Thank you, Chair.
I didn't get a chance to ask Mr. Regehr earlier, and it was my own fault for not judging time better, about the nuclear issue and the related ballistic missile issue.
You mentioned, of course, the obligations we all have on the non-proliferation treaty. Nuclear weapon states obviously have additional ones for basing and so forth. Clearly Canada remains, as NATO remains, a proponent of nuclear disarmament on the right terms in a way that enhances our security. Meanwhile, if we look at the last 10 years, probably the most disturbing trend in proliferation is in ballistic missile technology, where we're talking about a huge range of states who have them or are trying to have them, and even non-state actors who might be able to acquire them. This could be a small-scale threat to our ships if we deploy them to the Mediterranean or the Indian Ocean, but it could also be a large-scale threat to states, including NATO member states.
Given what you've said about DND and so forth, what do you think NATO's overall approach should be, within or even beyond the strategic concept, to defending its members and other partners, where there's political will to do so, against a growing threat from ballistic missiles?