We are fully aware that preparedness is necessary.

Yet we much recognize that this huge need for food assistance is symbolic of the vicious cycle that we are caught in.

Fully aware of the ethical questions concerned, we simply cannot, and will not, go that far.

First, staying on the right side of history is one thing, but suggesting that the US is inspiring, if not directing, the Arab revolts is quite another.

Looking at Greece's immediate neighbourhood, the Balkans, we realize that it has not yet been fully transformed into a region of peace, stability and prosperity.

We are also extremely familiar with the argument that European policies have not led to any mass arrests in Cuba.

Panama has supported the High level Meeting's draft outcome document (A 60 L.1), not because it is in full agreement with it but because it understands that the document is the beginning of a process of reform.

We find more and more complex arrangements of machines that make it harder and harder to diagnose what's going on.

While we fully recognize that the national Governments should take responsibility for their development efforts, we are also cognizant of the fact that domestic financial resources on their own will not be sufficient to finance our respective countries' development programmes.

We know what must be done.

We now know that they are not.

Nor is there such a thing as a free war.

We see the importance of our work, but we also see its limits.

Now we see that countries far away have had very similar experiences.

It is easy to see why.

We knew our heroes would win.

We understand, however, that the world is changing, and changing quickly.

We realize that this is primarily the responsibility of the Ivorian people themselves.

First, markets need clear rules.

In the end, the alternatives to adjustment are not soft.

The truth, however, is quite different.

We are aware that his task is by no means an easy one, but he must succeed.

We must recognize, yet again, that we are all in this together.

But there is a critical difference between balancing and subservience.

It is easy to see how terrorism can lead to torture.

It is not hard to see why.

We understand that both sides have domestic concerns and demands to address.

But make no mistake both parties are implicated.

This possibility is at our fingertips.

Finally, policymakers are running out of tools.

But the point remains that ideas matter.

We must recognize that democracy has proved its worth around the world.

A country s most valuable resource is its people.

But we should be clear that these changes are not just tinkering at the edges.

We realize that reporting can be a strain on already limited administrative resources.

It is heart warming to recognize that the proposal enjoys widespread support among Member States.

They must become full owners of the development process.

The dilemma posed by China for democratic regimes is understandable.

Many of these pernicious side effects can already be perceived.

After all, we do know that it is our future.

In retrospect, this was a major mistake.

Second, it is important to recognize the limited logic and impact of transition.

Number two thing that Howard did is he made us realize it's another very critical point he made us realize in the importance of what he likes to call horizontal segmentation.

But we must understand that Copenhagen is also a big chance to revive the global economy.

But in the end, the point isn t a battle over strategies.