 I also made another prediction six years and half ago. I said the United States and China both need political reforms. But in the case of China, small reforms have been going on all the time in the political system. We fixed problem here and there. But I said problem is the United States. Your political system was a product of pre-industrial year. And I made a forecast. I said result significant, substantial political reform. My concern is in your next elections you will produce a leader worse off than George W. Bush. So it was you, it was not the Russians. So this is the Chinese humble advice we can offer. China is a civilizational state. I remember when Harry Kissinger wrote his famous book on China. He started with this quote. He said, my goodness, look at this China. It's different. China used this unique language which started 3,500 years ago. It's 1,000 years earlier than ancient Greek. 1,000 five years earlier than ancient Latin. But these two European languages were dead languages. China still used the same language. This line of culture and continuation of civilization uninterrupted. So this is why we have indeed, you know, for instance, this whole idea of meritocracy. Why say confidence? I said with my debate with Professor Fukuyama. I said, if you look at the top leadership in China. We've just had people's, the party's Congress. Minimal requirement, two terms of provincial governor or similar position, which may have to govern at least 100 million people given the size of China before you came to one of the top seven positions, decision making bodies. I said to Fukuyama, I said, with this Chinese methodology, meritocracy-based system, we can say with certainty we can improve the system. There are problems. We can fix it. But we will not produce any leaders like George W. Bush, you know. It's way below the Chinese bar, you know. That's my point. I respect deeply more than respect. I admire Chinese civilization. I admire Chinese history. I have been all my life an admirer of Chinese art since I was a very young man. China has been one of my, the compass of my life. But I don't admire your political system. And I feel, I find much more admirable and worth of respect. A system when you have the right to make a strike, when you have the right to be paid decently, when you have the right to speak freely, when you have the right to not to be contaminated by terrible pollution, and so on. So I will not say in the name of relativism and so on that every political regime are equivalent. I don't believe so. I really think that Europe invented an idea which does not belong to Europe, that migrated to America, that has been adopted by a lot of parts of Latin America that is incarnated in part of Asia, which is an universal idea, which is the idea of freedom, of equality, and so on. And China of today is not worshipping these values. And that's why I do hope, I hope. I would be happy, I would not say that with surprise or not with surprise, if there was one day a real Chinese spring, a real cultural revolution as the one I saw in my youth of Chinese people saying it's good to have wealth, it's good to have gross products, it's good to have exportation, but it's good also to have human rights, I think that this would be a great news for humanity. You said that Wei Wei had this equivalence between political systems, but he does not have equivalence, he has a clear preference. He believes that authoritarian systems are superior to democracy. He explicitly said that democracy yields to bad governance, if I'm not mistaken. So my question to you, there are millions of people today in the world that live under bad governance systems, which are democracies. China has a different view, and therefore countries tend to like, tend to be very tempted to export their models. They like to see what they do replicated elsewhere. So would you recommend to your government to go out in the world and promote what you think is good governance and promote the cause of less democracy or non-democracy? Actually it depends on how do you define democracy. I like this nexus foreign, because you said at the very beginning that we discussed the real meaning of democracy, real democracy, but unfortunately so far what we see as shown in Arab Spring about one person, one vote, a multi-party system, that's the best procedural democracy. That's not necessarily the real democracy. Remote democracy is far more important as you said about education than many other important ideals. In terms of China, let me quote from everybody knows Confucius. He said, people are like water. Regime or leaders are like boats. Water can carry the boat, can also overturn the boat. So if you look at the China model in particular, the key message is stay in touch with your people. It's so easy. If you go to Africa, don't go there with your brilliant ideas. I respect your preference. It's understandable. But you do some surveys. What are they about most? Fighting poverty, fighting disease, street security, safety, et cetera, job creation. You do this accordingly. That's how China did. Would you recommend the rest of the world to go that way and repress the options that he described? No, it's not his definition. It's really people should sit down and discuss what kind of political system with your people. We're doing that. Yeah, we should experiment. China of an option, which is very interesting because we have the four decades of successful experience. In your opinion, that China should export that view? Xi Jinping said in his report, China's experience can offer an entirely new alternative for those countries and nations who desire for quick modernization and complete independence. Is this going to be a state-supporting export? No, no, it's not. I'm joking. Actually, China is very modest. I'm being slightly less modest. China does not export its model. Do not advocate its model. But once you're successful, you go to Africa, people talk about looking east. They have tried the western model for decades, not working, you know, look to the east. May I just talk here about the oppressed Muslim minority? So don't tell me that everybody is fine. There is an oppressed minority in China. And then I want to bring up something else here in terms of terrible things that are happening today like in Syria. And it's what is happening to the Rohingya Muslims. And the way I look at it is I thought it was never again. And to me, never again meant a Muslim or a Christian or Jewish or Yazidis or black or white or any color. But today we are seeing a genocide. And I don't see China has also quite a lot of influence in a place like Burma, like Myanmar. Apart from, I don't want to even talk about North Korea. But I don't see anybody doing anything for the Muslims in Myanmar or the Muslims in China. Let me answer you this question first. No, because I do believe it's important in order to know. Because I do believe we go in a conversation in which you are saying how good you are. We are saying that you are not very good. But in a certain way, the problem is that part of the Western democracy is also a problem today is that we lost curiosity on the others. Obviously, China's legitimacy is not based on caution only. And if we are not seeing this, we are basically playing a game. But on the other side, I do believe what you are also giving is actually a critical story because every political regime is successful under certain conditions and not others. I do believe one of the biggest problems that we have, we forgot what are the real advantages of democracy. The real advantage of democracy is not simply rights, but this is that when people are disappointed, you are giving them a mechanism through which they can react. Democracy is not famous for doing the right things, but democracy is famous for changing the governments that people don't like without violence. The question is the following. The Chinese system at the moment, in my view, works fine based on an incredibly important economic performance. How strong is the system if economic performance is not there? So if we want to be serious, we should be open to the vulnerability of both regimes because otherwise, we go in a rhetorical story which is probably a good opera performance, but it is not helping us more. And just on Bernard and Olivier, the government should be very happy that you went to Kurdish regions and didn't end up in Catalonia at the same moment. I think that China will not go so far as you think and maybe as China deserves if she stays on this path. If you really believe that the Rohingya problem is a problem of faith, if you really believe that the Uyghur problem is a problem of religion, it means that really your leadership has not understood how really a great power has to work in order to succeed because it is a human rights question. It is a democratic subject and it is not NGOs of the West who are... This is a plot theory, it's absurd. It is people who are in despair, the Rohingya. It's so terrible, nobody knew. No, no, no, let me finish. Nobody knew in the West, except a few of us, who the Rohingya were. They are the most miserable people in the world. They have no rights. They have nearly no identity. Have you been to that region? Have you been to this region? Of course I have been. My friend, I have been, alas, I am elder than you. And I went to this region. No, no, no. I went in this region. I will give you another figure. I spent my youth between Bangladesh and Burma. I know exactly what is the face of a cursed Muslim people in this environment. I know who the Rohingyas are. I know that they are men deprived of any rights and I know that in front of that, you cannot feel something else than despair and they are despaired and that's why they revolted and the way in which they are treated is scandalous. Okay, mind your own business first. I don't agree. It's 89% versus 12% satisfaction. Who does speak in China anyway? You know really too little about China, little knowledge is dangerous. We have 130 million visits abroad, three million students abroad. Don't attack me about my knowledge because that's not the right way to go about it. Even with that we cannot agree to your interpretation. I would like to bring in something different.