 Thanks very much for joining us Professor Shen. I was wondering if you could talk to us a little bit about how you see China playing a positive role in terms of its global leadership. Well, many friends load and belt initiative. It's a win-win project. China wants to promote its export of what it has called oversupply of those cement and iron steel. But China can pack these into the format like a fast rail, airport, seaport, terminal bridge, etc. And this may entice the demand side. China gives us a supply side. And China asks, are you interested? The six countries say yes. So this is a regional and a global leadership. Let's talk a little bit more about the Belt and Road Initiative. It can easily be sold as a win-win strategy and a wonderful piece of economic diplomacy. But the rest of the world still has some concerns about it. Do you understand where those concerns come from and do you have suggestions about how China could do better with the Belt and Road Initiative to make those fears? Concerns are multiple. Indians concern why China would give so much money to build Pakistan so quickly and especially build over the territory which is called the Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. Indians think it's my land. How China can go to this land illegally occupied by Pakistan without consulting with me? India is unhappy. Japan thought China would grab lots of market so that it may undercut Japan's export. And some countries may think China may give finance to a country which may not be able to repay. So why China has such an unreasonable economic partnership? And what if China would use this high rail for a strategic purpose? So lots of such questions that China need to explain. And first, China need to think about this before it would push for envelope. So for example, with India, they boycotted the big summit, the Beijing summit and I'm sure China would have been quite the Chinese official would have been quite upset by that decision but does something happen after that for the Chinese to try and speak to the Indians or alleviate their fears? Before the forum, China already has taken measures to mitigate India's concern. The Indian concern is that the land is under dispute. Why you build a road over such a place which should belong to India? China's response is that I did not take a position. Who deserves the ownership? Who should have the sovereignty? I just want to help the poor people living in this place. India said, no, you cannot do it. China said, what we change is the name of this CPAC, China-Pakistan Economic Corridor to China-Pakistan Indian Economic Corridor. India said, no, as long as you keep doing it, you cannot change my perception despite the change of name. So China is willing to change the name to incorporate India to make it a trilateral project. We will keep working with India to soothe India's concern. I guess there is a fear of China as a rising power and no matter what they go out and do, it looks like it can be a win-win strategy or that they're helping other countries as well. There's still this reticence. Do you think that's warranted or do you think the rest of the world judges China unfairly sometimes? Well, I would say China changed its name from one belt to one load strategy to one belt and one load initiative or simply put, belt and load initiative. China must think the term strategy is not bad but not good as well. So let me move to a better word, which is initiative. Strategy means that China has well designed it to defeat somebody. It is strategy. It is to defeat poverty and underdevelopment but it may carry some military sense. So China now is more smarter to use a more or less politicized term, initiative. You're welcome to join and you're free not to join and we can partner at a later time. But then, as a country can consider that, China offers goods and take a risk so why we refuse the partnership. And China welcomes U.S. and Japan to join as well. So in the forum in May this year in Beijing, Japan and U.S. start to accept the idea and Prime Minister Abe is talking about Japan should partner with China for this initiative. If we can see some win-win between China and Japan that would be absolutely fantastic. China is unable to take a monopoly of all projects. We need Japan's technology, Japan's money, Japan's finance and Japan's willingness to partner. Otherwise, China will be too lonely. So you need joint leadership in the future, not China ruling the world. No, it should be Japan leadership. China supported Japan to take leadership. But Japan said I'm tired. You are welcome to take a co-leadership. So we should be polite. Not to say I'm the leader. Deluding you are not a leader. We should be polite. Not to take a very high-handed position. Culturally sensitive. I think that sounds wonderful and particularly in the current global context to have a polite global leader would be something we'd all look forward to very much. Respectful leadership.