|
Disarmament DocumentationBack to Disarmament Documentation 'If North Korea has nuclear weapons then others will feel compelled to replicate this capability', UK Foreign Office Minister Bill Rammell, September 16, 2004'Written Statement by Foreign Office Minister Bill Rammell', House of Commons, September 16, 2004. I visited the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK or North Korea) from 11 to 14 September. It was the first ever visit by a British Minister. I undertook the trip because the North Koreans had agreed, for the first time, to substantive discussions on the nuclear issue and human rights. I met Foreign Minister Paek Nam Sun, Chairman of the Supreme People's Assembly Chae Thae Bok, Human Rights Minister Choe Su Hon and Kim Gye Gwan, head of the DPRK's delegation to the six-party talks on dismantling North Korea's nuclear programme. I stressed to Foreign Minister Paek and Chief Negotiator Kim Gye Gwan the importance which the UK and the international community attach to the continuation of the Six Party Talks. For some time, it has been clear that the North Koreans might not proceed with the scheduled fourth round of talks by the end of September. The Foreign Minister restated the DPRK's commitment to the talks process, but admitted the DPRK's reluctance to meet again in September. I also impressed the need for the DPRK to admit its Uranium Enrichment Programme, and encouraged the regime to look to the example of Libya. Before my visit the FCO delegation consulted on the human rights situation with three leading NGOs - Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and Christian Solidarity World-wide. Armed with detailed information on individual cases, I was able to hand to Human Rights Minister Choe Su Hon a list of 18 named individuals, and asked for a full written response. In particular, I raised the cases of two south Korean pastors reportedly abducted to the DPRK from China whose details we learned about from Christian Solidarity World-wide. I handed over satellite photographs of what appear to be a number of large prison camps in the DPRK and asked for both an explanation and for access to them by diplomats resident in Pyongyang. I also pressed for the North Koreans to allow visits, so far barred, by the recently appointed UN Special Rapporteur for human rights in the DPRK and by other thematic UN human rights Special Rapporteurs; and further visits by Foreign Office Human Rights experts. I hope to hear more about this at the UN General Assembly next week when I will meet Choe Su Hon again to continue our discussions. I repeatedly made the points that blanket denials by the North Koreans of alleged human rights violations were simply not credible. My visit coincided with reports of a large explosion in the north of the country. Having asked for an explanation, Foreign Minister Peak said it was a planned explosion of a mountain for the construction of a hydro-electric power plant. He agreed to my request that diplomats might visit to see for themselves. The arrangements are now in hand. The British Ambassador visited the blast site today; I have asked for an urgent report on the visit. Source: UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office, http://www.fco.gov.uk. 'Engagement is the right way to deal with North Korea', Bill Rammell article for the Guardian, September 16, 2004. This week I became the first British government minister to visit North Korea. It is a country more cut off than any other, one that harbours nuclear ambitions, and one that, arguably, has the worst human rights record. I went there because the regime had agreed to discuss human rights and the nuclear question, the two preconditions that had blocked previous ministerial visits. Whether and when to engage with a state such as Kim Jong-il's is a judgment progressive governments like ours constantly have to make. We believe now is the right time to make this move. If we cannot convince North Korea to shift its position, then the future of the country, its people and the wider world will be much bleaker. I do not underestimate how difficult it will be, but we have to try. On the nuclear issue we're rightly not acting on our own: China, Russia, the US, Japan and South Korea are also trying to engage through the six-party talks. The EU is pressing, too. We have to work at this together. Two years ago North Korea admitted it had been developing a highly enriched uranium programme to develop nuclear capability, in contravention of its previous commitments not to do so. If North Korea has nuclear weapons then others will feel compelled to replicate this capability, and the world will become more dangerous. I believe terrorism and the proliferation of nuclear weapons are the biggest threat to our civilisation. The talks are aimed at getting North Korea to dismantle its nuclear capability. Last weekend I urged the North Korean government to commit to the next round of talks. I said that if it did renounce nuclear weapons, then the international community was prepared to respond with security guarantees and aid. I argued that North Korea could, and should, follow Libya's example. The allegations of human rights abuses are shocking: forced labour camps, torture, and families murdered to test chemical gases. North Korean ministers admitted to me that they attach a much lower priority to human rights than we do. And they admitted the existence of 're-education through labour' camps. I told my counterpart that we would far rather discuss our human rights disagreements with them than simply run condemnatory resolutions at the UN commission on human rights. But for such a dialogue to take place we need the UN special rapporteur for North Korea to be allowed access to the country. The government did not reject this out of hand. We agreed to meet again next week at the UN general assembly. I regard this as modest progress, as is the fact that North Korea is discussing our concerns with us for the first time. In the past it has refused to do so. But we need more. The country needs to commit itself to renouncing nuclear weapons; it needs to move towards respect for human rights. That is not western conceit on my part; rather, it stems from a fundamental belief in the universality of human rights. Some will accuse us of double standards. We went to war with Iraq - if that was justified, why not North Korea? I believe the two situations are different. For 12 years in Iraq we sought a diplomatic solution. We are now rightly seeking a diplomatic solution in North Korea. We want a just and peaceful resolution of our differences. The country must understand the strength of our concerns - and that we are not alone in holding them. I do not know of any democratic government that is not concerned about North Korea. We have to tackle the threat from North Korea. But given its agreement to talk - albeit belatedly and hesitantly - I believe we are right to engage constructively with the government. This is the start of a long process to pull it back from complete isolation. The strategy is right. It makes sense to act now. Source: UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office, http://www.fco.gov.uk. © 2003 The Acronym Institute. |