 Good afternoon, aside from expressing our gratitude to the Economic Forum for holding this meeting in this wonderful city of Medellin, allowing us to participate. I would like to thank President Santos very particularly. I received President Santos for the first time in Saville in April of 1992. That is only 24 years ago. He came as a delegate of President Gaviria to the Ibero-American meeting and the Ibero-American exhibition. I would like him to allow the honour to participate in this meeting because the protagonist is the president. This morning we heard him discuss the social and economic situation of Colombia and the prospects for Colombia and as part of that assessment, there is a topic that is much discussed. The report on the topic is not very good because it is difficult to come up with the right information and it is the topic that has created the greatest expectations for the international community. This morning I heard the president said that it was the oldest conflict in the region. If the region is understood from Río Bravo to Pataconia or from Canada to Pataconia, but if you don't want to overdo it but tell the truth, it is the oldest as an internal conflict if we consider the entire international community. So there are great expectations as I was saying. President, we would like to hear from you the assessment, the social, the economic prospects. Of course, mood is difficult to govern and I have learned something throughout my life that many times in politics is what people perceive as the truth. The truth is what people perceive. So we're not experiencing the best mood, the cycle has changed, the region is going through moments that are of relative difficulty no matter what the color of the government is and it is very difficult to really assert that Colombia is in an enviable position because it is growing at a third percent rate and any of the small and medium countries starting with mine would love to have such a type of growth but all the region would want to have that growth and again I talk about the region in the broad sense. President, I know that what is creating most tensions has to do with the peace process and I have been following you in your process for many years. We have spoken a lot about it and I have many hopes that are against the mood that prevails. So thank you very much, Felipe, and thank you very much for joining us in this opportunity, in this very important event and if there is somebody who knows Colombia and who knows the different attempts that have been made at achieving peace in Colombia, precisely Felipe Gonzales since or from the presidency of Spain and then as a very influential individual, he has had a relationship with all the presidents who in Colombia have attempted to achieve peace. He was speaking about the economy and I will refer very briefly to the economy in particular for our international guests. Colombia is very clear about its destination where we are headed in economic terms. We have policies, tenets that rule those policies, fiscal responsibilities, social advancement, principles that have helped us adjust to the shock brought about by the oil prices and the commodities and the effect of these oil prices has been managed very efficaciously by Colombia. We are still growing poverty is diminishing and this morning we had a very positive piece of news. We have now news about the growth of the industry and it was 8.4 percent. So this again confirms what we have been saying and it is that this devaluation and this lowering of the oil prices came at the right time because we were coming close to what we call the Dutch disease, too much dependence on the mining and energy sector and we are going to avail ourselves of this opportunity to strengthen the rest of the economy, the service sector, the industry and proof of that is precisely the figure about which we heard this morning. We are committed to maintaining that path that we set for ourselves with the fiscal rule. We are committed to maintaining the social policy in order to continue to lower the figures of poverty for the first time. Colombia has a large middle class, a greater than the poverty class that is unprecedented. We want to continue to grow the middle class because therein will lie the stronghold of the economy in the future. We continue to integrate the Pacific Alliance continues to be stronger. We have the next summit on July the first in Chile. That has also been a very positive factor because that is where the four countries come together, the four countries that have had the best performance in Latin America and that is why we know where we are headed. We are clear about it. We are fully aware that we need to pass in Congress a tax reform that will lower the level of taxing for those people who are paying very high taxes. We want to broaden the base of taxpayers and maintain the fiscal revenue of the nation and therefore maintain the balance that we have managed to achieve over the past few years. Another very important point that will help us with the economic performance, and it was mentioned by Felipe, is the most important thing that faces us right now and it is putting an end to a 50 year old conflict. Allow me very briefly to give you an overview of this process which started five years, five and a half years ago. I had just taken office. It was in my mind. I mentioned it in my inaugural speech. I said that the key piece was not at the bottom of the sea that it was in my pocket and that I would open it to the extent that I found that the conditions were the right ones. Which conditions were a prerequisite in order to have some degree of optimism in this attempted making peace? Well, on the one hand, in every conflict in the world today, it is very important to have a committed region, a region that is committed to the solution of the conflict. When I came to the presidency, our relationships with our neighbors were very poor, so I decided that we should fix those relations as a prerequisite to have a successful process. Another very important condition was to realize that the other party has the willingness to reach a peace agreement, something that was non-existent in the past, that was achieved with military strength. It was achieved by shifting the correlation of forces, of military forces, because some years back we had a situation of inferiority. In Karwan, for example, at that time the guerrillas believed that they could take power through the weapons, but that changed and we have been unrelenting in the military because that is a prerequisite in order to achieve a negotiated peace from a strong position of force. I am told that I am very close to FARC. It's some sort of a criticism to the process. I really do not understand. Close neighbor called me the executioner because nobody has beaten them so hard because the number one, the number two leaders have fell, 63 of the commanders have fell, and that is what finally allowed us to sit down to the table when they realized that they would never come to power through force. Given those prerequisites and those conditions we decided to set for ourselves a roadmap that was realistic, that was imbued with dignity, in these circumstances that is very important and the military know that the other party needs an exit with dignity. We need to build for them a silver bridge or the golden bridge and something that would be totally acceptable for the people of Colombia. So one of the first announcements that were made when we made this process public was that this indeed should be endorsed by the people and it will be endorsed through a plebiscite. At that time and with the help of international advisors and friends, they told me 50% of a negotiation is the agenda. You need to probe these people about their will to reach an agreement and you can do that by determining if they can reach an agreement around an agenda and do it in secret and that's what we did. We negotiated the agenda for two years in secret. It contained six items and we made it public in October or November of 2012 and that is where the negotiation started. So very briefly, which are those items on the agenda, the first one and around which there is an agreement already is called comprehensive rural development, which is no different than what needs to be done with the rural areas that have been neglected by the state precisely because the armed conflict has happened in the rural areas over the past 50 or even 100 years. So it is very backward. Therein is concentrated poverty. There is inequality and there is backwardness in the rural areas and what we agreed upon was a plan. A plan to invest more in the rural areas to do what we should do with or without the FARC. We are not going to expropriate. We are not going to build Soviet communes. Nothing of the sort. We are just going to build more roads, more schools, more hospitals. We are going to bring loans and we are going to bring the state and not only for FARC but for all the farmers and peasants because that's another myth. People believe that we are going to be developing a policy just for the FARC and that the other peasants are not going to receive anything. We have agreed upon something that will benefit all the farmers, all the people who work the land in Colombia. The second point or item is political participation. It is no different than strengthening democracy. Democracy consists of a series of institutions and institutions have to adapt to new circumstances to new times and that is why they need permanent renewal. Democracy per se is imperfect so we always need to find a way to strengthen it and that is what we agreed upon. Under that second item one consideration is to give more guarantees to the opposition and that is something that is required in every democracy. The opposition wants more representation for areas that have been underrepresented in power and that is what we have negotiated under that second item on political participation. The third very important item for us who, well us in Colombia, a country that has paid a huge price in the war on drugs declared by the UN 40 years ago and we're trying to change the approach on this war on drugs which we have not won after 40 years and which Colombia has been a victim of. We have paid the highest price of any other country in the world in this war on drugs. It has been the fuel of all the manifestations of violence in this country and I insisted a lot on including drug trafficking because I was also aware that the guerrillas derived their funding from drug trafficking and they recognize it of course they don't like it when we call them drug traffickers because they say that they are not drug traffickers but they do acknowledge that they have derived their funding from drug trafficking. So this was a very important point because in all the attempts that Colombia has made and Colombia has been considered successful in the struggle against drug trafficking but nonetheless we continue to be the primary exporter of cocaine to the international markets. Why precisely because of the presence of the armed conflict because every time we go to those areas where coca grows our armed forces are received with the might of the weapons and the landmines of the guerrillas they finally take over they eradicate coca plants but since they cannot stay in the area forever they leave the military leave and then the next day the farmers come in again with more productive cultivars varieties. So this is like a static bicycle where you where you peddle and peddle and get nowhere but now we can because without that military might and with the FARC committed to collaborating with the substitution of illegal crops with legal crops for the first time we will have an opportunity to reduce this problem of drug trafficking and production in Colombia. The fourth item and the most challenging and the most important is the victims. This is the first process that places the victims in the center of the solution of this conflict. Why did we do this? Because first of all we have more than 8 million victims identified. If we needed if we wanted lasting peace we had to consider the victims and put them in the limelight. Moreover from the point of view of the solution of an armed conflict that should be permanent we need to heal the wounds of a war that has lasted for so long. And we started before the conflict is over we have already started to redress the victims. We passed a law on redress of the victims and land restitution. The secretary general of the UN said that this had never been done before and so far 600,000 victims have been redressed physically. The country that has given reparation to the largest number of victims in the history of this planet after an armed conflict had not given reparation to more than 20% of what we have done already. So they are at the center of the solution now. And we designed the negotiation around the respect for the rights of the victims, the right to truth. And we set up a commission of truth. Truth is what most of the victims want. Where is my daughter? Where is my son? Why was he killed? Why were these atrocities committed? So it's a very important thing to do in order to heal the wounds. The second right, the right to reparation to redress. This is what we're doing, individual and collective reparation. The third, very, very important point, which is that the crux of any negotiation has to do with justice. And what was the attitude that we adopted? We said we are going to look to transitional justice designed precisely to solve armed conflicts like the conflict in Colombia. And within that framework of transitional justice that Felipe says that needs to also be transactional to achieve within it the maximum justice that we can in order to achieve peace. And that is how we came to the negotiations. And for the first time in history, the two parties in the conflict managed to design a justice. Usually, the justice is imposed by the UN or a third country. But not only that, it's the first time that a guerrilla group, that an insurgent group agrees to decommission weapons and to turn themselves over to justice. That has been established already. The those who are responsible for crimes against humanity will be investigated, prosecuted, convicted and punished. So this is not a peace with impunity. There is no such thing. There is no impunity. And what we agreed upon meets the minimal international standards. The Treaty of Rome, we are the first negotiation under the Treaty of Rome under the oversight of the International Criminal Court. And we are complying with those minimum requirements. And also we are meeting the requirements of our laws and constitutions. And we created a special jurisdiction, a very sweet, generous jurisdiction for peace. And many say that this is a precedent for the rest of the conflicts in the world, what the Colombians have done. And of course, the right of the victims to non-repetition, which is the what will guarantee that never again will these atrocities occur. And the fifth and the sixth items on the agenda have to do with the end of the conflict, what the British call the DDR, disarmament, demobilization and reintegration of the guerrillas into civilian life. They are going to abandon their weapons and decommission their weapons under the oversight of the United Nations. And that is very important that the UN Security Council unanimously approved the mandate to the Secretary General. And the officials from the UN are already here in Colombia deploying their entire organization to monitor the decommissioning of the arms and the transition, the areas where they will concentrate, the way they will hand over the weapons and the timing. And a lot of progress has been made in that regard. In the next few days, I hope that that negotiation will be completed, how they will hand over their weapons to whom, where they will be concentrated, how many areas and for how long. And point number six or the six item on the agenda has to do with endorsement. That is to say that the people of Colombia will give their A or their no to what was negotiated. The plebiscite was selected. Why a plebiscite? Because any other route was impractical. The other one was a referendum and the referendum according to our own constitutional court cannot be presented as a whole. It has to be individual question by question. But imagine a referendum containing 100 questions. There's no possibility that it can succeed. So the plebiscite asks for a yes or a no to the agreements. And the plebiscite was given a threshold of 13.5 percent. Consultations with the people have a different, have a threshold of 15 people have criticized that it was brought down unanimously and abusively from 25 percent, sorry, down to 13.5 percent, but it was not so. This was an initiative passed in Congress in a very democratic way. 13.5 percent of the threshold has to do with the votes that need to approve what was negotiated. It doesn't have to do with the total number of votes. And what this does is force the people that are not in agreement to come to the polls in the past with the other system, abstention, which in Colombia has always been high, was used to defeat the initiative. So what we're trying to do here is to be more democratic because we do not allow the abstention to play in here. And 13.5 percent is equal to the 25 percent, which is the threshold for consultations, popular consultations. So there is no such abuse of democracy. The plebiscite has to be approved by the constitutional court. I hope that within the next few days the court will approve, will give its okay. And as soon as the plebiscite is approved, I am sure that the vast majority of Colombians will vote in favor of the plebiscite because, yes, people have said if the plebiscite is denied, we will be able to negotiate a better agreement. Please do not make that mistake. If we do not approve the plebiscite, we will go back to the state of war. It's as simple as that. It's not that we're going to go back to the table. We're going to go back to the state of war. Because people have wanted to say vote for the no, because that way we will get more years of jail for those who are guilty of crimes against humanity, and we will get a better negotiation. That is not true. The negotiation is a package. It's a bundle. Like with any negotiation, there are things where you need to compromise. And that is why I was mentioning also transactional justice as part of transitional justice. And what we achieve is an excellent balance, I believe. I believe it will help us as a country to leave or to close that horrendous chapter of a 50-year-old war. There are families who have three generations that have been born in the gorillas. They are the sons, the daughters, the grandchildren of the gorillas. A society cannot take it anymore. We cannot take any more war. And that is why I am absolutely persuaded that we will come to the end. The conditions are there, and we will take that step to make sure that all of our western hemisphere, all of the Americas, may be considered a territory of peace. We are the only country that still has an armed conflict. So here for our dear guests, for entrepreneurs, the only thing that we are negotiating here is the transition of an armed group toward legal life. We are not negotiating our economic model, our democratic system, our armed forces, which was something that, in other countries, was the first thing that was negotiated. That is the way it happened in El Salvador, in Guatemala, where the insurgents said, well, our enemies, those that we have been combating since we are demobilizing should also demobilize. We did not even allow this to be part of the agenda of the negotiating table. Quite on the contrary, we are going to need strong armed forces, a more effective police force, because the Colombian terrain territory is still very large, very complicated, and we are going to have to ensure our sovereignty and the security of our citizens. And it will give us a great opportunity to free many soldiers and police officers who are fighting the war today to work on citizen security, public safety. So those of you who are afraid of what happened in El Salvador, where violence increased, things are quite different here. We will have many more resources, many more units, units referring here to the number of police officers and soldiers who are working on public safety, on the safety of everyday citizens in the cities and in the countryside. And we have done this with great rigor, very methodically. Every step that we have taken has been studied, analyzed. We accept some things and we don't accept others. And I think that for this reason, we are close to the end of this road. And once we have all the agreements, those people who are afraid today, those who are fearful, either because they have been misinformed or because they have grown so accustomed to war that change causes them some concern, will realize, as Mandela reminded us, that agreements need to be evaluated by what they say in black and white, not by what people say about the agreements, not by what the rumors say, or by what both parties have been trying to sell to the public throughout the process, once the process is over, once we adopt the procedure, since we have agreed that nothing is negotiated until everything is agreed when we finish a negotiation, which I expect will happen in the next few weeks. And we have the agreements at hand, and people understand then that what was negotiated is in fact acceptable, and it will bring nothing but benefits for the country. Once this happens, I believe there will be an avalanche of support for this process. And then we are going to begin a new stage in Colombia. We're going to truly start a peace-building process without killing each other. That is what we're negotiating right now. Thank you so much, Mr. President. And allow me to tell President Santos that this is the most complete explanation that I have heard about the process. And Mr. President, I want to offer a couple of comments before opening the floor for questions. My first comment about the first part of your intervention, and I'm referring now to Colombia, but I could be referring to Argentina after hearing President Macri and the region as a whole. The region is going through hard times. There are many, many differences, probably the worst situation, and the region is Venezuela, which is truly worrying. It's reaching incredible levels. But the whole region is in difficulties. However, it's a region that has, I would say, an intercultural, inter-regional coexistence that isn't seen anywhere else. We're exempt of these problems. If this conflict is finished, and I hope this happens very soon, we're going to live under radically different expectations. This is a young region. And the region that I belong to, Europe, is aging. We are aging. We are getting too old. The demographic pyramid is misshapen. And I say this as a representative of this class of people, old people. I'm not referring to other old people, but myself. And sometimes I joke about this. In our agreement with Turkey, the 6 billion euros, so refugees are contained there. Well, what I tell people is, well, Europe is like full of men my age, who are aware that they've lost their sex appeal, and now they're trying to substitute it with a check appeal. And that doesn't work. Look, if Colombia and Latin America ask themselves, and we can ask ourselves many questions, our obligation as political leaders is to insert our countries in the best possible conditions into this phenomenon of globalization, economic, social, political, media globalization, and we have to ask ourselves, for example, about three strategic variables, under what conditions are we in the first of the three strategic variables, and Macri said this this morning, that is going to condition us for the future, which is the agricultural food business. We're going to have to feed 9 billion people very soon. And I can assure you that the Chinese leadership is worried about many things and pollution and so on. They're not going to allow China to go hungry again. They've done it once. They don't want to have that to happen again. So there is a strategic variable. Where would Colombia fit in? Where would Latin America fit in here? Second strategic variable, energy. Of course, we're going through a low oil price cycle, et cetera. And I don't want to fall into the demagogical temptation, but I feel that 40 years from now, even more than 40 years from now, half of the energy consumption necessary for the world will depend on fossil fuels. Even though on paper we can imagine anything else, we can talk about clean energy, but I feel that this is just going to be the case. And of course, we need to make changes due to climate change. But this is a reality. The third variable that affects the former two, what do we do with our human capital for research, development and innovation? What do we do with the young? Do we have that human capital? And I'll go back to the demographic argument. When they ask me about Europe, they say, well, how do you see Europe? Is it a museum or laboratory? That's a good question. And I am a Europeanist European. I wouldn't want us to lose our museum qualities, but I would be very, very concerned if what Europe has been in recent century, a laboratory for ideas and initiatives were to be lost. Well, Latin America has it and it has plenty of it. Another comment about this, Latin America in general and Colombia in particular are very well positioned to respond to those questions, developing its infrastructure and so forth. And about peace, how would we receive it? Well, Mr. President, your process over these few years, look, I began to be aware and I began to cooperate in peace attempts in Colombia under the Belisario Betancourt government, fully committed. And from then until now, and Samper just talked about it, every president of Colombia that I have met as a president, as a head of government, which I was for many years, as in the opposition, every single president has tried it. And in one way or another, in every peace process, I've been close to be prudent, sometimes more than close. And everyone has attempted it in good faith. More than 80% of the Colombian population has only known a state of internal war in their country. Can you imagine? They used to say this about guerrillas, more than 80% of the Colombian population. So one of the things that I understand, first of all, becoming more aware of the process and getting close to it, not because of my respect and even admiration for President Santos, who has dared to take this seriously. And it's not because it's President Santos, because it's happened to me with every single president. I've always been willing. I've always seen an absolutely good faith effort. And for the first time in my life, I see that a good faith effort is capable of achieving a final result for the first time. And to boot, because I've been doing this for many years, I understand that these are rough figures, around 80% of the population who want peace, say. And also 80% of the population or 20% of the population that mistrusts the negotiation, or rather 80% that mistrusts. How do you understand that? Well, understanding that mood is perfectly understandable, just because of the explanation that I've just given Mr. President. I've lived through Belisario de Tancura's attempt in the next one and the next one and the next one. And people start saying, we're never going to be able to talk with these guys ever. This will never end this conflict. In addition, negotiation processes are tremendously difficult, because in this networked society, in the internet era where everything has to be transparent, even pornography, well, in this society, a five-year negotiation has a multitude of interpretations. Everybody will draw their own conclusions. And those who are sitting sweating at the table, sweating, literally, because Havana is hot, like Cartagena, cannot be explaining themselves about every detail, especially under the commitment that you don't agree anything until everything is agreed. For this reason, we have what in philosophy we call the process arcana that is unknown. And if we don't know the details, we can invent them or say, recently I've heard people say, how much is peace going to cost? When I hear people doing a calculation, making calculations, first I find them obscene. And I say this with all the love I have for Colombia. But to continue, I say, did you ever sit down to calculate how much war costs in addition to the cost of human suffering? I can assure you that war is much more expensive. War. Declaring then, declaring war to war on poverty, or on internal displacement, or on hunger, or on the lack of education in children and health care. That is the war that we need to win. Even if it were more expensive than the destructive war, which is not true, it would still be worthwhile. For this reason, Mr. President, I am very hopeful that this will happen and I hope it happens soon. Moreover, I would like to encourage those who need to leave their boots behind and start asking for votes to see how many they can get to hurry up. Because what is true as part of everything that we hear is that managing peace is always more complicated than managing war. For that reason, we are in a hurry. We are in a hurry in every sense of the word. And we need to leave some time for questions. But, Mr. President, going against the grain, understanding that we are mired by a mood of concern and loss of confidence and so on. So going against the grain, against the current, I am perhaps more hopeful and more confident than ever. And I've been following this process for many years, for three and a half decades, out of the five decades of this conflict. And this is going to be achieved, and it's going to change that mood. We are going to have a Colombia in peace, a Colombia that is growing at 3 percent with an armed conflict. And with the lack of confidence that causes, can you imagine what is the potential growth without conflict? But I'm not measuring it in figures, please. Because the cost of a single human life cannot be measured in figures. It is more than that. So the truth is, Mr. President, despite everything, of course I want the peace process to be successful, which belongs to Colombians, not just to President Santos and much less so to the FARC. It is rather the right of every Colombian. I want it to be successful. And I also want your presidency to be successful for Colombia's sake, not only for peace, but because the country is on the pathway to modernity, to development, like no country in Latin America. Now, quick questions, otherwise they're going to kick us out, because the people at the world, the economic forum, are very serious, and we like to talk. So we need to be done in five minutes. Please ask some questions. Muchas gracias. Thank you very much. It is a privilege to be able to ask you this. And it says a lot about both of you, that you open the possibility for strangers like me to address you with questions. President Santos, it strikes me sometimes your proposal does. I would say many can opposition between either peace or war. Have the FARC told you in that negotiation that if they don't sign peace, war is coming because somebody who sits at the table with the real willingness to achieve peace, it would seem that if they're threatening with returning to war, they don't really have the intention to make peace. So my question is, how can you be so sure that if you don't sign this agreement, the war will continue? And my second question was this. Any process of this nature in the countries that I have been lucky enough to live has always been a process that hasn't been partisan. In Colombia, polarization is increasingly marked and there is a segment of the population that has its questions. I'm not going to say that they're a majority because I'm a foreigner. I don't know your country, but how would you introduce the necessary reforms so that your peace proposal can convince the majority of Colombians or many more Colombians, many of those who are currently unconvinced? How do you keep it from being a proposal from President Santos, but rather a bipartisan or multi-partisan proposal or a state proposal? Thank you very much. Allow me to answer your questions briefly. First of all, how do I know that if there are no agreements, we're going to go back to war? Well, because we have very extensive information that they are prepared to go back to war and to urban war, which is much more devastating than rural war. That is a reality. I know this and that is why it is so important for us to reach an agreement. Second, I am the first one to say, like Felipe said, that this isn't my piece or my government's piece for the past five and a half years. What I have tried to do is to incorporate every political party to this process and every social organization as well. And the fact is that every political party is a part of it, not only the parties that support my administration. Opposition parties are also part of the peace process. They participate. I have in my cabinet people from the Polo Democrático Party, which is an opposition party, from the Green Party, which is not part of the government. The only party that has remained outside of their own decision, not ours, is former President Rivas' party, to whom we have made all sorts of offers, to ask them to at least agree on this. What could be more important for any nation than achieving peace? We have made every possible offer to them. And what we are doing is precisely what he wanted to do when he was president, because I know I was by his side. He wanted this piece. He wanted to make peace with the FARC. He tried it. He went to Cuba, and he was there for three years negotiating with the ELN. So it's not a lack of will on my part or a lack of will on the government's part that they remain outside of this process. But the rest of Colombia, the rest of all the political parties are all accompanying this process, fortunately. Well, this can always happen in a political struggle. Maybe if we can lower the drama level, because it's a very serious thing. And something will always happen in politics, which is the scene from the Marx Brothers and the two hard-boiled eggs. But if I was there, it would be two more hard-boiled eggs if you've seen the film. We will never know. But I've known this country for a long time. And can we go back to war? In addition to the information that you may have that I don't have, 50 years attest to the fact that we have gone back to war before. So an inclusive agreement from the democratic standpoint and in terms of development is the only guarantee. And we're going to be fined if we don't leave the room very quickly. So one more question, please. President and President Gonzalez, it is a true pleasure. I feel that as important an effort as what Colombia is undertaking should bring together every part of society, including entrepreneurs. And there's a fundamental part of this process to make it successful. The question is how do we integrate former combatants into economic activity? And my suggestion, Mr. President, is please bring us the business community together. I feel that those of us in this room have the right tools to find active, efficient economic solutions to bring those people back into the fold. Otherwise, those 10, 15 or whatever many thousand people will very quickly become a problem, a short-term problem. So I'd like to invite you to, as one of your conclusions, invite us, conven us as entrepreneurs to join the peace effort and to put in not our grain of sand but our brick in the construction of a new future for Colombia. Thank you. Thank you very much. And yes, in fact, we have already demobilized more than 58,000 combatants. Colombian entrepreneurs at first were very reticent to accept former combatants, reinserted into their companies. But gradually they have been coming to realize that many times they are in fact even better workers than regular workers. We are no longer so mistrustful. Now, how many people are going to reintegrate compared to the 58,000 that already have? They aren't that many, I would say between eight and 10,000. And for that reason, the contribution of the private sector will be fundamental to welcome them. And we are already in that process of approaching those companies that could be most suitable to perhaps open a fan of opportunities for the reinserted guerrilla combatants. And your company is one of those, one of the first ones who took that step and I thank you for it and you're a witness that it can be done and that it should be done. Thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you all. We've exceeded our time, so have a good afternoon.