 I have another common question for all of you about regional organizations and extra-regional organizations. Because the WPC, it's about the global governance, the regional governance, so it's very important to speak about the different regional and global organizations. Kazakhstan is part of almost all regional organizations, unlike Georgia and Moldova, so my questions will be different for Kazakhstan. Which regional organization will survive this war in Ukraine? The Eurasian Economic Union is very affected by sanctions. The Collective Security Treaty Organization had a moment of kind of glory in January with peacekeeping operation in Kazakhstan. But on the other hand, it remains powerless in the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh and the conflict on the border between Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. In mid-October, Kyrgyzstan annosed the cancellation of the military exercises planned with the framework of the Collective Security Treaty Organization. And what about the community of independent states? Is the war in Ukraine the last nail in the coffin of this organization? And on the other hand, the organizations that go beyond the region seem to be doing quite well. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization, but also the Conference for Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia. So how do we see things? And then I will formulate questions for Georgia and Moldova. Well, Kazakhstan, being the largest landlocked country and being the country that is neighboring Russia and China, has ever since its independence pursued a multi-vector foreign policy, a balanced approach to our foreign policy, which, among other things, prioritizes the internationalization of our international relations, meaning the establishment, the relevant and the needed international organizations. And that is why Kazakhstan has been the founder of many of the organizations you mentioned, or the initiator, even, such as the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia, which is an OEC-type organization for Asia that we initiated 30 years ago. But I will perhaps highlight the example of the Eurasian Economic Union to a brainchild of Kazakhstan's leadership, two established in Kazakhstan in 2014. For us, that is first and foremost an economic organization because we want to have closer ties to the outside world. And that union, it helped remove the customs borders within the union. That is why it was one of the major reasons for the success of the China to Europe land-based transportation across Kazakhstan over the past 10 years before this war began. So we will continue to support these organizations. We will continue to pursue our own national interests and you may have seen our President Tokayev addressing the Eurasian Economic Union leadership just yesterday in neighboring Kyrgyzstan where he prioritized economic cooperation first and foremost. So we will support these institutions. We think each and every one of them plays their own role. I don't think it's the matter of which one survives. Each and every one of them has their own challenges, indeed. CSTO played a role in helping Kazakhstan overcome its own internal turmoil in January. And yes, within this institution, there are some ongoing challenges and discussions about its future direction or its future meaning. But we believe they have a role to play. We don't need to forget, of course, that Afghanistan is not far away from Central Asia and from Kazakhstan. And that is a top priority for several institutions which you mentioned, including CSTO, or the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. So I mean, however tragic that war is, there are numerous challenges outside of Ukraine and Afghanistan being one of them or illegal migration being another one. Climate change is another one. So we will continue to strengthen and participate in all institutions as long as there is in our national interest. Thank you very much. I will formulate the question for Moldova and Georgia. Of course, for you, the main question today is the relationship with European Union and NATO. Moldova is now the candidate. How do you see the past over membership? What are you doing for that now? And how many time it can take? Indeed, European integration and European membership is an absolute priority for the current government. This is also the mandate that the government got from the citizens. So we spend no effort to press on with reforms despite all the challenges that I have described before. We are aware that there are no shortcuts. We're committed to hard work. We're committed to reforms. When the European Union granted us the candidate status, the Commission recommended nine steps that we need to take. We're currently implementing this action plan. About one-third of this work is done. We have created a National Commission for European Integration, which is chaired by the president, which includes civil society. And it oversees the progress of reforms that paved the way to European Union. Now, these are wide-ranging steps that we need to take. Most of them are in the justice sector, also tackling the influence of oligarchs and the media's fee and the political life in the economy. We are also building up administrative capacity to deliver on these reforms. So just last week, we were recruiting about 24 new positions at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and obviously preparing for accession negotiations, just preparing the ground, creating working groups and creating coordination mechanisms for that. Thank you very much, Olga. Mr. Dursale, I will put it bluntly. Are you disappointed not to have been accepted as candidate when you expressed your European orientation very early? How do you see the relationship with European Union in the mid- and long-term? Well, we very clearly said, first of all, that it's a still step. We already made one step, which is granting Georgia the European perspective. So this is first step. I would not hide, expectations was more, considering the Georgia's achievements during all these last two, three decades. And we really hope that when the decision will be made next year, it will be merit-based decision, and Georgia will make there as well. And it's very well. From our side, we are very committed to continue this path of reform. We started this reform not only because of our wall of membership, but it is first of all for our nation. And Georgia is committed, the whole political class in Georgia is committed to continue on this path, and we really are hoping that short that during the next decision, Georgia will make the next step on this path. Regarding, but generally talking about the European and Euro-Atlantic perspective, I want to say that Georgia has two red lines. This is territorial integrity and European and Euro-Atlantic integration. This is very clear, and this is really red line. This is not neither pink or any other color. There is conventionally agreement even about this in Georgia. And I'm saying conventional because we have it in our constitution. Georgia's European and Euro-Atlantic aspiration, as well as territorial integrity, which is existential for any country. And first of all, this is, and I'm saying together, European and Euro-Atlantic, because this is not for us, not only choice of welfare or security, but this is first of all choice of values and to which part of the world, to which civilization we belong to. So that's why it is red line for Georgia as well. And generally saying that I want to state words about the international open, that Georgia strongly supports multilateralism as such. And I really hope that when we are back to re-establish European security architecture or when we are back to correct all this law, then it was done by the invasion in Ukraine to the international system. Multilateralism as a principle will be the one, will be even more strengthened. And that is if talking about which organization Georgia supports, generally supports multilateralism. And the organizations which will be part of the multilateralism will survive, we hope. Thank you very much, Mr. Darzaleh, because you built a perfect bridge to my next question with.