 I can see one, two, three, four hands and as we have some degree of gender balance, two men, two women, I'm afraid I'm going to have to limit it to that, we have exactly ten minutes left. Each of you please identify yourselves and phrase the question crisply, otherwise we're going to run out of time. Microphones up here if you would. Can you get one microphone to the front row over here and one to the front row over there? And then you chaps will pass on, but you'll be honest and pass to the people who had their hands up first. Right, shoot. Do you need glasses to see from afar? Do you need glasses to see from afar? Because at the same time, the human being needs glasses to see from afar. And finally, he made progressive glasses that allow him to see from afar and from afar. And so the first little conclusion is that you have to avoid complex subjects, to have a vision of too close, a reductionist vision. That's why I associate myself with the last intervention. I allow myself to remember that I have a particular experience, since I was in the media panel for the conflict of the north of Mali and the north of Niger, and that the Sub-Saharan question I know of, to have it and manage it and investigate it. So the elites of all these countries, of Sahel, ask themselves a set of questions that have been summarized, that I repeat quickly, it's true that migration to several origins, climate, employment and geopolitical issues, destabilizations have been mentioned, and now we can't timidly, prudently, kindly say that we have no responsibility. Now the climatic issues and economic issues are also obvious. Do we need to globalize but not globalize? Do we need to have a universal pretension but not universal? Globalized, then we are concerned about structuring the global economy and asking China to correct its deficits. And we are totally in this debate. And when we are in a certain number of countries on the Sub-Saharan questions, we have a presence of the capital but which has no responsibility for structuring it. And so there are, in my opinion, fundamental questions that we cannot avoid, believing that there are national or regional economies like European, is a 20 words that we have not understood at all the world economy, in terms of its changes, its evolution. It is no longer possible to have drawings or economic projects without having an open vision. Thank you. Thank you. I would like to address that teasing a part of those two issues. Thank you very much. The understanding of the fact that the freedom of each community stops at the freedom of the other. We found a consensual system of pluralistic democracy that works. Lebanon is the country of this most stable party in a region that is connected to the fire and to the blood. What is there is a reflection that is made. The universal chart of human rights is not recognized by everyone. For the Islamic organization of the countries, it is not acceptable that in the measure in which it is not in contradiction with the sharia. So we have come back to a subject of reflection that we are trying to bring to Lebanon. It is to work on a universal chart of common values, common values in different religions and different cultures. In this sense, Lebanon was created an academy to study this problem of the chart of common values and a file in this sense has been deposited in the United Nations for the creation of this center. Thank you very much. I would like just to make a couple of comments very brief and ask a question to our European panelists. First of all, I think that there is a very urgent necessity to reframe the debate. There is no real invasion for Europe per se, even if I am aware that there is very little appetite for migrants in Europe. However, we are not in the figures of 2015, very far from that. So to my mind, focusing so much on migration is creating more divides within the European societies, between the European countries and between the two realms. More than that, it is cannibalizing the whole relations between the two realms and we have no time to speak about any other thing except migration. So my question, do you think that by pushing European borders and someone has been talking about borders simply to the southern partners, namely North Africa, fragileizing this very shield against so many things including insecurity, against extremism, against terrorism like in Morocco, fragileizing the Tunisian democracy which is still very young, do you think that this is durable solutions which is very far morally unaccepted, far from the European values and it does not bring durable solutions to migration, which I remind you is going to increase tremendously, it's not going to stop, it's not going to decrease. On the contrary, you will have to find durable solutions. So Mr. Cope was saying that there is no European solutions and unfortunately there is one stand which agrees on then we have to put centers in North Africa and we are offering platform for the migrants. This is unacceptable and it doesn't bring durable solutions to the problem. We have to discuss all together and I hope that during the occasion of the compact about durable migration which is going to take place in my country, in Marrakesh, I would like to remind some constructive solutions to a human problem as Jim Hogland said and I would like to remind you to finish what the Swiss playwright said. We have asked for workers and we got human beings and this is the problem of migration because European policy have always been restrictive not integrative. Thank you very much. The wonderful thing about this, I apologize to everyone. The clock is unfortunately my master. There's no time for anything except a response from the panel. And I'm going to ask the panel. I apologize. Minister, I apologize sincerely. The problem is the clock is the master. Now I'm going to ask each one of you please to pick a question to which to respond and please respond as effectively and as quickly as you can so that we do not delay the next panel. Jean-François. We must not reproach the political leaders for speaking about immigration. If we speak about it, in Europe, it's because people speak about it and that we can't doubt what we call populist bullies. This is not the right word. The right word is extremist. There are not those who are in the middle of the people and those who are not. These are theoretical views. I have been mayor of one of the poorest cities in the island of France for years. My inhabitants vote for the left, for the national, for the right, for the local plan. Why? Simply because they vote for someone who tries to solve the problems. The real subject for us is to find the best solutions at each time. But on the issue of immigration, we must put aside ideology. We must put aside the good feelings on one side and on the other. And we must, pragmatically, have only one goal. To succeed in the integration of those who come to Europe. Otherwise, it's not a success for anyone. The tensions today are huge. If we want to avoid extremists who take power and who then bring the worst solutions, we have other choices than to have a solution that is national, European and that is made in partnership with all the countries that are, on the outside of Europe, concerned by this. With the help of development, sharing, with organized hotspots, with partnerships, but also with a firmness that makes the difference between those who will succeed in their journey because they have the possibility and those who can't. And one last point. I come back to what was said earlier for just one reason. We must separate those who rise from the demand of asylum, refugees who flee from the war countries and to whom we must welcome them because it is our responsibility to do it and those who come for other reasons and for whom we must have a much more strict vision because we can't succeed in their integration. That's what's in play. It's extraordinarily difficult and, thanks to that, we don't oppose the nice and the bad. We try to do the best we can and we can't, and this will be the last remark, compare it with the American situation. I heard what you said earlier about the United States. There is nothing comparable between the immigration issues in the United States and the immigration issues in Europe. There is the Mexican border. It's a big problem. I don't doubt it, but Europe is at the heart of many things and it's much easier to cross the European borders than the American borders. Thank you. Thank you. It's just a statistic concerning the borders that, since 1988, more than 28,000 km of new international borders have been instituted and 24,000 others have agreed on the delimitation or the demarcation. I can still continue the crime. It means that the border is still a very hot issue today. Of course, the passage on the border is also very hot, but let's not forget that in Europe, the cooperation of Schengen is still very important. I don't think it's just us, but for all Europeans, it's a value. When I want to explain to my children what is the greatest European value, that I can take the car and I can speak from Budapest to Paris without a border, without a border crossing, it's already an element. I think it's Europe. We have to show European values in practice. If there are no external borders, in reality, in this case, Schengen's code will be fragmented. That's the reason why Schengen's code is very important. There are only two words, one is Liban, because I am often a professor at Saint Joseph University in Beirut. You are absolutely right. We often forget Liban and the problem of Liban. I visited a refugee camp, really the border of Syria. There, I can see how difficult it is there. It really helps to help Liban. It's really a moral obligation of the international community. Thank you very much, Bogdal. Unfortunately, in Europe, Madam Ambassador, we have a much longer list of problems, not only migration. Migration is, of course, one of the main challenges for European unity, but this is not the only one. So this list is really very long and it is expressed in current negotiations concerning the future multi-annual financial perspective for seven next years of the European Union. And the cooperation between the European Union and the Maghreb countries, mainly with Morocco, includes also not only migration as main issues. I'm in a good situation as a reporter of the Council of Europe concerning Morocco because I can say here in this chamber that this list of our joint achievements between Europe and Morocco is really a long one. There are still challenges existing, but in the case of the rule of law, in the case of implementation of organically lost those that were written in the Constitution of Morocco, you have successes and we accelerated this process. We are aware in Europe that it is necessary absolutely to reinforce the common security and defense policy. We are also aware that it is necessary to enhance common foreign and security policy to avoid the situation like happened in Ukraine after 2014 that European Union was not active in this space, after the illegal annexation of Crimea by Russian Federation and after the European order that emerged after the Cold War was blown up by the aggression of Russian Federation. European Union was absent in those negotiations. So we are completely convinced that reinforcement of CFSP is crucial as well. And we have also other areas in which cooperation between you, I mean our southern and eastern neighborhood and Union's countries themselves is absolutely crucial. One of them is counter-terrorism. One of them is counter-terrorism. Without good channel of communication without the practical cooperation we will not be able to deal with this dramatic challenge for both for neighborhood and for European Union itself. So, again, the list is much longer although migration is one of the crucial issues. Thank you very much indeed. Sorry, but as everyone knows we're out of time. Jim, as crisply as you can. A brief comment to reinforce two views we heard from the floor. I share with my co-citizen the concern about border security and I think all the help we can give to the border patrol, to ICE to ensure that border screening is efficient is a good idea. I think it's possible to do that without indicting an entire country as rapist and bad ombres as the ambassador from Morocco has suggested. I think talking about immigration as we have here this afternoon is a contribution and I hope EFRI continues to do so. Thank you, Jim. As with one simple statement we've opened a discussion here. I think we've opened it well. I think that what was said by different panellists reflecting different perspectives and particularly the feedback from the floor is an indication of how difficult this issue is and how critically important it is that this debate be extended, deepened and carried forward. If it is not resolved if the solutions to these problems are not found we are literally sowing the wind and will reap the whirlwind. Let us ensure that we use this as a point of departure with everyone involved in order to take this forward in a constructive way. Thank you very much to the panellists.