Thank you very much indeed for the question, honourable member. It's a key question.
We see the authorities in Afghanistan, in light of their previous role, as a party to the conflict in Afghanistan, and therefore, within the scope of international humanitarian law, as a belligerent party with whom we, as a neutral, independent humanitarian organization, are obliged to engage with, precisely to try to protect and assist the people who are affected by the hostilities they are engaged in with the other parties to the conflict. Then, secondly, also now that there is the de facto government of Afghanistan, whose de facto governance clearly has a very substantial impact on the people living in the territory that they currently de facto govern.
Our programming, our presence in Afghanistan, is clearly driven by the humanitarian needs that exist amongst the Afghan population and the desire, the obligation, to respond to those needs. Clearly, on the one hand, we are very conscious of the need to avoid trespassing over the various sets of counter-terror legislation by providing any types of direct material supports to the Taliban as an entity. At the same time, clearly, in these circumstances, we are obliged to engage with them to try to ensure that for the people we need to assist and protect, we can assist and protect them by having access to them, and by having the agreement from those authorities to be able to carry out our work in the way that we do.
Thank you.