 Like Amy, my first exposure to MIKTA came through the wonderfully stimulating academic network conference held in Seoul in May of this year. Such academic diplomacy I think requires some explanation. It sits a bit awkwardly with standard ideas of what universities and research centres are all about. Naturally we teach, we research, we write papers and books, interact with the media and hopefully mentor rising generations. These are all big responsibilities. So what is the purpose of our academic diplomacy? I take such diplomacy to mean the international meeting of minds largely unencumbered by official constraints to take stock of the big issues and work towards shared understanding of current problems. Once we refer to this as track 2 diplomacy where track 1 is for officials and track 1.5 is caught somewhere in between. The second track though has its advantages. For a start it should ideally provide a forum for the exchange of frank views including those that might as Amy suggested be contentious. It makes sense that discussions at this level will lack the clout of their official equivalents but they can also serve to generate some pretty useful advice. One of the problems however with many track 2 dialogues is that because neighbourly disputes and historical animosities tend to get in the way, there is some reticence about venturing too far from the standard scripts. I think this is why our newly formed MIKTA academic network has such great potential. When this mechanism for academic diplomacy was formally launched in Seoul there was a great enthusiasm about the sorts of contributions that it could make. Bold ideas came very thick and fast and we're proud here at the ANU that our Bell School of Asia Pacific Affairs is the Australian hub for the network. And as discussions about what it might do have evolved I've continued to wonder how is it that we could position such an academic network so that it fully captures the potential for today's best practice in academic diplomacy. So let me give you my brief response to that question and consideration. First I think such a network needs to set aside official hesitations. Professional academics and their students should be encouraged to push the envelope. Happily such audacity emerged during the conference in Seoul and I expect that over the months ahead as we go through building up a series of unfolding MIKTA academic events there will be much more of that on the agenda. Second MIKTA in this particular academic diplomacy incarnation clearly needs to tackle global level issues. As liberal societies forging their own democratic paths influencing the lives of many hundreds of millions of people the MIKTA countries offer tremendous examples of how humanity is doing in the 21st century. What lessons can we draw from our respective experiences? These might be about education, technology, food production, urbanization or political institutions. Such lessons might even lurch towards questions of creativity and cross-cultural collegiality. All topics I think we agree that we need to focus on. Third and finally and I think this is where things get interesting I imagine that MIKTA could actually change how we think about diplomacy. Surely that's one of its starting points. I think that's particularly the case in that the second track form. As we have already heard today maybe MIKTA can dispense with the official anxieties that tend to go with other diplomatic treatments to give us some chances to do something fresh and different and new. So how is it that MIKTA in this fashion could be different? From my perspective at least the answer is in the constellation of interests and achievements of these five very different countries. On the second track why not do the high tech no-holds-barred non-traditional diplomatic activity that could be inconceivable with other partners. It should have hashtags and Twitter storms, scenario planning and plenty of face-to-face exchange. As the report, the very handsomely produced report of the academic network conference held recently in Sol notes. What MIKTA needs is the savvy use of new technologies where hashtag MIKTA should come to signify innovation and improved governance in the 21st century. So it's in this context that here at the Australian National University we are simply delighted that next month with our federal government support we will be welcoming a group of 25 students from across the MIKTA countries for a two-week program of academic interaction on our campus. Also next month Korea will host a group of 55 students and faculty in Sol for another major academic event and hopefully these are just the beginning of ever more creative and constructive MIKTA scholarly engagements over the months and years to come. So my suggestion in conclusion is that in MIKTA we should not limit ourselves to the patterns that prevail in today's academic diplomacy. This group, given its configuration, has the potential to set something of a new standard and to use this experiment in global interaction to break the mould. So on that very optimistic note I look forward to the rest of the discussion. Thank you.