tv Russian Ambassador to the U.S. CSPAN December 31, 2017 12:10pm-1:12pm EST
what about the oregano? the wife says it is in there. the pepper? it is in there. my dad says we have the kind of constitution now. doing the right to an abortion, it is in there. the right to die. it is an there. anything good and true and beautiful, it is in there, the matter what the text says. >> tonight on c-span two's bookkeeping. >> now a discussion on u.s.-russian relations with the russian ambassador to the united states. this event was hosted by the world affairs council of northern california. [applause]
amb. anatov: it is a great honor for me to be here. i would like to thank the council for this opportunity to be with you. important to discuss a very burning issue, what should we do together? do we need each other? are we partners? re: enemies? who we are, the united states and the russian federation? blame anyone for the current situation in russian-american relations, but today is the first official remarks by me as an ambassador for the russian federation to the united states. [applause] amb. anatov: i am not a magician. killing inou to stop
chechnya. stop killing gay people in chechnya. people left alone in chechnya. we need to protect gay people. stop killing gay chechnya and's. chechnyans. gay chechens. stop killing gay chechens. stop killing gay chechens. stop killing gay chechens. [crowd noise] amb. anatov: you can see our relations are complicated. it seems to me everybody has the
right to explain what he wants. sees then see how he current situation. it seems to me i also have the right to convey a few remarks to you, trying to explain how we in the russian federation understand the current situation in russian-american relations. youuld like to explain to how we understand the importance of russian-american relations. i don't want to offend anyone. i would like to be candid with you. i would like to be transparent with you. i hope there will be another opportunity for me to come here.
an unprecedented campaign to discredit russia in an attempt to punish our country for protecting its interests and pursuing independent for policy. regrettably relations between our countries are still being politicized and abused. russia is being ground this league accused of meddling into the united states's elections, and other domestic and external problems of the united states.
the expulsion of russian search of seizure and our diplomatic property, along with the removal of state flags of the russian federation, infringement of rights of the russian media, all these actions are destroying the foundation of the russian-american federation. constantly threat is used as a pretext -- the so-called transatlantic solidarity, which takes forms of military planning. hypear example is all the around military exercises in 2017 conducted by russia and belarus in september. we were accused of preparing for invasion of the baltic countries for occupation of ukraine. there were rumors that once the exercise was over the russian
troops would remain in belarus. none of this happened. it was all fake news. states, the united canadian, german and british contingents which were pulled up have the pretext of this stayed and are still there in the proximity of the russian borders. comments are unnecessary. the fact we are not welcome at the u.s. congress, a place where all kinds of commissions and investigations on so-called russians this year takes place between itself. members of the russian parliament reached out on multiple occasions to their american counterparts with an
invitation to visit moscow or to meet in the united states. no reaction followed. by the way, i have not succeeded in arranging a meeting at the capital either. it is very strange for me. there is no opportunity for russian diplomats to explain how we understand the current situation in the united states, how we explain the relationship and the russian-american federation to congress. they don't want to speak or maybe they are scared to speak to me and my colleagues. but how it is possible to construct bilateral relations. it is impossible to create anything without conversation, without dialogue. the logical outcome of this kind of policy is unfortunate. the heavy burden of missed
opportunities of pragmatic preparation. -- attempts to put pressure on us and resolve the right to decidedly respond the hostile actions. the russian side however does not seek confrontation. if open to improving the bilateral dialogue, it can only be achieved if relations are built on equal and mutually respectful -- my departure -- before my departure to the u.s., i visited senior ministers of the russian government. i would like to send this message to you, that they would like to promote good relations between the united states and the russian federation. mr. putin has received me on the eve of my departure to the united states, and what message i have from him is that we need pragmatic, equal relations
between the united states and the russian federation. one should not forget that russia and the united states as permanent members of the un security council and the largest nuclear powers there a special responsibility for maintaining global peace and security. all negativespite -- negativity, we should not shut off from one another. look back at the past. it is clear the russian and united states interests intertwine when it comes to the fight against global terrorism. there is a context within the russian and united states presidents on the sidelines of the asia-pacific summit in vietnam, in a joint statement of syria that our countries need each other.
coordinating their efforts to defeat isis and achieve a stable political settlement in syria. we are united in necessity to address the challenge of nonproliferation of weapons of mass distraction. the fact we have not reduced our efforts to resolve the iranian nuclear program and to destroy chemical weapons despite our strong disagreements over the ukrainian crisis speaks volumes. developments surrounding north korean nuclear program are quite serious. in this regard i would like to emphasize that russia, as well as the united states does not accept the nuclear state of north korea. we have consistently advocated the denuclearization of the korean peninsula, but this issue can only be settled through a negotiated solution by diplomatic means.
it would be inadvisable to test the strength of the north korean leadership and provoke a rash countermeasure. russia is committed to the joint comprehensive plan of actions on the iranian nuclear program as a successful example of knopfler for asian and an essential factor of regional stability. we consider it important for the participants of the plan to remove existing princess from the agenda for negotiations without reconsidering the agreement itself. it is evident show the plan fail, it would be an alarming signal for the whole or to national security system, including resolving the nuclear problem of the korean peninsula. stabilityof strategic and arms control was and continues to be one of the key
problems in russian-american relations. relations have never been suspended, even given the most intense period of the cold war. over the past 50 years joint efforts of both countries resulted in the creation of a legal base for the modern system of international security. therefore the russian-american population has a crucial impact on key global processes. it is one of the pillars of the current world order. we consider the intent of the russian and united ex-president's to develop -- united states presidents to develop a balance of interest and search for a chilly beneficial agreements to be highly important. which was confirmed in a recent telephone conversation between vladimir putin and donald trump.
our countries need to restore a broken means of communication. it is hardly possible to agree on anything through remote and minimal contact with one another. lack of key indication they lack of -- lack of communication leads to distress, especially in the political circles of the united states which has made an unflattering image of russia. our counterparts are resuming functional dialogue between our security council, defense agencies, intelligence services, numbers of parliaments. at the same time we should get rid of everything artificial which burdens our population, removing multiple irritants and bilateral relations. the most sensible topic is the
return of the diplomatic property which was seized from us. it is a paradox as we have not always been this deprived of our allowed, but not even to share the buildings. to thessible threats ambassador's visit to our compounds cause to the united states security? answer. get a negative to enter russian property, russian buildings, nobody cares to specify the reasons. what we heard from the state department is just only, you have no permission to enter russian property. it would be important to establish a joint working group on cyber security in order to assist fell -- two dispel doubts where what was the goal and was
intervention really happening, or was this just idle speculation? so far the american side's failed to provide any evidence. we are just being told the united states cannot present the facts because there is a classified information. that way one can come up with any charges so as to avoid speaking to the point. ties,al and humanitarian as well as social context that helped strengthen mutual understanding and trust among our citizens are of great importance. this area is less exposed to political environment, and it is definitely expected to bring positivity to bilateral relations. of the topics one that brings the two nations together. this year we are celebrating
many milestones. nobody is talking about it, but theuld like to mention 210th anniversary of establishing the russian-american diplomatic relations. arrivalniversary of the of the russian fleet in hawaii. th anniversary of the agreement to purchase alaska. the 80th anniversary of the legendary flight of the crew from moscow to vancouver. is to lay out economic groundwork for the russian-american relations, which would secure them from irregularities of the political atmosphere. the volumes of bilateral trade and investments do not meet the economic potential of both countries. volume never surpassed
the modest sum of $40 billion in 2016 -- in 2016, it was $20 billion. i would like to emphasize , we host about 3000 american companies with almost 180,000 employees and $75 billion worth of aggregate assets in russia. on a regular basis the american companies confirm they have no intention of leaving russia. extra proof is the unprecedented success of the international economic forum held in june 2017, during which the united states delegation managed to set an attendance record of 556 representatives from 140 companies. that's a quarter of all companies registered at the forum.
it was highly important to present positive aspects of the russian-american relations during the current complicated political circumstances. consumes arctic science and space expiration. american astronauts fly our soyuz spacecraft. 80 engines ared-1 being acquired by the u.s. to deliver payloads for nasa and the pentagon. rd-818 agent is used to deliver cargo to the international space station. there are plans for joint implementation of large-scale projects that could serve as communication for the international space station. in september 2017, russian space
agency and nasa signed a statement on cooperation in creating the deep space gateway lunar station. we could say in space cooperate better than on the ground. russia effectively implements the mega grants program, the leading foreign scientists a research and scientific rate through in our country. over the six years of the work, 160 world-class laboratories were created with plenty of grant recipients being american scientists have moved back in their days. the ties between russia and america across the pacific ocean were always unique. starting for the russian-american company and its activities in alaska, to the
settlement of russian pioneers , from the second world war lend lease program, in particular with nearly 8000 airplanes and ships moved from montana through alaska. to the oil and gas fields. the latter included -- have forever changed the fate of the far east and transformed the russian islands into one of the leading energy suppliers of the asia-pacific region. taken a major place in the relations between our two countries. we have the chevron corporation working for a long time in russia along with transnet as the operator of the caspian pipeline consortium to deliver oil to the seaports. machinery of the
caterpillar company supplying large construction machinery and equipment to the russian far east. thousands of employees from russia work in the flagship high-tech companies in silicon valley. google to namet, a few. the russian-american pacific partnership has been active for more than 20 years. it is a unique platform for dialogue which brings together officials and businessmen in the regions of the russian far east and the united states west coast. the state of california is among the leaders of the bilateral interregional cooperation. over the past years it has established contact with republican because extend -- of kazakstraan. this is mostly due to the state's current leadership,
governor jerry brown, who in september posted the economic forum in vladivostok to get acquainted with the potential of russia and the far east. a bilateral for initiating political and business circles taking place in united states and now with russia, as well as place increasing role in developing ties between the regions of russia and the united states. it has proven itself to be an important and formal platform for dialogue and development over positive bilateral agenda which are countries desperately need. in conclusion, i would like to remind you that this december -- marks theth 210th anniversary of diplomatic ties between russia and the united dates. 1787, thomas jefferson
wrote to the russian emperor alexander i. russia is thehat most friendly nation to us. the russian president vladimir putin has repeatedly stated we are not picking fights for the united states, and have always had a positive attitude towards the american people. we alwaysood together .chieve success happenedow it has during the american war of independence, the first and second world wars. we honestly what bilateral political atmosphere normalized. i genuinely hope we will not remain hostages of each other zone prejudice -- each other's
own prejudice. we cannot allow complaints undermine our ability to effectively respond to the measured security challenges of the 21st century. thank you very much. [applause] join us for the most interesting part of our conversation. ford: thank you very much those remarks and for laying out the whole agenda of cooperation, potential cooperation between russia and the united states. amb. anatov: not only potential. relations, the current status of our relations and the potential. but we are at a point where relations between our
countries are probably in worst states and the have been since the late 1980's. certainly since the end of the cold war. there is a great deal of and you are the new prussian ambassador in washington. the u.s. has a new ambassador in moscow, jon huntsman. when he presented his credentials deposited putin -- to president putin he set a look forward to working to rebuild trust between our two countries, and a strengthening the bilateral relationship based on cooperation on common interests. it sounds to me from the remarks he made that would also be a fair description of how you see your mission here in the united states. amb. anatov: you are right. of course it is difficult to start working in the united states nowadays friendly. friendstioned to my new
before our meeting, you said the first news i got when i left my plane was the decision of the united states regarding the daughter has sent me a message saying, father, be prepared. there are a lot of journalists who would like to see you and get some remarks from you. house iof going to my was forced to go to the embassy to start working. what to do under such circumstances. mynkly it is difficult but official remarks, please, it is a lot of positive elements in our history. wen during the cold war reached drastic agreements regarding nuclear arsenals.
treatiesget about the treaty., stadd these trees are still alive. it's very important the united states and the russian federation consider important to sit together and to tackle this issue. as i mentioned, it is my understanding -- not remarks i got from moscow -- it is from my heart. when we are together we can do a lot. during myat mentioned courtesy call to him if the -- we states and russia can face the problem of north korea. wally are together, the whole world can sleep well.
let me follow up on the issue of nuclear weapons which you mentioned. the u.s. and russia, the dominant nuclear weapons powers. you, head of the delegation that negotiated new start treaty. so, my question is you mentioned the treaties are healthy, but there is some commentary now that arms control as we have known it is not in a healthy state. i don't believe we have formal treaty negotiations going on. is underreaty criticism from both sides. are we at the end of arms control as we have known it or is this a temporary pause? if we don't have arms control as we have known it, had we manage our nuclear relationship?
amb. anatov: first of all i would like to repeat your words. we need more trust. start --ossible to impossible to start negotiations tomorrow. it is necessary to make a lot of preparation work for this. and 2008 we009 started our negotiations with the united dates. -- united states. you had an excellent team, a professional team, a smart team led by your former undersecretary. it was very difficult for her because they was a gap of negotiations between the united states and russia. it was necessary to create something special for such negotiations, and for the russian federation it was difficult to do the same. but we managed and we agreed. say 17t about -- you
hours per day together trying to understand what kind of concerns we had at the time. of course we can be criticized today by our opponents regarding the documents, but at the time it was the best solution in the interest of the american and russian people. you are right. we have bilateral conversations on various issues of arms control, nonproliferation, and sometimes we have some differences. but we are great nations. we have our own interests, national interests. it's important to respect national interest of each other. if we can see such from our partners, under any circumstances we can find a solution. it seems to me that it's important to continue such strategic dialogue.
strategic means disarmament, nonproliferation, arms-control altogether in one bottle. it is important to continue such dialogue, even taking into account the current situation with russian-american relations. we have started such dialogue and there are two delegations from the russian side led by our deputy minister, and from the united states led by mr. shannon. a smart, experienced professional diplomat. i met him and discussed some issues. david: when you think about a russian for improving relations with the u.s., in your position, you laid out many areas of cooperation we've had in the past. and also potential areas in the future.
which look to you to be the most promising in terms of moving the relationship forward? amb. anatov: maybe you will be as that i served six years at the minister of defense. it was difficult frankly for the diplomat to be in the ministry of defense. but i got a lot of knowledge, experience. i would like to say the differences between the military commands it seems to me we are close to making a breakthrough on the cooperation between the pentagon and the ministry of defense. we have common goals. overve to get a victory isis. we are very close. we are together in syria.
we are fighting against global terrorism. it seems to me the great potential capabilities we have. it's very important not to think about just only national interests, but necessary to look at this problem from a global point of view to understand what we get if we can achieve victory devil.is double. -- i understand maybe you're not satisfied with my answer, but potentialhat a great for our cooperation in the military sphere. i don't want to repeat what we already have. it is the base for a future cooperation. the next issue i can say -- i can mention. it is north korea. we are members of the security council and we are very much
concerned with what is going on in north korea. as i mentioned, we never recognized north korea as a nuclear weapon state. we are together with the united states. there is a difference in how to achieve this goal. we are in favor of diplomatic means and tools. we are a little concerned the united states that had a say in a diplomatic way? very sensitive possibleregarding the or potential actions in that region. we are very much concerned. you said north korea is our neighbor, and i've repeatedly said to my colleagues it is easy to change a wife but difficult to change a neighbor. [laughter]
you referred to so diplomatically, that also is the official position of the united states. diplomacy is the way to resolve the issue. the question is how? amb. anatov: you say if i'm a , you say that for this issue. there is only one option. only one outcome. negotiations. in of how to freeze activities and at the same time they would like the united states, south korea, japan to freeze joint exercises. korea forvoke north the next missile test and
nuclear tests. you say that to come down -- calm down emotions, sit together and talk. the russian federation will help and we are ready to be together for the united states, with other permanent members of the council. david: i'm now getting questions from the audience. perhaps --can amb. anatov: maybe you will choose the tough one. david: i'm looking for the toughest one. i giving you some easy wants to make you feel relaxed. [laughter] spirit of cooperation. you make some remarks. -her dear a tough negotiator. amb. anatov: that is a compliment.
she will never say took negotiator. she could say i am smart. [laughter] you say we respect each other. if there is opportunity for me, i would like to convey her best regards. it is difficult for her to be in brussels now, to deal with those russians. [laughter] i was i think perhaps paraphrasing. i meant in the sense of smart. you know what your position is. you negotiate hard, but he did reach an agreement. what i'm interested in asking is you have referred to a number of things in united states. view, all the stuff made
about russian interference in our election in 2016. i would like to come back to that question later. we will conduct to it. i wanted to ask you a broader question. back, could russia have done differently to avoid getting into this position? amb. anatov: i know, i know. i would like to remember some ideas i heard in moscow in various corners and our government, as well as our ministry of foreign affairs, as well is the ministry of defense. i will explain but i have to say this. were very much flexible
towards western countries. easy toder it is very come to a compromise with united states and other western countries. we try to show flexibility, too much flexibility. i explained to you i participated in various rounds of negotiations at g-8. when russia was a member of the g-8. i was responsible for arms control and nonproliferation. i remember when i agreed with western countries i was the good guy, smart guy, professional guide. let's cometed to say to another decision, you said it is not -- it does not meet my concerns.
i need some other phrases in the final document. i became a tough negotiator. david: that's a compliment. amb. anatov: the same situation if i hope many of you know about the situation with arms control in europe. conventional forces in europe, and so on. i don't want to torture you with such formulas. you said from one side there were western countries and from another side with the russian federation. when we are together, everything was fine. when i said come on, i don't understand nato. i don't understand decisions made in brussels. you consider i mean the my colleagues from europe and the united states, you consider that the threat coming from south of europe. from iran.
yes, i understand it is possible you have such concerns. and you consider it is the threat. nato is coming to my boundary? you have to go to the south. what is the problem with my country? discovereduddenly from intelligence sources, the ministry of defense it is a lot of intelligence. planes are flying along the boundary between nato countries and russia. for what purpose? i will explain we are trying to protect our country from terrorism. please. what kind of terrorism? what are you talking about? i don't understand you. that's what i would like just only to give you one example. it was my concern. i failed to get concrete answer on this issue.
during maybee if that's the beginning of the tough, moreere more understandable for western countries maybe we would not face the current status of our relations. by the way, it was said by my president, mr. putin. david: thank you very much. turn to the question well, election, which is, must dominate the headlines. of a greate source deal of distrust because the
sense desperately because the election was so close. partly because of the evidence of the statements made by our intelligence agencies that there was an influence campaign that the u.s. and the russian in differentngaged kinds of trolling, different kinds of advertising and so on, packing and releasing -- hacking and releasing documents to wikileaks. wholegoing through a procedure, a process of dealing with that in one way or another. what is your response? your president has denied you engaged in those? amb. anatov: you would like for
me that i agree? i will go to moscow. david: i'm not asking you to challenge that, but i'm asking that she think then mentioned this at the beginning how it affects the relationship. how is this going to play out? amb. anatov: the situation is really delicate and complicated. sometimes i raise a question to myself. where the american people have more problems with the russian interference in the election? i just explained to some sayingues in this room, a few weeks ago i visited chicago. hotel, switched on the tv. showing or trying to
prove russia interfered into the united states' elections. i changed my suit. then i visited a restaurant where he had excellent dinner with my friends. i went back to my hotel room and what do i see? the same. the same. three hours. there are gossips, intelligence reports regarding russian interference into american relations. you say we raised this issue with our counterparts many times. we took a lesson from them. if they have opportunity to put proofs on the table, at least one or two proofs, it was mentioned we hijacked or
interfered into a democratic party website and so on and so on. specialists in cyber security have known it is easy to interfere in your computer. for example, from singapore. but it is possible to keep fingerprints in russia. problem, cyber security. we have offered our american friends to sit together and look at this problem. to find out what kind of problems, what kind of security challenges we face today. and to discuss how do we cooperate together. favorhink that we were in one way or another in the united states. -- i see you are smiling.
you say it is up to you to decide. please raise the question to yourself. what kind of system you have it anybody can penetrate it? [laughter] amb. anatov: that was said by all of your presidents, the united states is a superpower. nobody can defeat it. please, what has happened with your security? david: that is not to many americans a convincing response to say we do every thing perfectly because we are a superpower. recall glasses of champagne in the duma when the election results came out. they are elected members.
amb. anatov: that was you also, raising glasses of champagne. david: let me put it in a broader context. not stopped have the process going on. it is going to play itself out. in what way i don't know. there is a general problem, and this perhaps should be a topic for mutual discussion. median fact to the social -- impact of social media have on what we see as fundamentals of democracy? namely the possibility of open discussion. the possibility of transparency and access to facts when we discuss the policies we want our governments to pursue or when we are electing people to parliaments or congress.
i think the big issue, whether what is important here is the particular scandal or the more general issue of what is changing. i'm wondering if that is the kind of area in which it would be fruitful to have not only in relation to social media, but also artificial intelligence, for example. amb. anatov: it seems to me it is high time for our intelligence and counterintelligence services to work together. this issue, to find solutions, to get answers on this issue. speculation regarding the meddling of russia. maybe it is not russia. maybe it is another country. i see a lot of cameras and that is why don't want to name other countries.
we have some speculation. is it just only because of the problem between democrats and republicans? i do not want it to interfere in internal relations. i would just like to answer your question. my proposal to you, you meaning restoreed states, to sensitive links of communications between counterintelligence and security the usworking together will repeatedly say we are not enemies. we are partners. we were alive in the second world war and we are fighting. it is high time for us to have
constructive discussions about open and transparent discussions about security challenges that we face. if we have concerns, we openly discuss them. matthew mass media. throughry easy to speak mass media. i do not want to betray my friend who has given me this information, but i would like to save habits -- privately, the united states -- i don't want to continue the sentient -- the sentence. now the mass media will take this information and it will be good fake news.
>> unfortunately, our time is running out and there are so many issues to discuss. i have two questions i want to raise. is a major issue in our relations, the u.s. and indeed the european union have stance onrong annexation of crimea. we have continuing, low-level conflict in the eastern part of ukraine. imposed inere response to russian policy. this is a major obstacle to the improvement of relations. how do you think the issue can be resolved? amb. anatov: you have raise so many questions. we need to hours more.
-- two hours more to would like to disagree. i do not want to waste your time to explain the russian position on the issue. explain the russian position on the issue. there was a vote organized by the people of crimea, and by the way, who other sanctions of the -- for whaton purpose i am on the top list? we have secret information from that i run russian troops and had taken one of the towns .f ukraine and because of my failure, you say we did not seize the tower.
you can check it. , i have to beion put on the stop list. i'm diplomat and everyone knows what i have done. i was responsible for international relations and military relations between defense and other ministers, defense of various countries. it is stupid. i do not know what kind of fake information from whom that they took this. it is stupid. frankly, we are very much concerned. had variousofficesfrankly, we e relatives and they entered my office saying, mr. deputy minister, what is going on, we don't understand.
ukrainian counterparts said we have taken our relatives pulses so we -- they think that we could kill our mothers and fathers. the situation is a different one. and don't forget russia is not a conflict.e everything is mentioned there there is a sequence in this, be done, what should first? the cease-fire, -- and other elements. there is a problem knell of how to fulfill it. westerns a request from
countries to protect peacekeepers, monitors, let's call them. mr. putin has decided to help and has decided to agree with an idea to protect these on both sides. all.is you say these others -- other ideas, peacekeeping operations. we do not want russian people to be killed. other towns.ned in we would like guarantees, from western countries and the united states, that russian people leaving will not be killed. that is why, all elements to protect lives of citizens,
ordinary people, stipulated and examined. tore is only time for us david: implement disagreement. we unfortunately -- for us to implement disagreement. we unfortunately have run out of our own time. i would like everyone to thank the ambassador. [applause] amb. anatov: i would like to say thank you very much. maybe you're not satisfied with all of the answers to your questions but i would like to confirm i'm ready to continue our dialogue, our conversation. maybe we will choose one
specific topic. tomorrow, will make a presentation. nuclear disarmament, nonproliferation, these are very important and it seems to me they are crucial for the united states and the russia configuration. the united states and russia configuration are bound by many in nuclear forces but not all. -- not all nuclear powers have the same limitation the united states of -- and russia have. we have a lot of questions to discuss. thank you very much. [applause]
[captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2017] later on c-span, james clapper on his life and career in the intelligence community. he spoke about his decades of public service and shared his views on current intelligence issues. james clapper: there are times when you have to be tough with people but by and large i have found in my 50 plus years in the intel business is people want to do the right thing. want to do the mission well and they want to excel in it. you have to create an environment where it can happen. leadership and intelligence i guess is about motivating others to use their intellects. that is a great thing from a
thersity standpoint about community. it is all about your brain. it does not matter what your ethnic group is, gender, sexual preference. none of that matters. it is your mind, that is what counts in the intelligence community. the interesting work you have the opportunity to engage in. i consider it a leadership laboratory in the book. i thought i would mention it because in the context of leadership. looking back, one factor that has changed the intelligence community, the thing address changed it more than anything else historically is technology. when we had traumas like 9/11, yes, that had an impact. reorganizations, which i think are highly overrated,