 Juan Gallardo, thank you very much for being on WPC-TV. Thank you. Pleasure to be with you again. You are a leading Mexican businessman, but also you are one of the negotiators of the original NAFTA agreement, North American Free Trade Agreement. What is wrong with NAFTA? Most economists think, probably all of them will say it's been a great success, Donald Trump doesn't think so. So what's wrong? How can it be improved? I think first let me say I was not a negotiator, I was just, I had the privilege of coordinating the Mexican private sector in a very close teamwork with our negotiating team. And I think that NAFTA has been an extraordinary success. I mean, I won't go into any numbers or anything, everybody knows it and so on. It withstands any kind of analysis. But as any agreement that you made almost a quarter of a century ago, you look back on it and the world has changed and things could be improved and deepened and modernized and transformed and so on. So I think there's a very, very unique opportunity here today. But Donald Trump, of course, doesn't like, say, deficits. Well, I don't think you measure an agreement by the deficits. I mean, that is perfectly clear. It makes it, that is not the measurement in what you do. You should measure by volume. You should measure by jobs created. You should measure by chains of production. You should measure by internal contract, et cetera. From your point of view, how could it be improved? Well, I think there's several things. For example, the whole issue of transformation in the world, e-commerce, for example, obviously a big subject that can be deepened and improved and that wasn't even included in the first go-around for the simple reason it didn't exist. You know, the second, I mean, Mexico at the time and today has undergone major changes. One of the most important is in energy and in telecommunications. At the time, those two issues were not on the table. Today, they're not only on the table, they're being totally transformed. And locking them in with a further naft, I think, makes a lot of sense. Then another thing, which is very important, is the whole dispute settlement system. What we put together in the first go-around needs more teeth, needs more enforceability, needs more speed, needs more transparency. And I think that there's the opportunity to do that. Here you have at the table today a little over 700 technical people from three countries who know each other, respect each other, and who have worked together for many, many years and who can certainly come up with the solutions to this modernization transformation. So I think it would be absolutely absurd that three countries who have had the level of integration that we have had would not be able to find the steps ahead to further it and improve what was done. Professor, do you think that the absurdity will be avoided? I totally, I think it will take some time. There certainly will be some difficulties along the way, as we're already sensing. But I think that common sense will prevail and common interest will prevail. The big difference, you see, when we did the nafta thing 25 years ago, we were selling a vision. Today we're defending a reality. It's a completely different game set. I wish you the very best of luck in defending the reality. I'm sure it's in everybody's interest to have nafta. Win, win, win. That's the idea. Win, win, win. Thank you very, very much. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you.