The second part of my question is on the influence of outside actors in place. Right now, you have two main actors who are involved in the affairs of South Sudan. You have the troika—the United States, the U.K. and Norway—and you have China. China's involvement is a little different because they don't have necessarily a political involvement, but they have more of an economic involvement, heavily in South Sudan.
When we look at the DRC, as you can appreciate, the DRC is the sixth-largest producer of copper in the world, and also half of the cobalt in the world comes from the DRC. You can appreciate how critical they are for phone batteries, electric vehicles and other industrial applications.
In this case you have a conflict. You have a conflict of one actor who is looking in terms of pure economics and you have probably the west, if you include the troika but you include other countries in the west also, who are looking at a more humanitarian and a more security or a more institution-building way.
How do you think that conflict is going to resolve going forward when you have one entity that is looking just at the economics and you have another entity that is looking at the humanitarian issue and both entities will not see eye to eye because in some cases the governance model of China is being imposed in certain countries, whereas the west has a more stringent view towards human rights and making sure that there's capacity building on the ground?