francesc, you had a great opening statement. let me ask you to follow up and deal with some of the points they raise. and in particular the question is it will end up like kashmir for example, or somebody negotiating from a position of weakness? is it can only be done on the local level? i mean, basically how to respond to the objection particularly raised by marvin? >> well, first of all, talking and fighting are not incompatible. and in many situations, and the report doesn't suggest otherwise, one can continue the military operations, both sides, i'm sure the taliban would want to do the same. at the same time talking and trying to find an agreement. second, the kashmir example is, i'm sorry to say, a very bad one. in fact, indians in pakistan have not been talking on kashmir. have been talking about each other. and there's been no sensitive by the international community to push the two sides towards a meaningful discussion and agreement. to some degree you can argue it's a failed process, not because they're talking. becaus

francesc, you had a great opening statement. let me ask you to follow up and deal with some of the points they raise. and in particular the question is it will end up like kashmir for example, or somebody negotiating from a position of weakness? is it can only be done on the local level? i mean, basically how to respond to the objection particularly raised by marvin? >> well, first of all, talking and fighting are not incompatible. and in many situations, and the report doesn't suggest otherwise, one can continue the military operations, both sides, i'm sure the taliban would want to do the same. at the same time talking and trying to find an agreement. second, the kashmir example is, i'm sorry to say, a very bad one. in fact, indians in pakistan have not been talking on kashmir. have been talking about each other. and there's been no sensitive by the international community to push the two sides towards a meaningful discussion and agreement. to some degree you can argue it's a failed process, not because they're talking. becaus