Okay. My view on this is that the higher the level of activities you have in the Arctic, for example the more human presence you have there, the more you need a governmental presence.
It's not necessarily the military threat that is the real issue. There could be an oil spill or an environmental accident. It could be criminality. It could be illegal trafficking, but all these potential threats underline the need for the government to be present, clearly, in the Arctic. You could say the same for the maritime security in general, and yes, I agree that a military threat is not the first, unless we have dramatic change in our relationship with Russia. I don't want to fuel the fire.