 The floor is yours, please. Thank you so much. I have several remarks and several questions. I will use them to some, only to some. First of all, how could you imagine, you know, the return to the new cooperative model of security between Russia and, let's say, the West? After the current model was blown up during the intervention in Donbass and before, during the annexation, illegal annexation of Crimea. Crimea, this model that was paradoxically introduced into the NATO's security concept in 2010, but practiced for years, I mean, since the end of the Cold War. The model that was based on an assumption that dialogue is better than confrontation, that it is better to resolve problems together within the institutions that were set up for such decisions. For example, between NATO and Russia, within the NATO-Russia Council. So how could you imagine the return, you know, to the similar dialogue that was at the basis of the cooperative model of security that doesn't exist anymore? That's first. Secondly, some of, one of speakers, Mr. Malgin said that in 2018, there will be a chance for personal changes within the administration and within the cabinet, and that it will lead to, let's say, new circumstances, political circumstances. Do you think that after such changes, the Russian Federation will change the approach concerning the conflict in Donbas, where you have still 30,000 troops, more than 800 of armored vehicles and around 390 tanks. And this Donbas is still surrounded, eastern part of Ukraine is still surrounded by about 80,000 of regular troops of Russian armed forces. So do you think that there will be a withdrawal of those troops, of the shadow army, of the shadow army from Donbas? Do you think that there will be changes within, let's say, this area surrounding Donbas because this is one of the most visible signs of Russian, I will use your word, assertive position. Assertive position. And thirdly, one of the speakers was talking about the future of, also you are speaking about the future of the relationship between the European Union and Russia. Of course, in such a context of 2020 and 35, we can say everything, because everything can happen. But there are some crucial differences between the European Union and Russian Federation concerning, let's say, the policy, concerning the economic model, concerning, let's say, the reference to international global efforts. And there is a huge confrontation right now between the West and the Russian Federation and the European Union is a part of this West. So how to avoid this confrontation in future and what should be done? I mean, what are the preconditions for such a reduction of tension between the EU and Russian Federation, thank you. Thank you very much. How shall we manage? We'll collect the questions or we will answer one by one. Collect them. Okay, so three questions on Ukraine and EU-Russia relations. I put them down. And then we go to you, please. Thank you very much. I'm Chaldeju. I am for my ambassador to France and I was also senior foreign policy advisor to President Park. Retired now and welcome this occasion of speaking on this issue. Russia is part of Europe. You know, a lot of chunk of relationships may be done through your relationships with Europe and United States. But you are also a neighbor and we have our own initiative and project to link the railway with Russian railway, trans-Siberian railway to shorten the distance of the logistics to connect with Europe, Germany, France and other countries. So we worked very hard to link the railway in direct contact with North Korea, not direct contact. And we were about to sign finally the contract in February 2015 after 10 years of waiting and patience. Then in January, North Korea blasts nuclear, fifth nuclear bomb testing so only it went off and we didn't be able to sign. And that time I left the government reading but it was very unfortunate. Then probably even the UN Security Council opt out, you know, the mention on this railway project so still it can be done potentially. And the new government focused very much also to follow the same pattern of policy. Even though they changed the name, they don't call it Russian initiative or Russian cooperation committee, which will be more powerful. So I hope they can carry on. And then another thinking that we have is of course the most backward region in China now becomes the northern province, three provinces in, you know, three northern provinces in China are the most legate region in China now because of this blockade by North Korea. And of course, you know, you need to develop the Mosque area. We are ready to also cooperate. Big project was there, nothing was done, practically. But now our people start to, you know, travel freely there because there is no visa waiver now. The big change will be there potentially. One of the conclusions I have personally is that we should change mine before already something has to pass through North Korea. But until we find solution of North Korea nuclear problem, we cannot do that. But we can link our Busan port to Rajboshtok and Haribirn and beyond. We can start this operation of trans-Siberian cooperation. So that is the vision. I hope the new government will carry on that. And so, you know, my viewpoint is I don't have a feedback or say that we must have solution of finding solution of North Korea nuclear problem because that's against humanity. Now we don't need any more nuclear weapons state. We must absolutely put an end to that. And we need your cooperation. You are permanent members of the city council, like France, and I think there is a good cooperation. But how to pursue North Korea? You are the best. For the moment, you are the best one who can speak to North Koreans. Because of these tough relations between China. Thank you very much. I hope you comment on that. Then also, I see the drastic change in Rajboshtok area. Rajboshtok became a modern city, very attractive city in terms of tourism and potentially logistic destination area. So I think we, in 20 years time, I hope to see a very, you know, prosperous region, the Primozki and the Avaroski area and the other region. That goes with the parallel development in northern province, three provinces in China and potentially North Korea and Korean Peninsula and Japan in the final source of investment there. I think, lastly, I think the Eastern Economic Forum that President Putin launched years back will add momentum. And annually, one must revisit the document. So this should be changed and I think there will be changes. Again, without even passing through North Korea, we should do that. But it will be far better if we find solution of North Korean nuclear problem. We'll have, you know, gigantic program of helping economic health. We are ready to help massively to North Korean economic build-up. But now the only precondition is nuclear problem. We need to stop regional powers, cooperate, find solution. But on the other hand, even if we don't have that, we must maintain peace. We don't need to have another war and we have to start linking your port with our port and start, you know, shipment to Europe and European which can come to us. So that's my end. Thank you very, very much. Okay, let's keep our questions a little shorter because we don't have enormous amount of time for answers. So please, the third question and that's the end of the first series of questions. Good. Tom, Mr. Dinkin, the first question about territory. There is many interpretations that Russia can divide in future or there is many interpretations that Russia will enlarge. For example, in Central Asia, I mean, Kyrgyzstan, the question about relations between Russia and Belarus which prognoses its closer to the reality way of develop of situation. The second question to Mr. Malgin about Siberia. About plan of develop of Siberia in context of, for example, the population, et cetera, et cetera, you know, very well for sure the problems. I think that it should be a key element. Every prognosis about the future of Russia to look for the Siberian problem. And the third question to Mr. Nisovnik about the what's your, in your opinion, the main barriers of growing on population in Russia. What's the main barrier in develop of population. The question is, in fact, how to stop the population of Russian Federation. Thank you. Thank you very much. So I guess there are more questions to Artyom than to others. Artyom and then Alexander and then Yaroslav. Okay, please don't be too long in my okay. First about Siberia because it's easy to answer. I have no recipe, first of all. I've never been in Siberia the last geographic point of was it was the Urals and then many times in the very far east. So it's complete known place to me personally. But what I can say that southern Siberia is rather well populated. But it's also the problem of climate. Do find those who are let's say ready to go to unfriendly climate. And the next thesis, it's look at the pre-revolutionary Russia. It was much more south words. The biggest cities at that time were Kiev, Odessa, to some extent the greatest developments were faced in Yekaterinburg nowadays Krasnodar and if not the revolution, I guess it had a chance to be as big as Odessa to some extent. So, but then under the Soviets because of this resource-led economy, we and probably not because of the political will, because it was that time of such kind of industrial development. We moved towards north, we moved towards then Siberia and I guess it's not the best recipe to populate somehow artificially this region. It's what I can answer on this question. I guess it could be re-addressed to Yaroslav to some extent because then about Ukraine, Eurasia and Russia. I'm not going to count figures of the troops, tanks and all that stuff because when we start talking about figures troops when it comes to around Ukraine or even Eastern Ukraine, they're absolutely different. But what I can say, what I can stress again the basement in Ukraine to stop conflict in eastern Ukraine it's a key point to Russia's European Poles. It's a key point to better relations with EU and it's also one of the key points to stable developments in Russia itself because the conflict in Donbass touched strongly the development of the Russian regions which neighbor this part of eastern Ukraine. Look at the statistics what's happening in Rostov region and other neighboring region which neighbors Ukraine bother. They to the greatest extent were interlinked with Ukraine and with Donbass in particular when it comes to very southern parts of European territory. And here I see no other ways as resolution of the conflict and I guess it's the best in the mistakes to start approaching with counting troops. First need to understand that it should be resolved and then it opens our relations with EU. You know that EU imposes sanctions or continue imposing sanctions every half a year so we have a chance to a pretext to remove the situation in Donbass every half a year. Alexander Dinkin I have one sort of geographical question so let me start with geography. Let me remind you that I told that Russia is not the country for the beginners so our border with say European states is something like 6500 kilometers our border with Muslim countries is twice as bigger our border with China is 42 hundreds and we even have 17 kilometers border with DPRK just to imagine where we operate. So I guess there is no intentions to enlarge this territory it's even huge so I guess this is about Baltic it's completely political speculation about Belarus and so on and so forth so this is first part of the answer regarding Ukraine and relations with European Union you know our perception in Moscow was that it was good time in Kiev and France, Germany, Poland who signed the transition period with an opposition they did not say a word after happening of this coup d'etat and President Yanukovych he was staying for three more days in Ukraine nobody supported him this is about the so called international international law our policy towards Ukraine was typically western policy it was responsibility to protect Russian speaking population no so we are mirrored your behavior I don't know where, everywhere completely so alternative 5 facts about overestimation of the troops you know recent military drills in the western part of Russia and Belarusia we follow the statistics in Poland it's overestimated the quantity of troops involved in these drills 10 times so this is not my problem regarding relations with North Korea I do remember this very, I guess economically available project of the railroad towards Pusan with connection with Yokohama so it could be the belt to Europe it never happened due to the policy of the North Korean regime I could not understand they maybe they scared influence through this railroad but it never happens regarding solving the nuclear problem I guess it's military solution would destroy the cell completely this is my point so I guess something like Iran deal with North Korea is the only one recipe how to manage it but there is plenty of other options regarding Donbass approximately months ago President Putin suggested these keepers on the dividing line and in my perception this is a breakthrough for the solution of the Donbass issue currently a Russian project of the UN resolution is in New York and United Nations debated and we shall see what would be the western response to those idea I guess it's idea completely workable and Yaroslav please so very briefly on the Siberia I think if you were to ask me what are my top picks in terms of regional centers and regions that are to grow in the coming decades I would say it's the far east as rightly was pointed out by the Korean representative here clearly there is a lot of interest from foreign investors and I think we are seeing developments important developments with regard to building scientific centers etc in southern Russia including regions of Krasnodarsk Krai I think the paradigm of regional development that we saw during all of the Soviet period and partly in the post Soviet period of hinterland regions being developed more compared to the seashore regions this is going to be reversed and Russia is going to be more in line with international practice whereby it is going to be the coastal regions that are going to be growing much faster and I can tell you if you look at the share of the budget that is distributed from the federal center to the regions the highest shares are the far east and southern Russia so clearly in terms of state priorities these are the two regions Siberia I think will continue to be the three repository of natural resources which has been its traditional role but then of course another important issue is human capital development and there are parts of Siberia that are very important in this regard including the Novosibirsk region so I think to a significant degree the role that has been played by Siberia will continue but in terms of growth and in terms of priorities it's going to be the far east especially I think in terms of demographics and what are the recipes to deal with adverse demographics well it's targeting human capital development and budget spending that is oriented more as a share of total spending towards financing healthcare we in Russia had a program that was very successful that directed additional monetary transfers to those families that had a second child that served to boost fertility rates and then I think under discussion I'm not sure but I think there are discussions of the possibility to expend this program to families that have a third child and then if you take the past several years the average life expectancy has increased substantially and is now above 70 years it's roughly around 71 years for males this is 67 to 60 years old to remind you in the 1990s the average life expectancy of a Russian male went as low at 1.54 so clearly the developments of the past several decades in that regard are positive but the main conclusion from our history especially from the 1990s in terms of demographics is that the best thing the most important recipe for these things is stability economic stability and economic growth the experience of the 1990s was a tremendous fall in the population both with regard to fertility significantly higher mortality and part of the reason was simply economic instability thank you very much another round of three yours Sean Cleary and our Consul General thank you very much my name is Peter Yankovic I was a former member of the Austrian government and Austrian diplomacy and I now work for the Austro-French center for rapprochement in Europe so this is a very interesting discussion for me and my question relates to a very unstable region of Europe namely the western Balkans and President Putin once said that the the means of the Soviet Union was one of the great catastrophes of the 20th century I also believe personally at least that the dissolution of Yugoslavia the disappearance of a country of stability and had a very important role in international relations is a similar catastrophe so it created a lot of instability in the region and the only organization which at the moment in Europe is capable of bringing some degree of stability and continue it into this region is one like it or not the European Union two of these countries have already joined the European Union but there are four more and I have a little question in my mind how the Russian Federation sees this process of integration of these countries into the European Union which is not in any way anti-Russian some of these countries like Serbia have a long and very and a very close relationship to Russia all of them are Slavic and certain certain shall we say overtures made from time to time to the Republic of Srpska in Bosnia from Russia that raises question whether or not Russia is behind this process and I think this would be something which would be very stabilizing for the region and would also certainly help to improve the relations between the European Union and Russian Federation if not a shadow of a doubt would exist that there is no opposition to this joining from Russia another purely personal remark to Mr. Panov I would like to say you know I've always defended the idea that Russia is a profoundly European country and I wrote don't really see out of this philosophical in some way we mentioned Tostoyevsky China but that's just a personal remark thank you very much you're not alone Sean Cleary please forgive me for this but it's a philosophical statement about future world foundation is about philosophy and you're leading this thing thank you but it's related to the topic it's about Russia in 20 years now when one does any form of scenario work you usually have two questions that you have to ask right at the beginning are you going to look at a set of drivers a set of uncertainties and then plot the interrelationships between these are you therefore going to take an analytical approach in respect to the development of scenarios or are you intending to create normative scenarios in order to justify an outcome that you perceive to be appropriate now both of these are legitimate uses of scenario method and both of them I would suggest are appropriate ways to tackle the question of Russia in 2020 so my question but if you'll allow me I want to tag a comment onto but my question is in approaching this question how much was normative and how much was analytical Michelle I think yours was normative I think but the key question is what are we trying to do the second tag comment on it is that quite frankly we are at probably the most dangerous period certainly of my comparatively short life seven decades is not a huge amount of time but we're at a point where the rules of the game are being questioned on almost every front international law has been questioned in terms of both its efficacy and its legitimacy most geo strategists over the last 30 years I suppose have tended to argue that stable and progressive situations can only be defined if there is a reasonable equilibrium underpinned by a normative regime that enjoys legitimacy and permits efficacy arguably that isn't true today now the problem is when it isn't true then you get the sort of situations that we've seen too often in the past we certainly saw it in the years leading up to the first world war one doesn't have to say Christopher Clarke's thesis of sleep walking into disaster in order to be able to argue coherently that it was an absence of an ability to envision better outcomes and a coherent strategic approach among the great powers of the time that led us into an absolute disaster one could make the same case in respect of the 30s leading up to the second world we don't want that today but there's a very great risk if those in Moscow envisioning Russia in 20 years time and those in Washington characterized by tweeting and frankly indecent behavior and those in Europe fractured as a result of uncertainty due to rising populism and the like and those in China determined because of a failure of everyone else in the system to try to bring some order through frames of global governance or all acting on independent tracks there's a very great risk that a funny little man sitting in Pyongyang or one of half a dozen other events could in fact lurch us into something that we'll all regret deeply for the rest of our lives so the question really is do you have a vision of where Russia should be in 20 years time and can one start constructing a strategy that will enable one to achieve that outcome in a manner that is consistent with the positions that other major actors will be adopting over that period Thank you very much we discussed it many times over we are in the process of building up something like normative vision of global governance with Sean and with his people and I would dare to try when I make a conclusion to answer your question from my personal point of view I thank you very much for your question and our Consul General of Russia in please Thank you, I'm not in the business of entertaining any questions here it's not my role and purpose I wanted to resort to an allegation made and we're not talking numbers of troops there are no Russian troops in Donbas period Remark is well taken care of Thank you very much so there were three questions two questions and one one declaration put it this way so question number one is on the western Balkans and what's our role what's our position on their integration into the EU who wants to answer please, sure Just a hearing commented that he provides the path to the young they in Austria have really young people at the top that is providing path and track to the EU ok look I said it in my speech and I always stress it when I in the western audiences when we talk whether Russia whether Russia want to support being against or something like this if it's not a really strategic issue and taken in a short period very much won't use word diversified and the Balkans as well as many other international issues it's such a point of discussions not as strong as Ukraine because when it comes to Ukraine there are many other points of view and I for example belong to a rather moderate one and as for the Balkans there are those who are really involved into the Balkan affairs those who understand differences between the small state in the Balkans they could have their interests in but strategically Balkans are rather far from us and it's clear that through this 25-27 years of the post-soviet period we have not managed to wage a specific long-standing logic strategic land there because the region is very much diversified to know everything and coordinate to put together all these minor trends it's impossible and I guess now I've anticipated in a number of recently agonized official, semi-official discussion of the Balkans that I'm not especially on the Balkans and the general trend I can say just to let them on their own it's clear we have no let's say immediate interests of let them into the UAE or stop stopping from this and I guess if it's the general trend in the Balkans and it's a the general trend in spite of what our Albanian friend yesterday said that for him EU looks a little bit ill men of Europe let him look at his own country and it's much more than Albania I guess so if it's a general line we'll follow the general line and when they are in EU we'll set another portion of our interests in a new frame of the western Balkans being inside the EU just a question on that the Albanian prime minister and also Mr. Djukanovic Prime Minister of Montenegro said that there was a Russian military attempt to overthrow him is it true or not because they wanted to the point of order because first Mr. Lisavoli once Montenegro, Djukanovic is the what Djukanovic actually said that there were Russian nationalists who are persecuted by Russian authorities including national security council and those Russian nationalists which have nothing to do with they tried, two of them they tried to do something in Montenegro before Montenegro has elections which would be historical joining then probably NATO which they did so I don't think that Russian authorities has anything to do with radicals who are now today in Moscow are being locked up in Moscow demonstration which was not allowed by the state but excuse me for interruption Yaroslav wanted to answer the previously Serbia is actually talking about not just a one way vector in terms of its development of partnerships towards the EU but it's actually negotiating and discussing the possibility of an FTA, a free trade area with the Eurasian Economic Union so I would actually turn the question to you back would Europe, would the EU accept the possibility of an economic alliance between the Eurasian Economic Union and Serbia and by the way as you probably know there are no full fledged relations between the European Union and the Eurasian Economic Union there is no full fledged consultation so I actually see some issues in terms of how this process needs to be approached that should not be approached as a one way street this is a country that has substantial support for Russia substantial inclination for economic building economic relations with Russia and it should be allowed to choose its own path and if it's a two vector kind of model with the possibility of alliances both to the west and to the east let it be so but the Serbs are talking about Serbia as a bridge between the Eurasian Union and the European Union I think that would be a very good model that could be perhaps replicated for some of the other similar cases that are called in between countries between those between the European Union and the Eurasian Union Thank you very much before we wrap up and give a short final remarks to all participants of the panel can Russians allow me to try to venture to answer Sean's Cleary's question if so then Sean by wrapping up the discussion of today here is the main outcomes there probably would be a bipolar world the United States, European Union on one side Japan and other allies and China, Russia, India probably other countries on the other side which is basically the two Polars united by the different system of governance one democratic another autocratic if this is so and now we are talking about Russia from the analysis given by Alexander Dinkin which is Argentization of Russia I remind you that Argentina was the fifth largest nation of the second world war now it's 65 or something Argentization because our human capital, investment capital and technology plus demography doesn't allow us in this linear model of Alexander Dinkin not only of his develop faster than 2% probably 3 this 2% is identical to 3% of the European Union and even a little less than United States at the moment that means that we are lagging behind and in 30 years time we are Argentina of today but we cannot allow it first of all because of national pride, genetic code and everything else plus we control the territory which definitely will be a very big interest from the neighboring nations we cannot allow ourselves a military point of view to become Argentina because we will just explode so that's not a chance for us second in command to China I don't think the Russian character would ever tolerate that nobody among my friends know a single Chinese song, verse or even watch the movie and everybody knows Beatles and Humperdink and whoever knows the song it will take not one generation to make us Chinese and to say that we will be second in command to China when we didn't agree to be second in command to the European Union on the United States for me it's very hard to visualize so what's left one polar, China and the autocracies which we can temporarily join another polar, democracies will develop with its own difficulties what's in future for the world which becoming larger in terms of population and smaller in terms of resource I guess the only viable theory is that's what Sakharov name it on your side was aspiring for which is conversion of two models which China tried to do at the moment by installing very serious social conditions on its own systems but enhancing efficiency so the combination of social justice the way declared had to be numerically and would not normalize and economic efficiency brings us together on these two polars they will develop and I agree in the years it will be bipolar but to survive they had to come together to come together that can be only on the basis of some kind of conversion which stiglitz on one hand and Sakharov on the other was aspiring for so one happy multipolar world with some drastic cut on wealth disparity which you are alluding to the mathematical models which in terms of norms and in terms of analysis will bring us together that's the only way out it's too difficult now to visualize but I don't think that if we have to survive we have any other chance to do I'm being a little bit how should I say more practical than some of others but you know that we submitted to the World Future Foundation our views on that and I think that this peaceful conversion of two systems probably is the best chance for Russian Federation otherwise we will be torn apart by European Union on the one hand and bigger Europe and Asia and China on the other please any of the participants all of them have I will tell you how much two minutes each two minutes each well that's very good I've enjoyed listening to the conversation but I attracted to Sean's point what do you envisage for Russia in 20 years we seem to get off that which is easily happens but I see Russia building on its extraordinary comparative advantages which it still has primarily human capital supported by enormous resources and we talked about Korea I spent a lot of time Korea didn't have any resources the only resources Korea had were up here and Mercury actually has more resources than South Korea and look what South Korea has been able to accomplish which takes you into the other part the Koreans for centuries have put a very very high value in education and it's not the chavaux I don't think that necessarily there are a lot of difficulties when President Putin says he's interested in the Korean model I hope he's thinking about the education model and I also hope that he's thinking about how important the fact is with these resources behind it how well placed Russia is to make really serious strides ahead these relationships at one point I wanted to ask you about we never heard the one Belt One Road project which is probably the largest infrastructure project in the history of man which the Chinese have floated and I know Russia, I think President Putin actually went to Beijing for an announcement in that regard and I went there as well to understand more about what this is but it's massive and it's got to have information for you and the Eurasian countries I mean there's something like 97 airports and how many ports and roads and pipelines and this is seen by many as basically putting it to the Americans basically bringing a trade somebody's talking about the railway through Busan which would but that North Korea stands in the way of that and Busan looks like it might suffer through this project because it's not but we didn't hear anything about it here today and I would think that that's got to be some sort of glue between economic interests in China and Russia it's so massive Thank you very much Michel Two points on international law, I agree Western country broke the law in Iraq in Libya and in Kosovo I was in charge of Kosovo in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and we were not strong enough to oppose U.S. Department and the Pentagon we were proposing substantial autonomy but without the U.S. military base near Pristina because we were not informed of that project so I fully agree it's not a reason to put everything out and to rebuild rule because I don't want to live under the leadership of the people in Beijing I'm a democrat okay, so I'm not sure it's to enter Ukraine and EU is deeply divided on that and issue started much before Donbass issue it started in 2008 with Bucharest summit with the sentence because France and Germany were against accession but Madame Merkel wrote during the night a sentence on open door policy and this was interpreted very badly by the president in Moscow and I agree with our term, this is really the priority how to provide appeasement President Macron is working on that I think the Merkel factor does exist you will find a very nice analysis in the New York Times which is a comparison between two trajectories starting in former East Germany this is a starting point somebody in Dresden and somebody the daughter of a pastor she has a very moral view of realities it means in Normandy format it's not always easy to our Polish colleague left but of course there is a Polish factor in the American one in Ukraine in crisis my view is we share a burden which is a co-responsibility for the crisis I always thought that it was unacceptable for Russia to have a scenario of NATO in Ukraine this is a provocation that's why I came back to but we should have proposed that at the beginning and when I talked to my colleagues in ministry I was not there anymore the answer was yes we are ready to propose that but what do we get in exchange from Moscow so I think we have to work much more to look for appeasement we have to work in the EU to have a common view because our Polish colleagues are very offensive by the way they dislike very much Obama pivot to Asia they wanted troops on the ground boots on the ground but they are offensive they are very offensive you are from Italy to Poland a full spectrum position so I think we should really it's a priority and we should avoid to live with a frozen conflict if we do that we will fail thank you very much Michel so the time is running short so Russians who are predominant in the discussion they have one minute each instead of two minutes for our colleagues from Canada and France Mr Pano I agree that we are Europeans but it's interesting that Europeans don't listen to us and don't understand us but in the eastern countries it's better understanding and better really treatment of Russia and I would like to say of course we will never be Chinese as we never will be Germans but at the same time now at our institute the biggest groups many groups are students who are studying Chinese not French no no no no you see the Russian diplomats cannot agree even on that one Mr Dinkin please look regarding this polarity we produce joint study I guess with Atlantic Council with their part which deals with the foresight analysis and this team produced global trends famous report very popular around the globe so we joined our efforts and we produced five analytical scenarios polycentric greater eurasia something else the first one was new Bipolarity and we published it two years ago both in English and in Russian and this is not my fault that the developments of the global order moves unfortunately towards this new Bipolarity scenario which was just one of the possible outcome after the demise of the Bipolarity regarding this arrogant funny little man in Beijing he is also learning something he learned he learned on the case of Colonel Gaddafi who received no flight zone then he was wounded by his two legs and then brutally killed and before that he get rid of his nuclear program so this young guy learned his lessons and we counted at my institute that North Korea is a nuclear state in just 100 days after the death of Gaddafi so for him this is a salvation you know so we have to look at behavior of those countries who engineered Libya I guess a little bit more closer I'm not saying about Argentinization, I just mentioned that Brazil and Mexico there is our competitors in terms of quality of institution it was me who was saying that you are much, much more suave unfortunately we have no time to discuss you just react and that's it Ukraine to my mind is a key point for the next 3-4 years it should be treated in a way as now we have 50% let us say of the conflict resolution resources in Moscow and 50 somewhere outside Moscow divided to 25 in Kiev itself and 25 in the west and at the same time Ukraine should not overshadow other issues if we move ahead with other things in our Russia relations Ukraine's situation will be resolved in a smoother and in a faster way thank you very much I like you 50% everybody starts to like everybody that's very good Yaroslav on the question you actually asked in the very beginning when I was about to speak whether Russia is the master of the Eurasian universe Eurasian space I think the role of the Eurasian Union will grow and I think it's very important that the European Union works together with the Eurasian Union after all it is very important to realize for European friends and colleagues that the Eurasian Union is believed as one that is based on the values of the European Union and it was inspired to significant degree by the success of the European Union so the negation of the Eurasian Union I think is a bit of a self-negation for the Europeans and lastly I think it's great that we have this discussion on long-term issues I think even parts of our discussion is lacking this long-term focus Thank you Yaroslav you wanted to have something to say I just wanted to just about what Michel said about when diplomatic conference I think we missed a huge opportunity in this February 2014 crisis in Ukraine on the 19th of February Hollande and Merkel were in Paris and the foreign ministers to Kyiv they arrived on Thursday 20th in Kyiv they took Sikorsky of Poland on the way and they start negotiating with Nukovic the fact that they started negotiating stopped the killing which is very important no more killing in the afternoon of the 20th in Kyiv they negotiate all night long at 7.30 they are tired they go to sleep 1 o'clock Sikorsky wakes up goes to Maidan say you should accept it you will never have a better deal then at 5 o'clock at the afternoon they sign a deal so I'm watching BBC news and I see Pro-Russian president Yanukovic shaking hands with Tarim Bolk Yatsenyuk and Kliszko it's a huge diplomatic success huge and this agreement which is also just looked by looking but this agreement has 3 Paras, Godfathers, France Germany and Poland it's a huge success they shake hands, there is a political agreement in Ukraine then we the westerners forgot the lessons of great kissing where you have such a miracle baby you babysit him you don't live the baby in the snow you babysit him it's kind of diplomatic miracle and the basic it will be taught in diplomatic academies and you see like Gimo people here the basic reflects of good diplomats and Fabius unfortunately was a very bad diplomat to take this it's called mobile phone excuse me, there is some time limit just finish my sentence and to ask to see Putin and to ask Putin to be also godfather of this agreement telling him, Sebastopol will always be yours NATO will not take Ukraine and remember Vladimir in April 2008 really short of time I think that we missed ok maybe you are not interested but I think it's quite interesting it's a very interesting discussion we can carry on during dinner but here we missed a great opportunity just my point thanks everybody who participated we have to change