which I mean, I thought the idea that you have all these states, they're not happy with their own national government. It's possible that a negotiation involving those states could change what gets talked about and shift the balance of power and provide an opportunity for a sub-regional piece of the treaty to go ahead. So that's about bargaining chips, but it's about the involvement of subnational units on the India side and why their involvement could make a difference. So I'm really saying, don't just talk about things at the level of bargaining chips. It's too broad. Pick a couple of bargaining ships that you think are most promising and say who should do what with this new bargaining chip that might lead to either a new treaty or better administration of the existing treaty or a completely different kind of treaty. I mean, not keep the one you have and in addition, adopt maybe a new treaty about this additional river. Maybe that's what opens things, but take specific bargaining chips and make them into your recommendations, okay? Okay, so thank you. Yeah, so in a line with Larry's succession, so my succession would be, so you mentioned only the state versus state diplomacy, but you know the India's order resource responsibility is given to the state, I mean not federal state. So most, mass of the water power is given to the state. I mean