Yes, just quickly. I understand that “child soldiers”...and Mr. Kessel made the point that it's a colloquial term. But what I would say about that is yes, it's colloquial, but if it's the term that's being used, it does affect public opinion, and public opinion, as we all know, in turn can affect political will to follow the international norms, which indeed refer to and use the phrase “children in armed conflict”. There's a set of United Nations Security Council resolutions on children in armed conflict.
Again what I would say is that the real issue for me is the actions that we're performing. The question is, are we adhering to the norms set out under what are binding Security Council resolutions on children in armed conflict, which do define age of majority and do have specific prescriptions around the treatment of children who have served as combatants?