 So let me turn now to Haimini and I mean you had long long experience in international economic relations But also particularly in trade and then it'd be good to get your take on this In order to talk about the new international economy order, I think we need to identify the challenges we are currently facing In this sense, I'd like to highlight two most significant challenges, focus on trade First is the breakdown of international cooperation system at the same time the collapse of the rule-based trading system Edward Luce, Financial Times columnist, recently said that the rule of world trade is the rule of jungle I think he's quite right because the existing W-2 rules are no longer respected and new rules cannot be produced With the declaration of Janet Allen, U.S. Treasury Secretary in April last year that U.S. would pursue secure trade with friend showing The WTO's fundamental principle of MFN is that And as you know, the WTO's dispute settlement mechanism continued to remain paralyzed with the non-functioning of its appellate body More seriously, new international rules cannot be agreed upon even though we need new rules on digital and climate change Because the global cooperation system is broken down due to the intensifying U.S.-China conflict and Russia's invasion of Ukraine G-20 summit of last year and this year clearly demonstrated that the G-20 has lost its role as a world crisis management committee With the breakdown of global cooperation mechanism The G-20, in addition to stabilizing the world economy after the 2008 financial crisis, was very instrumental I noticed that I witnessed it as G-20 chef of Korea in concluding the Paris Climate Change Agreement in 2015 at COP21 And its early entry into force in 2016 However, in view of the current international political situation, it would be very unlikely that G-20 can do anything meaningful Regarding global issues such as climate, digital, health, energy or food crisis Because of the impossibility of producing a consensus on global issues, we can see the listen trend of fragmentation Of the international rules on climate change and digital economy in particular In fact, it would be more appropriate to say that European Union is monopolizing the legislation on those issues Through GDPR, EU taxonomy, carbon border adjustment mechanism, digital service act, digital market act Those EU rules are to be applied beyond the European Union The good example is X, the former Twitter, can be subject to EU sanctions because of its misinformation and harmful content Based on EU digital service act and EU's listen decision to ban misleading carbon neutral claims will be applied to Apple Watches as well With the launch of Indo-Pacific economic framework, the United States is also trying to make new international rules But it is not so certain because there are too many different economies participation in these discussions And the issues are so difficult to be resolved Moreover, the recently published draft text of PILA II supply chain, I think is the most important PILA of the IPF Is very disappointing and far from establishing binding rules And we can see the proliferation of national security exception invocation by major economies and increasing export control based on these national security exceptions Since the government cannot produce the rules, we can see more active rules played by the private sectors and NGOs Lineable 100 is initiated by NGO, an international sustainable standard boat, not the government is producing a global standard for ESG disclosure of the companies Second challenge is the strengthened government intervention in the economy De-globalization since the financial crisis of 2008 and COVID-19 have significantly strengthened government regulations And climate change and digitalization of global economy requires stronger government intervention as we need new rules on these issues The direct impact of the strengthened government intervention is increased subsidies by the major economies to the detriment of the middle power countries The US, European Union, Japan are currently trying to offer subsidies to their own industries, most notably in semiconductors and electric battery in order to combat China state capitalism I think the problem of the subsidy is distilled trade and industry because government decisions not market forces determine competitive outcomes Thereby substantially reducing efficiency. We can see the invisible hand of the market is giving way to the visible hand of the state I stop here and come back later about how to properly address these challenges. Thank you Thank you very much, Hymen. We'll come back to that because you could have a parallel conversation where people would say, look, we have to achieve a set of goals Whether they're security, whether they're climate change or global public goods and we have to use a set of instruments that we have, policy instruments Some of them are subsidies, we talk a bit with Pierre Koms next and if you think the European version is a bit less subsidies and a bit more regulation And if this has a consequence in terms of influencing the pattern of trade flows, that's a price once you just have to pay And I think the question that we'll have to pose is how does one address that trade-off because we're no longer going to be in a world in my view where we can only sit on one end or the other of the spectrum And the danger in some ways is that there are two parallel conversations going on What about what we frame as a liberal economic order and what about a whole set of new issues that are on the table that people want to address at the national and international level But I'm not sure that those conversations are coming together enough and it would be interesting to get your view on the role of middle powers in advancing that