I want to come back to the term “disruptive”. You sort of conflated the word “disruptive” with the word “turbulence”. I would say that the disrupter is someone causing the turbulence, even if this definition may annoy a number of Southeast Asian countries.
I'll go back to your three challenges. The third is the fact that the strategy focuses on security issues and provides for a greater military presence in the Indo‑Pacific region—imagine that—when these issues are not aligned with the preferences or priorities of Southeast Asian countries.
Again, does this contribute to this reputation problem you were alluding to when explaining the second challenge?