And it will be a win-win for the entire international community. Two years ago, right here at the United States Institute of Peace, then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave an important speech in commemoration of the 40th anniversary of President Nixon's visit to China. She said, we are trying to find an answer, a new answer, to the ancient question of what happens when an established power and a rising power meet. What we have achieved in the last two years is truly encouraging. The answer seems to be within sight, but we are not quite there yet. The journey is not complete yet. There will be more ups and downs as we go forward. But I don't think there's any alternative for our two countries. There's certainly no turning back. So let's be steadfast and persistent in reaching our goal. We in China remain fully committed to this new model of relationship. I hope that our American partners will be equally confident. And you will say it again, yes, we can. Thank you. As I understand what we're going to do now, I'm going to ask the ambassador a few questions. Those of you in the audience who have questions, there are cards available. Please mark your question in the card. Stephanie will gather them and pass them up to us, and we'll try and get through as many of them as we can. Mr. Ambassador, thank you very much. That was a very helpful description. And there is a lot of confusion, I think, about what this new model of major country relations looks like and what it means. I want to talk a little bit about that and then talk on a couple of subjects related to what we'll be doing together today. You talked about core interests. And I personally have not been a fan of the notion of core interests, because I think it suggests that once someone declares something of core interest, it's off the table, not subject to discussion. And the other side simply has to accept that position. And I think that causes some inflexibility in our negotiations. So could you talk a little bit about how you view the notion of core interests and what you think China's core interests are at this point? Because there's a lot of confusion about that as well. I think it's a choice of words, maybe. If you say core interests, or maybe very often here you say vital interests. And this applies to everybody in the international community, not just to China. For instance, we all care very much about sovereignty, territorial integrity, and the unity of the country. I don't think that these things are negotiable for any country. But of course, on the other hand, this concept of core interests could only refer to these real, really vital interests. It is not a basket that you could put everything in it. For China, I think it's quite clear, like other countries, sovereignty and territorial integrity would be our core interests and is our core interests. And also, because China is not finally reunified, so national unity would also be part of our core interests. When I say these core interests are not quite negotiable, I'm not saying that we will reject cooperation and communication with others. I think the best way to avoid crisis or avoid conflicts on these issues is to show true respect for each other's core interests. Good, thank you. One of the things that's explicit in your discussion of new model of great major country relations is cooperation rather than confrontation or conflict. And you listed a long list of areas where our two countries are and need to expand cooperation. And my perception is that while there is an enormous amount of cooperation going on, neither from what I can read the Chinese people nor the American people are very much aware of it. All they hear about are, if you're an American, South China Sea, East China Sea, and I suspect if you're a Chinese citizen about US reconnaissance off the coast of China and all the rest. So if one of the things about a new model of major country relations is to get our two peoples to embrace it and see that there's something different in the relationship, what do you think are the two or three areas where China and the United States could cooperate in a way that would really be visible and break through the consciousness of our two peoples so that people understand that something different is happening between China and the United States? Well, first of all, my long list is still open-ended. We can still add more areas of cooperation to it. And I think actually we are already benefiting from our cooperation. As I said just now, we have maintained overall stability in Asia. Although we still have very difficult and sensitive and potentially explosive issues in the region, like the Karim Peninsula and so on. But thanks to our cooperation, these issues are still manageable. And we are making some progress on the difficult issue. And we have also contributed to prosperity in the region. I think if we look at the past history of the last three or four decades, two things are very important for the region. One is the reform and the opening up of China. The other is normalization of our relations. I think we can take a lot of credit for the stability, prosperity of the region. So we are already benefiting from our cooperation. But we can certainly do more and we should certainly do more. There are many areas that have very good prospects. Our security front, we should certainly strengthen our cooperation on the Karim Peninsula, non-proliferation in Afghanistan, for instance. Economically, now the two governments are working together on the bilateral investment treaty. I just hope that we can make sufficiently quick progress on that. That will certainly open up new opportunities for business communities of both countries that will further promote our economic and trade relations. And that will certainly produce concrete and tangible results for the peoples of the two countries. And we would also like to see more progress in people-to-people exchanges. We have a growing number of students in each other's country. I think in the United States we have over 200,000 Chinese students, and the number is still growing. And the United States 100,000 strong program is doing quite well. So there are so many things that we can work together and we can bring about real benefits for the people. I want to push you one more time. If there was one thing that the United States could help China on that would really get the attention of the Chinese people, what it would be. My primitive example, I was in Beijing, and one day the pollution was terrible. And the next day it was a gorgeous day, sunshine, blue sky. So I thought, well, if the American government could somehow work with the Chinese again to help clean up the air in Beijing, that's something the Chinese people would notice. This is my naive contribution to this dialogue. Is there one thing we could do that would get the attention? That could be one of the things. Our cooperation to handle climate change, to bring about environmental improvement, to have clean air in Beijing. This will certainly be a major achievement if we can have that. You said in something I did not know that crisis in Chinese is two characters, one danger and the other opportunities, which is a terrific framework for that issue. We've had some near misses in the past, the accidental US bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, the EP3 incident at the beginning of the Bush administration in 2001. Are we better now in terms of our communications and crisis management procedures between China and the United States so that if, heaven forbid, we have a similar incident in the future, we will manage it better and be able to make sure it does not disrupt the relationship? Where are we on the crisis management issue, which is very relevant to the topic we have before us today? I certainly don't want to see similar incidents in the future. Yeah, that's for sure. But I think now the communication between the two countries is much better than 10 years ago, for instance. We have so many mechanisms for dialogue, coordination, communication, and this really enhances mutual understanding and crisis management, including the project you have here. Right, right. I read an article the other day that was talking about a lot of discussion about the new model of major country relations, what it means for a diplomacy and a cooperation. This article was trying to define what does it mean for our military to military relations? So could you talk a little bit, our two secretaries of defense have recently met in Beijing, could you talk a little bit about what you think the opportunities are in terms of US-China military to military relations? Well, first of all, I think I have to clarify a little bit about this major country relationship, as I did in the Asian society the other day in New York. I'm using this term only in the sense that some countries like our two countries have bigger economies, larger population, and maybe greater capability and responsibilities. It does not mean that we are major countries, they are minor countries. Fair point. And having said this, I think military to military relations would be an indispensable part of this new model. Without better military to military relations, this new model would be not effective. And I don't think it would stand for very long. And I'm quite encouraged by the progress we have achieved in the last two years and also in military to military relations. Last year, I had the opportunity of accompanying our defense minister, the commander of the PLA Navy, on their visit to China. It was very encouraging that when the two military, when the uniformed people of the two countries actually sit down face to face and discuss real issues, they could be very honest and frank and direct to each other. And they could reach much better mutual understanding. This is indeed a very encouraging development. And I have also noticed the most recently by Secretary Hegel to China. He had a very substantive and direct exchange with his Chinese counterparts. I think maybe this is not a bad thing. Maybe this is a good thing. We could have our two defense ministers facing each other and make their own view known to the other side in a way that would clearly express his own concern, but at the same time, still in a constructive manner. I think they still concluded that we should promote meal-to-meal relations. We should try to have better mutual understanding. And there will be more exchanges in the years to come. One of the things that has been a problem about the meal-to-meal relations in the past is when tensions have arisen in the relationship, either one side or the other, China or the United States, has tended to then cancel or suspend the meal-to-meal relations. I've always thought that that was a mistake, that indeed, in times of tension, you want to actually maintain those meal-to-meal conversations. Do you think this is something that the two sides are getting to understand and that maybe there's a prospect of insulating a little bit the meal-to-meal cooperation from the ups and downs of the political relationship? I don't think that we can separate meal-to-meal relations from the overall relationship. But I hope that meal-to-meal relations and the overall relationship could be mutually reinforcing, not mutually exclusive. Of course, military of any country have to be prepared against the worst case scenario. But at the same time, all of us, including the military, should work together for our best hope. And there are, honestly, there are a couple of things the United States and maybe the United States military can do that will greatly enhance mutual understanding between the two militaries and between the two peoples, even. For instance, if you could reduce and stop your close range reconnaissance activities in China's exclusive economic zone, and still better if you could stop arms sales to Taiwan, that would help us a great deal. I knew that would come up at some point. Mr. Ambassador, you were ambassador in Japan. And as you said earlier, in a quiet time between signer Japanese relations, I told the ambassador was because he was there that it was a quieter time in signer. I'm not quite sure. But I think there's a good chance that China and the United States can work out a new model of major country relations. Sometimes I'm not so sure China and Japan can work out a new model of major country relations. Can you talk a little bit about that relationship? It is something that we're all concerned about. Japan is a close and valued ally of the United States. We have a treaty commitment there. What can both sides do? I mean, you'll be clear about what Japan needs to do. But what could China do as well to try to knit back up that signer Japanese relationship? Well, I think our relations with Japan are much longer than your relations with Japan. That is true. Historically speaking. And the two countries are close neighbors. And there's a growing economic interdependence between the two countries. It's quite clear that if China and Japan can really work together, can really set up what we call strategically mutually beneficial relationship, both countries will win. That's quite clear. So it's very unfortunate that relations are not in very good shape now. But we have never given up our efforts to improve the relations. We still want to have more people-to-people ties, economic cooperation, and possibly cooperation in other areas. But I think you know it's quite clear that we also have our own principle. On matters of sovereignty and territorial integrity, there's no room for us to make any concession. And the post-war international order, there is no room for us or for anyone to make compromise. Because if we compromise on these principles, it would not help us in the relationship. But it will bring about even greater harm to the two countries and maybe to the world at large. So I'm still confident that sooner or later, China and Japan will have to address the problems together and work together for a better relationship. But it requires efforts from both sides. You mentioned the sort of the principles of the post-Cold War order. And you mentioned sovereignty, respect for territorial integrity. I think one of those principles, and I want to see if you agree, is also not to use force or threat of force to resolve disputes. This is a principle we thought was established in Europe. Vladimir Putin has had a different view. Would you agree that that is also an fundamental principle for stability and security in Asia? I think this is one of the principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter. China always stands for this principle. It's very interesting to note now people in the United States and in Europe are talking about non-interference. They are talking about sovereignty and territorial integrity. Actually, we stand for these principles all the time. We stood for these principles even when people were trying to find justifications for so-called humanitarian interventions in Kosovo, in the Middle East, in the Central Asian Republic, and so on. But we have always stood for these principles. There's no doubt about that. One of the questions from the audience notes your argument for a win-win or a positive sum rather than zero sum relationship between the United States and China and makes the point that particularly in Asia there also needs to be win-win solutions between China and some of its neighbors. And could you talk a little bit about China and its relationships with its neighbors and how it can similarly move from a sort of zero sum approach to win-win approaches with China's neighbors? We have so many neighbors. You only have two. And the history of interaction between China and our neighbors is really very long. So there are different neighbors, of course. But on the whole, I think we have good and stable relations with all our neighbors. For instance, we have very good relations with the ASEAN countries despite all the media reports about these disputes in South China Sea. The overall relationship between China and ASEAN is very good, is excellent, and it's much larger than these disputes in South China Sea. And the disputes in South China Sea are only between China and a few ASEAN countries, not every ASEAN country, not ASEAN as a group. And even for these few ASEAN countries, the overall relationship is much larger than the disputes. I think this is an agreement between us and the ASEAN country. And for our relations with India, I think it is also very good. Although we still have the boundary issue to be resolved, it might take some time. But the two countries keep in mind the big picture. We are working together very closely, not only in bilateral, but also internationally, in the G20, in the UN, and EES, and so on. Of course, we have a strategic partnership with Russia. So if we look at the overall picture, I think we could be confident about the prospects of our relations with our neighbors. One of your neighbors, of course, is North Korea. There's been a lot of speculation in the American media and among our experts about the significance for the removal of Kim Jong-un's uncle and what that means for the stability of the regime and, quite frankly, what it means for China's influence with North Korea. And there's a big debate about how much influence China has with North Korea. And I'm not sure that's a productive approach, but one of the things I guess we could say is the following. We've seemed to sort of ignored North Korea. A number of us have felt that North Korea is potentially as divisive of the relationship between the United States and China as Taiwan is. So it's, in some sense, a ticking time bomb within the relationship. What should we be doing now, given the new regime in North Korea? And how can we maximize the influence that China and the United States have in terms of trying to take that situation and, quite frankly, really beginning the opening up of that regime that might bring a better life to the North Korean people as well as help resolve the nuclear issue and other issues? As far as the Korean Peninsula is concerned, I think what concerns China most is, first, the existence of nuclear capability, the nuclear program. Number two, the risks of another war, armed conflicts, or chaos, because these would affect China's national security interests. So we are very concerned with these threats or risks on the Korean Peninsula. That's why we have always stood for denuclearization of the Peninsula. The entire Peninsula. And we are always against any war or armed conflicts. And we should certainly do whatever we can to avoid chaos on the Korean Peninsula, because it's so close to China. The Peninsula is just at our doorsteps. Any chaos, any armed conflicts there will certainly have cross-border effect on China. And it's a nuclear program. The nuclear facilities are so close to the Chinese border. Maybe even an accident could do a great deal of damage to our environment. So it's quite clear that we stand very firm on these issues. But these problems cannot be resolved by China alone. We need cooperation among the relevant parties, for instance, in the form of six-party talks. And we did make some progress in the past. We had this September 19th joint statement. What is unfortunate is that the goals we all agreed to in this joint statement were not implemented. So now there is ongoing efforts between China and the United States to find ways to resume negotiations, to move forward to our agreed goals of denuclearization and peace and stability. I think we should continue our efforts. And there's a great hope that we will achieve something with an intensified efforts. But there is one thing that worries me a little bit, and maybe more than a little bit, is that we are very often told that China has such an influence over DPRK. And we should force the DPRK to do this or that. Otherwise, the United States would have to do something that will hurt China's security interests. You see, you are giving us an admission impossible. And you are telling us, if you cannot do it, I will do something that will hurt your interests. I don't think this is very fair. I don't think this is a constructive way of working with each other. Got it. I'll pass the message to my friends in the administration. One area, I think, that we can work together on is Afghanistan and that whole area of Central South Asia. You will get, I think, Kristen mentioned, that Andrew Wilder, who's back from observing the election in Afghanistan, will meet with people tomorrow and give him a report. We're very encouraged by what we see in Afghanistan. And is that an area of potential cooperation between the United States and China? And can it be the basis of a broader effort, which China can have a much bigger impact on than we, to get greater economic integration in Central South Asia? A lot of discussions about silk roads going north and south, east, west, but it clearly is a relatively unintegrated economically part of the world. And with the prospect of some stability in Afghanistan, is there now an opportunity? And could China, working with its neighbors, take a lead to try to encourage greater trade investment and economic integration in that region? Right. Maybe some people are not aware that we also have border with Afghanistan. But it's just mountains and mountains. And I've been to Afghanistan twice. Some of my colleagues in the embassy have even worked there. Unfortunately, maybe we are the only neighbor of Afghanistan that has never had any conflicts with the country. So China is trusted by Afghanistan people. And we certainly care very much about the stability and the well-being of their people. This is a very good area that our two countries should work with each other, should cooperate. By working together, we have to make sure that there is stability in the country, or there is general stability in the country. And there is a functional government and economic recovery. And maybe more economic ties and economic integration with its neighbors. And gradually, we move forward with economic cooperation and integration in the region. So maybe we could draw some lessons, useful lessons or inspirations from our ancient history from the Silk Road. Maybe Silk can pave the way that guns and tanks cannot for regional stability and prosperity. Great. I'm going to offer you an opportunity, something that I think you'll probably decline being the skilled diplomat that you are. But we, of course, in this country have a big debate over Ukraine and what President Vladimir Putin has done with respect to Crimea. If you were not an official of the Chinese government, but if you were an official of the American government and the President of the United States asked you for advice on how we should handle the issue of Ukraine, would you have any advice for the American president? I think you have very good minds here in the United States. You have excellent people here in the US to offer advice to the US president. For instance, Dr. Henry Kissinger wrote an excellent article in The Washington Post. He gave a very balanced approach to the issue. I also wrote a piece in The Washington Post, which did not get the same endorsement that Henry Kissinger did. And as I expected, you did a nice job of ducking my question. And it's fair enough, fair enough. We're almost out of time. I have one last question that comes from a student here in the public policy program at American University. And that question is, what is your advice for young people today in both countries that want to step in and work in the field of US-China cooperation? What is new that can make us a truly new generation in dealing with this problem? I think that there is a natural friendship of very friendly feelings between our two people. This is always the case. And I'm very happy to see that more and more young people are studying, working, or just visiting the other country. So I think for the young people to really help us in this relationship, the first thing they have to do, and maybe the first thing we have to do, is to really look at the other country, observe, learn about it with an open mind. We should make real efforts to have a good understanding of the history, culture, and of the people of the other country. I'm sure we will find out that people in China and the United States have very similar aspirations and have very similar concerns. And it's important for the two governments to keep in mind that we have to work together to address these specific concerns of our two people. So this new model of relationship, this complex bilateral relationship, is not actually that complex. It's very simple. It's about the well-being of our people. What our people want, then we have to do it. We've come to the end of our time. I want to thank the audience for their participation in this process. And most of all, Ambassador, thank you very much for being with us today. Thank you. Thank you. I should read the article. Thank you.