 Well, but there's this other issue that Attiku, the presidential hopeful for PDP, has gone to the United States to campaign. I mean, I ask myself, what is it with campaigning abroad? Does it have any significance to our election back here? Campaign, that's the word they use, campaign. Yeah, to go and campaign. And I think, first of all, I think managers of information have a bigger challenge today in the choice of words, as well as in the platforms that they deploy in effecting not just public communication, because what we do today includes public interaction. Because on most of the social media platforms, for instance, your audience can also engage with you. So you are not just doing public communication, you're also doing public interaction. And your choice of words matter. Because when you say that a presidential candidate of a political party that is contesting a Nigerian election has gone abroad to campaign, when we do not have diaspora voting, there's something that's not really aligning. So I think managers of information need to ensure that the words and platforms, that their principles or their organizations or their political parties deploy adequately reflect reality. You cannot, to me, you cannot campaign to people who are not going to vote. So that choice of words will need to be modified. But we've had many of them going abroad. Peter Obi has been there, Ashwa Jewelach Metinumbu has been abroad a number of times. And it begs the question as to why all of this flurry, we cannot say they are engaging with government officials in those countries because they are not government officials yet. And the way government-to-government diplomacy is conducted, they cannot represent government because they have not been elected. So obviously, for whatever reason, some people have even said maybe for fundraising, they are all going abroad. But definitely, the choice of words and what we say or how we describe these kinds of engagements actually matters a lot. But another thing, I don't know if it's a colonial mentality or inferiority complex or whatever name we are going to call it because colonial, I don't know if that word will be suitable if we're talking about America, not UK. Now in the last election, for instance, there are some candidates that the people were saying, let them go to America and show us that they don't have a criminal record. So sometimes maybe these people who want to go to America want to show that if they are elected, they can stand and bid their chairs and talk with the American government and get the kind of collaboration that we would need and that they have no criminal record or so. Maybe it is saying more than we are hearing. They are busy to America. But also, there is a dynamic shift in the global strategic balance. The Euro-Atlantic powers are unlikely to be able to keep wielding the kind of influence that they wielded 30 years ago. This is a fact. This shift in the global strategic balance is increasingly favouring Asia. And so as our politicians rush to Europe and to the U.S., it would be interesting to see how their strategic planners are calculating, whether they are also going to be rushing to Asia. And then also in terms of our primary area of influence, which is Africa, whether also they would go to certain African countries. If for example, we recognize that a significant part of the Sudanese population is of Nigerian descent. So if you are talking of Nigerians in the diaspora, and they are actually very proud to describe themselves as Sudanese of Nigerian descent, almost one-quarter of the population of Sudan, of Nigerian descent. So it would be interesting to see if our politicians will also go to Sudan and engage with the diaspora. But like I was saying, why I brought the issue of whether it is inferiority complex or colonial mentality or whatever our name we might want to call it, is the fact that why do we even need the validation from any country for that matter? Why not just stay here? Do what you need to do here? Even if you become president, is there any time in the future that we can stamp our foot on the ground and say, America, for instance, if you do this to us, we're going to do this to you and stand by our words? Because we know that we have held them where we shouldn't hold them. Our leaders in Africa, some of us were colonized at the same time that India was colonized, China or every other country was colonized. And these countries have moved beyond that level where they still see themselves as people who should go cap in hand to get something from the West to becoming independent nations that those Western countries come to them. Okay, sometimes we complain about the population of Nigeria when we have so much land. India, okay, you were the one who was giving me some statistics about the population of it. A billion plus or so? A billion, 1.3 billion here. A country and if you see all the top tech companies, in fact, even now the UK is being ruled or run by an India. That's why I said the dynamic, there's a major strategic shift. And you see, it's a very good issue that you brought up this particular subject because it tells us something about the quality of the intellectual resource of our presidential candidates. That's basically what we're saying. It tells us something about the quality of the intellectual resource of our presidential candidates. If you look at the major trading partners, right now the Euro-Atlantic powers are struggling to contain a self-imposed economic problem arising from the Ukrainian conflict. What does that tell us? It tells us something that some of the countries which were previously overlooked probably have more importance than we ever thought. But also, if I can just quickly mention, during the anti-apartheid struggle, Nigeria, we had countries called frontline states. These were states around the countries that were still on the apartheid, countries like Tanzania, like Zambia, they were the frontline states. Nigeria, which is in West Africa, was considered a frontline state because we were financing most of the liberation movements. Now the reason I'm mentioning this is because the UN had what it called an anti-apartheid committee. It was a very high-level committee. And for consecutive terms, it was headed by Nigeria. Right? Why? We didn't campaign for it. We didn't lobby for it. It was a matter of right because of the role we played in the liberation of the southern African countries. So if you know what you want to, your strategic objective, your national interest, how you want to get there, how you want to deploy your resources, the countries that are observing will come to you, which is what you were saying, right? Not you going around the place. And that's why I said it tells us something with due respect and with all sense of responsibility about the intellectual resource behind the strategic planning of all these presidential candidates because show me the money. Is the money still coming from the Euro-Atlantic powers? This is a big question and it's probably a debatable one. But what is not debatable is that there is a very big shift which is occurring in the global strategic balance. Like they say, man, know thyself. So if our leaders will just know our worth and see how we can make that worth even more dear, then in the space of maybe 10, 20 years, we wouldn't be described the way we are described right now. Poverty, capital of the world, when there is so much money in Nigeria, third world country, we have no reason to be a third world country at this time, 60 years more over. So we should start to look inward. For now, we'll just take a break and when we return, we go back to what a foreign country has made us to feel right now by giving a travel advisory to their people. Security alert coming from another country and it seems as if our own security apparatus is sleeping or something. When we return, we'll be meeting with Mr. Augusten, a guy, security experts. Stay with us.