Andries Botha: Arundhati, hi. You know I’m from South Africa and so it’s such a problematic question to answer because my fundamental - my fundamental self tends to move towards non-violence. Yet I do believe that that’s completely naïve in a world in which we live. You know, the struggle against Aparteid took place finally with a many, many-pronged assault on the aparteid state, some of it violent, some of it economic, strategic. I would – you know, your question basically answers itself. You know I do believe we need a sort of as you call it a biodiverstiy of approaches to bring down what is construed and proven to be illegitimate. So, resistance, yes. You know but on the other - I also do know this for sure. That violence inculcates violence. And sometimes the spiral goes out of control, and, you know, literally that the delicate center or epicenter does fall apart. And it gets out of control. So there’s enormous responsibilities that are attached to the idea of struggle, struggle and violence and the decision to take life because it is justified by a higher moral purpose. My personal perspective? Is that I believe that we should not take life. That armed struggle that costs human life is not sustainable. My logic however tells me that armed struggle has brought about [transition] of power. In South Africa, there’s been a moral shift, a higher order of morality established, but I believe all South Africans are now losers, great losers. I’m not sure. The cost of war, the cost of conflict, directly and indirectly, I’m not sure. You know we really need to find another way. But if - if we can’t agree on the terms, well, then we really are in trouble. Because obviously not everyone is going to agree to reasonableness, so [inaudible].