 Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. This is great to see. I was just having the conversation with the minister and the general about the number of people in this room on an August afternoon minister. This is a tribute to how important this topic is. So let me welcome you all. My name is Bill Taylor. I'm the executive vice president here at the United States Institute of Peace. We are so pleased to be able to welcome the minister of defense of Georgia here to speak to us this afternoon on a range of issues. As probably most in this room know, the minister has been in Washington for a couple of days, has had senior meetings, of course met with our secretary of defense yesterday, had a very good conversation with Secretary Carter about a range of issues having to do with Georgia's security, about other issues having direct impact on both Georgia and the United States. Her colleague, Secretary Ash Carter, was very impressed with the kinds of conversations that they had, and it was a very productive conversation. She's also had conversations at the White House. I know she met with the assistant secretary of state across the street, Victoria Newland, and a strong supporter of Georgia. Georgia faces challenges. We know these challenges. Georgia has been a stalwart ally of the United States and of NATO activities around the world. Georgia has demonstrated its capabilities, its military capabilities, its diplomatic capabilities, its political capabilities. Georgia is being a strong ally for the United States and for the NATO nations. It's important for us to understand the kind of challenges that Georgia faces. You can see one of the challenges that Georgia faces just by looking at the map. So this is a great opportunity for us. So Mr. Kitashele's background is well known to you. She has a legal background. She has been in this position to demonstrate to the world and to the Georgian people the commitment to European integration, to NATO integration, to EU integration. This is the kind of strong message that the minister has provided both from Georgia but also to Georgia. So we again are very pleased to have the minister here. We will be looking forward to her remarks here. Then I will join her for a couple of questions. We're very much looking forward to your questions and a dialogue following her remarks. So prepare your questions and please welcome the minister of defense of Georgia. Thank you very much to Yusuf for hosting this event. I know it's August and it's not probably the best time to be engaged in this kind of activities but times are difficult and even tragic, I would say, in my parts of the world and we don't have time for vocation or enjoying summer holidays, unfortunately. This map is actually showing lots of things and lots of troubles Georgia is in today and has been historically. But if there is one thing that this map shows is that there is Georgia stands as the only kind of an exceptional place in that part of the world that still did not give up and still fights for the success. For proving to everybody that success is possible without Russia being in charge. That success is possible without having permission taken from Moscow as to your actions and activities. This is probably the main reason why Russia fights so much so desperately against everything that matters to Georgia and against every ambition that Georgia has. It is absolutely impossible and acceptable for our northern neighbor to have a successful country coming out of the Soviet Union by its own. What is happening in today's Russia I would characterize in a very simple one sentence saying that Mr. President Putin is kind of recovering Russia from its post-Soviet breakup, post-Yeltsin drama when Baltics escaped, when Russia was weak and some other countries in the world took over and dominated and set the agenda that was winning agenda for those countries who have escaped at that time. Today he proves that those mistakes are part of the history. Russia is back on this scene and it's not going to allow for anyone in its immediate neighborhood and its sphere of influence to have a say without them, without their permission, without their engagement. It's dangerous for the region because if Georgia is successful somebody might get the wrong idea that it will work for them as well and might go on the same road and fight exactly the same fight as Georgia went through for these 22 years. And it's dangerous for Russian voters and for the Russian leadership itself because the Russian voters might ask questions about success of Georgia, about this kind of a success that they are not experiencing and is not happening in Russia. This is one of the reasons why Georgia's success matters. This is one of the reasons why it should be important for not only for us but also for our friends, partners, allied countries that Georgia succeeds in this exercise to set an example to prove to all those countries in the region that if you try hard, if you work hard, then success is guaranteed and is possible. The couple of years ago or six years ago when the European neighborhood policy has started and that's probably one of the best examples of unfortunate failure, the European neighborhood policy started with six countries. Europe was very enthusiastic, Brussels was making plans one after another and today in May, we had only basically one and a half countries left on that path. Belarus never worked, Armenia and Azerbaijan almost did not show up, well one of them did not show up, the other one almost walked out of the room. Problems, big problems, significant ones in Moldova, well Ukraine we all know and there was just Georgia standing as one country alone trying to prove its cause and trying to prove that we deserved a chance given in Riga. And we can cite lots of examples like that of different projects that the world has started during the last 20 years being it NATO, the European Union when those countries were falling apart and Georgia is still there. It stays on the same path and desperately says that we are not going anywhere and we are going to fight it to the end. I don't want to make a long speech here because I will be more willing to answer your questions and address the issues that you are interested in and you want to hear Georgia in perspective to those issues but just a couple of more arguments that I want to make for the reason why I am here today and why we are going to different capitals of the world, searching for answers and providing arguments for the kind of work that Georgia has engaged in and the past that we are on. We came to Washington with double agenda, kind of double agenda one which is to strengthen our partnership with the United States to have more tangible results out of this partnership to have people in Georgia believing, seeing, actually touching the results of this partnership to have Georgia military even more engaged with our American counterparts and at the same time to search for the answers and advices as well as support on our NATO path. Also summit is coming and Georgia has made it very clear to all the nations and all the partners that we will be raising an issue of membership and enlargement stronger than ever. We believe that Georgia deserves it first of all but at the same time we believe that NATO needs it even more than Georgia does for its own credibility and for keeping the promises that this organization has been making over the years. We hear the argument that further advancement or enlargement of NATO in Russia's neighborhood might be triggering factor for Russia to act and we tell to our friends that it's a perception, legitimate one, maybe valid one but it's not the fact. Fact is different and the fact say that when NATO refused to enlarge in 2008 this is exactly when the war happened. This refusal or no courage on the side of NATO to accept the challenge was understood as a green light by Russia on acting in Georgia. And in 2009 the world said that, okay, let's forget what happened between two of us and start a new discussion, new partnership. We had the reset policy and lots of other things following it. Russia was considered as a partner again and there were lots of other ways tried for this partnership but then Ukraine happened. And I think after that, if before that, if after the August war there was even an illusion that Russia can be a partner in any ways after Ukraine events and developments and the war, to name it as it is, it has become absolutely clear that there is no partnership to be expected from Russia, reliable, predictable partnership from a country which is able to go at any moment and invade independent country, change the territories of states, annex parts of it, collect the pieces of it and claim that they were part of Russia at one point of history. What we are seeing today in Georgia right after the Riga summit is another implication of that failure on the side of our partners. As soon as Riga did not deliver, Russia started action in Georgia. So again it was not triggered by delivery but it was welcomed by non-delivery in all cases that the modern times history shows. We are witnessing in South Ossetia on this artificial border that Russia drew in 2008 after the occupation, daily movements on the territory of Georgia proper. Russian troops have moved 100 meters, 500 meters, kilometer, two kilometer away from that artificial border for the last three months. Last one month was the most difficult and most problematic for us. Georgian government says that we are going to keep patience, we are not going to respond, we are not going to allow for the war on the territory of Georgia to happen again and by that stopping Georgia's development and Georgia's movement towards the NATO or European Union. We are not going to be provoked. But at the same time we need to keep in mind that the place where the Russian checkpoints will be created pretty soon. These are the points that they have marked recently in July and August, are only half kilometer away from the main road, main highway in Georgia. The question obviously here is whether their target is to block that main highway and to cut the country in two. There is only one highway which is connected east and west of Georgia to each other. If Russian soldiers and tanks are rolled to that highway, that's it, the country will be simply cut in two. Whether it's a target or target is just the idea of them moving on the highway and us working on this issue constantly and forgetting everything else that we are committed to and we are working on together today. Whichever is their goal for the short term, it's absolutely clear that waiting for Warsaw decision and depending on Warsaw decision, that's the territory, that's the movement. We are going to be seeing either backwards or forward. Again, depending on the decisions of the Warsaw. And the last thing about the timing of the Warsaw Summit, which is crucially important as well for Georgia, is that it's July 2016, which makes it right in the middle of the electoral campaign for our major parliamentary elections in October 2016. And Warsaw summits or whatever will come out of the Warsaw Summit will be big parts of decision Georgia voters will be making in October 2016. Skepticism is growing, especially because of Ukraine in Georgia. People start to get disillusioned about the prospects of Georgia's integration into either European Union or NATO. Our colleagues and leaders of European nations especially very often reminds to the rest of the world that there will be no expansion, either of the European Union or the NATO for the next five, ten years. There are different deadlines given, different by different leaders. But again, these are just the political statements. Whatever happens in Warsaw will be a fact already. We see, and just I want to conclude with that, we see Warsaw Summit as two, ended with two possible outcomes. One which is saying no to the enlargement and by that creating in the best case scenario kind of Article 5 iron curtain in Europe. When NATO will say finally clearly that these are my boundaries, rest of it I don't care, rest of it is under the Russia's political dominance, interest, settle the problems, settle the issues, deal with it before the next summit. Or there will be an expansion and very clear message, there will be an enlargement and a very clear message sent by NATO members to Russia that partners matter the same way as the members. And this partnership matters to NATO. And if there is anything that the history proved to us, is that NATO brings power of peace. There was no war as far as NATO expanded. And the only reason why Baltics are safe now, for now at this moment, is because they are members of NATO. But if that decision is not made in Warsaw, then I'm pretty sure that that will encourage Russia not only in Ukraine and Georgia, but also for the next more advanced challenge for proving its leadership, which will be one of the NATO member countries from their former space of influence probably. And I don't see any reason or any practical argument action that will detail Russia from doing its, if things continue as they are right now. For a year and a half, there is a war in Ukraine. Different from Georgians, and I'm sorry to say that, but it's true. Ukrainians are fighting. If there is anything they proved, is that they are fighting. They are going to fight to the end and they are not going to surrender. And people are still dying there. And the world was not able to stop the war for a year and a half. I think that's the best answer to all the questions or all the arguments, perceptions that we are hearing around as to the intention of Russia and the potential that the West shows today to deter those challenges that are coming from Russia. So I hope very much that it's still one year before the Warsaw Summit. There is lots of time for thinking, discussion, arguments, dialogue. But at the end of the day, we will all come up with the same conclusions as to the level of threat Russia constitutes to the world, peace and security, as well as to the actions that need to be made in order to address that kind of a threat that is coming from Russia. Thank you very much. And looking forward for your questions very much. Minister, thank you very much for those remarks. As earlier, very direct, very straightforward, you have a very clear point. And I'm glad to be able to explore that a little bit. Before I do, let me welcome your excellent ambassador here, Ambassador Kedeshidze. I'm very glad to have him, as well as General Kapanadze. General, welcome. We're very glad to have you here in support of the minister. So I've just got a couple of questions. But again, I'm very much looking forward to, as the minister said, to your questions and your comments about this. Minister, you talked about the danger that we can see on the map. We can see in the upcoming decisions about Georgia, about Ukraine, as well as you pointed out. And you mentioned that it's even dangerous for the Russians. I've had several conversations. We've all had many conversations with people in this room with people like Zbigniew Brzezinski, who makes, I think, a related argument to the argument you're making, which is that if Russia absorbs Georgia, if Russia absorbs Ukraine, that is dangerous for the Russians and their eventual movement toward a responsible, democratic participation in the world community, in particular in Europe. What is your sense of, if you could elaborate your comment about the danger for the Russians of continued aggression? I don't think Russians today care that much about their democratic participation in anything. If there is anything that is gone, at least for now, and I very much hope for now, that will be Russia making an argument seriously that they want to be engaged in any democratic process in the world or they want to be a part of the democratic community. I think it's just gone. I think there is this idea of a big Russia, stronger Russia, dominating Russia, Russia being in charge of everything in this world, is the policy and the dominant argument, which is there in Kremlin. If we talk about Russia as a society, as in Georgia, we have this thing about two Russians. Well, I never believed in this concept, but of course, there are people and there is part of this study in Russia which is not happy about the actions of its own country, which is not, which is very much worried about the future of its country. Well, most of those Russians are probably gone from Russia and live either here or in other parts of the world, but those who stayed there, there is a constant threat of physical survival for those who stayed there. But other than that, I believe that today, Russian politicians, being President Putin or any other, do not really have any trouble, any problem explaining things to their own voters as how they suffer because of this capitalist world, as it was during the Soviet times, which is making sure and making everything possible for making their lives miserable. And as long as there is an enemy, we just had this conversation before coming here, as long as there is this enemy, you can blame everything on them. For example, talking about the sanctions, why I think sanctions are not going to serve its purpose, although I'm very much positive about the facts that the democratic world was able to unite on something and have a consensus on some joint action. I don't think that the sanctions alone are not going to serve its purpose because for probably most of the voters in Russia, all the troubles that are coming because of the sanctions, like economic decline or poverty or declining currency and so on and so forth, are the reasons to believe that they will die as heroes in the fight against this capitalist world that causes all their troubles and sufferings rather than saying that it's because of my government's bad decisions that I have this problem. This propaganda is very well worked during the Soviet Union. There are masterminds who know how to do it. And of course, all of them are back to business now. And we see it every day on Russia Today and many other channels and the means of communication that are run directly from Kremlin. So it's a different world. And as soon as the rest of the democratic, civilized community will get it, understand it, sooner the problems will be solved and the solutions will be found. I always say one year ago, exactly with Mr. Vrijinsky, we had a dinner conversation at the CSIS and everybody was very enthusiastic about the sanctions saying that now the economy will decline and in a year people will go out and I don't know all those things that will happen waking up the Russian leadership because the people will be so dissatisfied that they will be obliged to react. And I was saying that there is one small thing missing from this discussion that this is the country where people were eating rats and cats for 900 days during the Leningrad war, whatever it was called at that time, crisis in the Second World War and they survived and they won eventually. This is country we are dealing with. So all those notions of hardship and happiness that we have here in the United States or in France or Italy are completely irrelevant. And I think that's the biggest mistake that we are all making there. Well, Georgia's less than the others, but still. Minister, you also said that NATO means peace. That is the Russians look at NATO nations and other than in wild fantasies, which I hope will remain fantasies, would not think of challenging a NATO nation. And thus your point on this trip, your point today about the importance of NATO membership for Georgia. And indeed, for Ukraine, we were talking earlier about the 2008, and you mentioned the 2008 discussion, NATO summit in Bucharest, where the support for NATO in Georgia was very high. I think you said 80%. The support for NATO membership in Ukraine was about 20% at that time. That's now changed, and so the support for NATO in Ukraine is now well over 50%. It's gone up dramatically because of the clear threat, because no NATO means no peace, and NATO does mean peace. Can you elaborate again a little further on the benefits, both for NATO and for Georgia, and indeed for security in Europe, for an expansion of NATO in Warsaw? Well, I think for Georgia the benefits are pretty clear, and we don't need to talk that much about it. For NATO, it's more important now because Georgia has made its decision. So now it's important to talk about the benefits for NATO to help NATO to make its own decision, because this is, we are the process is stuck. Why is it beneficial for NATO? Well, there might be lots of arguments, but some of them will be probably there. Well, first of all, NATO has made it very clear for many years about its commitment to partners, because NATO has been talking for all these years about open door policy. Because NATO was talking about 28 making decision rather than anyone else outside the club having the veto power, and because of so many other reasons of that kind. So if the decision is not delivered in Warsaw, and we are not even talking about the membership, unfortunately, well, we are talking about the membership, but realistically speaking, obvious expectation would be to have one step forward with NATO rather than immediate membership in Warsaw, being it map, or we can call it any other names, but in essence, meaning that there is no intermediary and Georgia is on a membership track without anything in between the two to be accomplished. So like it is in Bucharest declaration that Georgia will become a member of NATO, but upon the completion of map. So this intermediary step should be missing after the Warsaw Summit, because if it is not delivered, if the issue is on the table, straightforward, put by Georgia or any other country for that matter, and it's a no, then it puts the whole credibility of NATO under a serious danger. It puts all the statements they have ever made under a serious danger. I had a meeting with the Secretary General, and I've told him very openly when he was talking about 28 making decision and need for the consensus amongst the 28, which is right, absolutely, yes, we need all 28 countries to agree, but I was just asking him, do you really believe that if decision is not delivered in Warsaw, there's anyone in this world who's gonna believe that Slovakia or Austria, well Austria is not a member, but Slovakia or Great Britain or the United States for that matter was against it, and there was no big elephant in the room that suddenly nobody wants to be noticed. And yes, that will be a very clear message to Russia that they do have a veto power over the decisions of the organizations where they are not even present or which they are fighting so hard for the existence of this organization. This is, I always say without any hesitation, that today, looking at the developments in my parts of the world, NATO needs Georgia more to prove itself, to prove its strengths, to prove that the courage that was there when NATO was created is still there, then Georgia needs NATO, because when we talk about the map, map is not gonna get anything to Georgia other than we already have. Map is not Article V, nobody's obliged to defend Georgia tomorrow if we have Embassy Action Plan given, and all the other instruments that come with the map we already have. For a long time, for many years, all we are talking about now is to name something that we already have, to make a political statement that, okay, Georgia has passed one step and now it's on the membership track. And if we are told no on that, I think that's a very clear message that all those promises made were are staying just on the paper, and somebody out there, either in Brussels or any other capital of the NATO member states, really believes that there is a potential in partnership and in successful work with Russia. Today's Russia, with the Russia under the current leadership that we have there today. Mr. I have one more question that I'm going to ask our colleagues here for theirs. We've both mentioned Ukraine. Georgia has given good advice to the Ukrainians, Georgia has some relevant experience, 2008, and have... Big team of people sent for those advices to Ukraine. We also have people, you have Georgians in the cabinet, in the Ukrainian cabinet, and in the sub-cabinet. Yes, there is also a governor who also is maybe pushing reform along in a part of Ukraine that very much needs it. What, you've had this experience with the Russians since 2008. The Ukrainians now have a similar problem. The Russians have annexed Crimea and they have prompted and indeed participated in invasion in Donbas. So the Georgians have given advice to the government in Kiev. What advice geostrategically? What kinds of actions should the Ukrainians take based on the experience you've had since 2008? Well, there are two sets of issues there or two sets of the policies that need to be pursued. One, and Ukraine is in a hot phase of the war, which is obviously a different setup than what we have today. We say that Georgian government is working under the gunpoint, but at least we don't have open war going on our territory, which is unfortunate for Ukraine still. But on the other side, obviously, it's critically important to really start effective reforms in the parts of the country that Ukraine controls because that's kind of a winning lottery ticket for further advance and further development on the integration path. Again, it's kind of difficult to say now which 100% certainty that's an entry ticket anywhere with the unfortunate experience so far of Georgia, but it is absolutely necessary that at the end of the day we don't do those reforms for NATO or for the European Union. We do it because that's the only way to survive and to build your own country, to be proud citizen of a proud country which can claim all those things that we claim, membership to NATO, membership to the democracies and the family of nations that are united under the European Union. So number one thing that needs to be done, regardless of the difficulties, regardless of the fact that you are in a war, is not to stop, not to quit on the domestic front as well. Fighting the war is important, but it's much more difficult war that is inside to be fought and won inside the country if you have a dominantly corrupt system and if you have kind of close to the criminal regime, inherited kind of a criminal regime from your previous government. I think that's the crucial and most important lesson that we have learned. Unfortunately, we were not successful always, but that's why the friends are to learn from their mistakes and not to make the same mistakes. Thank you, Minister. We have now the opportunity for you to make comments, ask questions, and we would be very interested if you would state your name, your affiliation, and I think we will have a couple of microphones come to you as you better do this. So, right here, yes, sir. My question is, yesterday, as I know, you've met with Erskine Carter. So how much assistance from the United States are you expect to get in this year and next year? Thank you. How much money or how much? Money, okay. Shall I answer the question or we collect the questions? This is fine. At the beginning and then we'll see how much we're in on time. Okay. Well, yes, we had a very productive and very good meeting with this episode, and we spoke about all the different directions that Georgia and the United States are cooperating for the last 20 years. On those kinds of meetings, you don't discuss the details of cooperation. This is why staffs are, and there is gonna be a long dialogue and negotiations between the two, but what we have agreed is actually, agreed long time ago that the strategic partnership is key in our internal foreign policy, and we will continue on that even more than we had before being it within the NATO under the WALS package, SNGP, or on a bilateral level. Yes, sir. Yes, Luis Navarro, formerly resident of Georgia, consulted now. I wanted to ask, first of all, to share your hope that you'll have a positive statement from NATO out of Warsaw, but I do wanna make sure I understand the point you're making. You say that in 2008 the failure to go beyond the promise of membership was the reason for the Russian attack. Secondly, you say that there's a political statement that's missing, but you're receiving benefits, NATO training center defense system. So then, and then the third thing is that you mentioned the impact that that could have on the 2016 elections. Do you, my question is, do you anticipate that if you receive a no from Warsaw, that there are any sort of substantive actions that could be taken that would avert a negative reaction? And if not, what do you anticipate the ramifications of being that in the elections as you yourself raised? Well, if 2008, I think that we were, yes, we were given the promise of membership, but we were not given what we were asking for. We were given more as it was said at that time than membership action plan was, but unfortunately the same statement said that we still needed membership action plan, which meant kind of postponement of the process even more. And that was probably the reason why before December, before the next ministerial, which was given as a kind of a time for further dialogue and further consideration between Georgia and NATO, was seen by Russia as an opportunity. Exactly those six months were seen as an opportunity to act and stop Georgia. And they acted and stopped Georgia for now seven years, as we see on that chart and on that development. 2016, well, I hate to be predicting bad things. That's not something that any government wants to be part of and to be predicting. And I very much hope that I'm just fantasizing and it's not gonna happen. But unfortunately the history of this, all these delivery non-delivery summits proves that every time there is no result from either European Union or NATO summits delivered, then Russia gets activated and acts more. Today it's Ukraine. We don't know what will be happening in Ukraine or in any other neighbor of the Russia for that matter during this one year. But I am absolutely confident that if Warsaw is not delivering, then Russia will get even more aggressive than it is today. In both directions or in much more directions than we have today, than just Ukraine and Georgia. 2016 elections, my expectation, I think that it will be the time when political parties who run on Russian tickets will enter the parliament, which is not the case now, which was not the case in the previous parliament. We will have officially legitimized the pro-Russian political parties in Georgia with enough voters to be part of the official open politics. We will have members of parliament who will be advocating from that podium, the Russian case, but that will be it. I don't expect them either winning or coming with the substantial numbers. But to me personally, that's also the tragedy. That after 22 years, we might end up with something like that. But of course it's not a tragedy in a way that Georgia has not seen before anything worse. But then again, what will be their numbers on the elections will depend on the Warsaw outcome. And when I say Warsaw outcome, I don't mean that because of one or another solution, people will either fall in love with Russia and go and vote for the Russian political party or anything like that. But what it will affect are my voters. I'm not sure that my voters will show up in numbers as they used to in 2012 or any other election before that because disappointment is already big enough. And after the war, so if there is nothing there, of course it will be even bigger. And then better than I do, how it works with those numbers. You don't need to increase pro-Russian voters if the other side of the voters are not coming to the polls. Then automatically it gives the benefit to them. This is what I expect. I don't expect sentiments changing. I don't expect mood changing. People becoming predominantly anti-Western pro-Russian. No, it's not going to happen. But people becoming skeptical, yes. People becoming tired of delivered promises, yes. Mr. In addition to the people in this room, in addition to the people watching us online, there are others in another room, just on the other side here who came and were not able to fit into this room. But they are able to ask questions. Certainly, they can. They can. And a person over there has two questions for you and these in your position as Minister of Defense. Georgia faces an incursion threats from the north of Russia, from Russia. Once the newly acquired French air defense systems becomes operational, do you intend to use it against Russian aircraft violating Georgian airspace? First question. And the general is here. The general can help on this. Can I ask you a telephoto? That's right. And the second question, do you have contingency plans to prevent further creeping annexation of Georgian territory by separatists who now threaten east-west highway that you mentioned in your remarks? Well, air defense system, we've said it many times and I repeat it now. We are not buying anything to fight anybody or to start the war. This is purely for the defense purposes for Georgia. And the only aim Georgia has today, making its army better equipped, is to deterrence and is to make sure that an enemy thinks twice before making an action. So we are ready for Georgia becoming ready for any challenge that might be out there with being it in 2016 or before that. Are we going to shut down the plane? Well, I don't know how a sovereign independent state is going to act if there is a threat, practical threat constituted to its population or its territory. It depends. There is always a double answer to that question depending on the threat. Because we are seeing today lots of illegal air movements by Russian military, either planes or other instruments on the territories of NATO member countries, but they are not shutting them down because, well, it's not an immediate threat that those instruments are constituting to those countries. But again, if there is a direct threat from that, I believe that the obvious answer is always obvious from the independent self-respecting states. It depends on the level of threat it constitutes. That will be my answer. As for the creeping annexation and the highway issue, it's probably the same. Well, we, as I've said, are witnessing constant movement on the territory of Georgia. We are witnessing Russian soldiers running around with the maps that they've created by putting together different data from different maps published during the Soviet Union to 1922, 25, 38, 86. In those maps, you have different border lines for our autonomous republics. We get South Ossetia, Oropazia. What Russians did is that they put together the best options of any village on the territory of Georgia from those maps. So they basically joined forces of those four maps and now have this wonderful border line, which basically cuts the whole country in any direction in half. Now, the Russian intention is very clear. Like in 2008, before big day, they want us to be provoked. Before big day, they want to stop us. They want to have something happening in Georgia that will make it impossible for anybody to even talk to us, not to talk about making any decisions about us. Our intention is, as well, very crystal clear. We said we want to be provoked. We said, you cannot stop us. We are going to pursue this goal. And we are going to get there. Now, what is the red line, is the question, obviously. If they cut the highway, is it a red line or not? This is a tricky question. But I believe, and I'm very open and direct here, this is not the question only for us. It's a question for everybody, for all our partners. It's a question here in Washington. It's a question in Brussels. And this government, if there is anything we've said, is that we are not going to make any moves of that kind alone. And we will go through the consultation process constantly. And we will have friends on our side every time we decide to do something. So that's why it's not that I don't have answers to those questions, but I'm not ready to answer those questions openly. Before, again, I don't know what are the answers in the other parts of the world. We are it should matter. And not the same way as it matters for Georgia, obviously, because it's my country, not your country. But to a certain level, it should matter for our partners as well. I think that's where we are today. And yeah, we will be seeing much more developments of that kind. It's not just borderization or barbed wiring or creeping annexation. You have lots of Russian influence, or you have Russian influence growing in other ways as well in Georgia. You have NGOs, mushrooming. I've never heard of people you never knew were politically or publicly active, but suddenly are showing up on TVs, giving interviews, becoming these big shot experts with high salaries. We are seeing certain influences in Georgia media. We are as difficult still to say that is with 100% certainty that, OK, here it is. It's Russian paid or whatever. But you slowly but you see that it is happening. The moods are changing there. You have a different kind of reporting on some of the TV stations already. Too early to say anything finally, but it is there. You have political parties, as I've said, who are running on officially, openly, publicly, already on Russian ticket. Every time something happens, former speaker of parliament, the biggest friend and liar of Mr. Sarkash really in previous life, goes to Moscow and meets with Putin. And nobody knows what they talk about. But every time she goes to Moscow and comes back, something horrible happens in Georgia, like this very last moment of the border in South Ossetia, which happened right next day when she got back from Moscow. So lots of things like that. So it's not just physically moving border here or there, but you have all other means and tools used and implemented by Russia. But fortunately, they do not have first-side grounds in Georgia. If there is any country in the world where they do not have first-side grounds, that will be Georgia. But it does not mean that people will be staying as enthusiastic and over-optimistic as they were for all these years as to the potential of pursuing the goal that they have. Yes, right here. Jackie Mahler, Center for International Policy. Both economic and military aid from the United States is expected to increase for 2016. What does it mean to Georgia that it will be receiving the most aid out of Central Asia and the Caucasus? And how do you foresee this increased aid being put to use? Well, normally, there is always a framework to this aid. So it's not that aid is coming in. Then we start thinking how to spend it and what to do with it. There are traditional fields of cooperation between two countries that have been there always, being its defense sector, which is one of those, and reforms within the Ministry of Defense, or the rule of law. I see lots of people here who've been working on that for many years in Georgia. Education, which is one of those areas where we do need big support and assistance, especially from this country, being it supporting our universities and the educational system. They are in Georgia, as well as having more students sent here for the education. We're targeting the professionals that we need the most. Georgia is not Switzerland. There are so many different areas where we need expertise, support, both financial and expert aid to get on a right path and to have right reforms implemented. But we've learned a lot during these years of cooperation. And I think we've advanced to the level when it will be really a cooperation. It won't be any more student-teacher kind of an attitude. But there will be two equal partners sitting around the table and developing all those plans on the most effective use of the aid for the good of my country. Yes, sir. Thank you, Ambassador. Paul Joyo, NSI. Minister, since taking over, you've taken a number of very decisive steps. Clearly, it's been mentioned about the French air defense system. But you've also taken an active interest, a very active interest, in the military themselves, concerning their food, concerning how they live. Now, I would say that you took a rather courageous step recently by reinstating those who were released from prison related to the Cable's case. I'd like to find or hear from you your decision-making coming to that very courageous and bold decision and how this has affected morale within your own ministry. He keeps reading Georgia news. Well, there is nothing courageous about that decision. I'm a lawyer, and if there is anything I've been committed all my life that will be rule of law rather than being aggressively intervening every time against the rules and against the democratic principles. There is a court decision that released those people from prison. It also massively meant for me that they are back to job. And that's it. I don't know how it influenced morality within the ministry. I hope in a positive way. Because everybody, if there is anything this case shows, is that well, as long as I'm a minister, I don't know how it will be after that. But as long as I'm a minister, everybody will be treated according to the law and equally, regardless of my personal opinion about those people or anybody else's personal opinion for that matter about anybody. They will be treated by their merits and as it is in the law and regulations. That's it. That's all my philosophy that I've been committed to. And because I'm a minister today, I'm not going to change that. Because that's probably the main reason why I fought to Akashwili and why I am a minister today in this government. That I believe that my government is, if there is anything this government is strong about, that will be respect for the rules and respect for the principles. Mr. Shah, I think we have time for one more question if you have that. And let's do it right here. Minister Hidashwili, thank you very much for a very, very interesting and very encouraging presentation. My name is Alaina Suhira. I'm an independent consultant. Let me just say this, that in the last few months there have been several reports that came out here about ISIL recruiting in Georgia. Now, of course, ISIL is recruiting all over the world, and Georgia is no exception. But within the context of Georgia's relationship with Russia, and particularly the areas from which ISIL is recruiting in Georgia, I wanted to ask you to talk a little bit about what you can do, what you have been doing to prevent this from happening as this is also posing a grave danger to Georgia itself. Yeah, it is a great danger to Georgia itself. It is not something that a country can be proud of, as you rightly said. Unfortunately, Georgia is not the only state where it is happening, and you have all the countries across the Europe fighting with the same problem. I think that the region where it is happening needs particular attention from any government that current government and that will ever come in Georgia. And this is, I think, where we failed to pay enough attention to the problems that we always had in Pankisi Gorge for decades, and now starts reminding themselves in this way. I don't know, I cannot be original on giving answers to the question that nobody managed to answer yet, but I would say more integration of these communities, more education, especially targeted programs for their employment will be part of the answer. Again, it does not guarantee that things like that will not be happening, but at the same time, there are traditional means for at least decreasing the numbers for at least decreasing the tension, decreasing the feeling of isolation and abandonment on the parts of the population in your own country. So more education, more employment, more integration tools and means should be paid by the budget and should be worked in those regions, in that particular region, as well as in other places in Georgia, we don't have a problem today, but potentially, when you look at the demography of this country, you can easily figure out if things go wrong, where they can go worse than in other places. So there should be a very targeted, demographical, or geographical approach to various parts of the country when it comes to the risks like that that we face today with the ice of the clothes in Georgia. Minister, on behalf of the group here and in the other room and around the world who are watching you here, let me thank you very much for your remarks, for your answers to the questions. I think, General Ambassador, you all are very well represented in your minister of defense. You have a very strong, direct speaking minister of defense for a country that is important, not just for the region, but for international security more broadly. So please join me in thanking minister of defense. Thank you very much.