Both countries are now at peace.

In the process, both countries have suffered grievously.

The delegations of both countries met in Geneva.

Both countries have a point.

The upheaval in these two neighboring countries has reshaped regional geopolitics.

In both episodes, a missing handshake symbolized the countries persistent rift.

As a result, both countries maintained their sovereignty claims.

Both countries invested millions of dollars into surveying.

This led both countries to seek an alternative future in each other s company.

That's because the two countries have about the same population size.

Both countries have suffered from extreme weather events in recent years.

Consider parallels ten years apart.

But today both countries say the best defense is to attack.

Thus , at the end of 2003 , the situation had been fully corrected in both countries .

Of course, this difference between the two countries is mostly old news.

A second crucial difference lies in the two countries mix of monetary and fiscal policies.

Both countries know that it is time to cooperate and shape the future.

And both countries had the better health, but still a very low economy.

A third crucial difference consists in how the two countries have positioned themselves in the world economy.

Its neighbors to the west, Cyprus and Greece, are at the epicenter of the eurozone crisis.

Each entered the financial crisis with huge current account imbalances.

Moreover, both countries need growth oriented policies to help with deleveraging.

And America will need to work to deepen its understanding of China s transition.

Russia and China both feel encircled by the United States and its allies.

But then both countries upped the ante on America s fiscal profligacy.

The standoff came to an end on May 6, as suddenly as it had started.

Both countries, along with Bahrain, have recalled their ambassadors from Qatar.

People from both countries have been meeting to share information about incinerators, reports, and strategies.

What makes the Sino American relationship dangerous is that powerful forces in both countries seem intent on a collision course.

Both countries needed new recipes for revival and growth, and turned to each other in a marriage of convenience.

It goes both ways.

But the two countries have conflicting interests in Central Asia, where China is pursuing major investments to expand its influence in countries that Russia views as its near abroad.

But the sombre economic and financial prospects of the two countries could pour cold water on their ambitions.

They are far more autonomous in terms of foreign policy than they were four decades ago, when they equated independence with nuclear capabilities.

Both countries external sectors have clearly been hit hard, while domestic consumption is stagnating.

But we're now up to 55 countries in the world, have had this virus emerge, in either birds, or people or both.

That stance has left both countries isolated and looking somewhat churlish.

And it's going both ways.

They are both in the room.

Both of them are in the room.

The two of them are in the room.

Both marriages ended in divorce.

We have also supported the motion for an amendment on securing the right to take collective action.

At the time, hardliners on both sides denounced the LTBT as a weakening of national defense in the face of an implacable enemy.

And in both cases, we were able to use genetic sequencing to look at the polio viruses, and we could tell these viruses were not from these countries.