Mr. Dewar, thank you for the question.
I think you raise a fundamentally important question because, like you, I have not heard a clear goal from the United States government, the G-7 governments, or the European Union. What is it that we are trying to achieve? We are, as David said, in a reactive mode, seeking perhaps to penalize, but we ought to have a clear goal ourselves of what we want to achieve.
Like David, I agree the goal should be to return to the status quo before Russia annexed Crimea. We need to put in place sufficient sanctions that will cause Russia to want to negotiate to get back to that outcome. That would be a heavy mix of sanctions, and it would take some time because Putin believes he can hold out, that he can outlast us.
I think among ourselves we may recognize that we may not get that. We may need to settle for Crimea is gone and we prevent anything else. But I don't think we start there. I think we start with a clear goal of saying it needs to be rolled back. In doing so, we have the virtuous effect of stopping the momentum that Putin has now gathered. If you think about where we were in February, with demonstrations in Crimea, it's now marched on to occupation, to annexation, to demonstrations now in other parts of Ukraine, and talk about referenda in Transnistria. We have to go for the rollback, blunt the momentum, and then be prepared to negotiate an outcome.