Motion for a resolution - B7-0138/2013Motion for a resolution

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on nuclear threats and human rights in North Korea

11.3.2013 - (2013/2565(RSP))

to wind up the debate on the statement by the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
pursuant to Rule 110(2) of the Rules of Procedure

Tarja Cronberg, Gerald Häfner, Barbara Lochbihler, Rui Tavares, Amelia Andersdotter, Ulrike Lunacek, Raül Romeva i Rueda on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

See also joint motion for a resolution RC-B7-0132/2013

Procedure : 2013/2565(RSP)
Document stages in plenary
Document selected :  
Texts tabled :
Debates :
Texts adopted :


European Parliament resolution on nuclear threats and human rights in North Korea


The European Parliament,

–   having regard to UN Security Council resolutions 825 (1993), 1540 (2004), 1673 (2006), 1695 (2006), 1718 (2006), 1874 (2009), 1887 (2009), 2087 (2013) and, in particular, 2094 of 7 March 2013, which added additional financial restrictions and made interdiction and inspection of all suspicious ships and cargos mandatory,

–   having regard to its previous resolutions of 26 February 2004[1], 10 March 2005[2], 17 November 2005[3] and 14 March 2007[4] on nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament, and of 10 March 2010[5] on the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons,

–   having regard to the European Union Strategy against the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD), adopted by the European Council on 12 December 2003,

–   having regard to the Council statement of 8 December 2008 on tighter international security, in particular points 6, 8 and 9 thereof, which expresses the EU’s ‘determination to combat the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery’,

–   having regard to the Foreign Affairs Council conclusions of 18 February 2013 on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK),

–   having regard to the statement by the EU High Representative Catherine Ashton concerning the DPRK’s ‘satellite’ launch of 12 December 2012,

–   having regard to the relevant resolutions of the UN Human Rights Council, notably that adopted by consensus on 19 March 2012 on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,

–   having regard to the report of 1 February 2013 by the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Marzuki Darusman,

–   having regard to its previous resolutions on in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, in particular that of 8 July 2010[6],

–   having regard to the Universal Peer Report of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) of 7 November 2009 and to the DPRK agreement to examine 117 recommendations contained in the Report of the Working Group on Universal Periodic Review, which the Human Rights Council adopted on 18 March 2010,

–   having regard to the initiative by the European Union and Japan to form a new UN committee dealing with the monitoring of human rights abuses in the DPRK, as announced on 27 February 2013 in the UN Human Rights Council meeting,

–   having regard to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay’s condemnation of the human rights situation in the DPRK in January 2013,

–   having regard to the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declarations of Human Rights, the International Covenants on Human Rights and other human rights instruments,

–   having regard to the 1984 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,

–   having regard to Rule 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

Nuclear non-proliferation

A. whereas on 11 February 2013 the Government of the DPRK announced that it had successfully conducted a nuclear test – the third in seven years – of a device small enough to fit on top of a rocket; whereas two months earlier, on 12 December 2012, the government had launched a long-range ballistic missile;

B.  whereas on 7 March 2013 the UN Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 2094 calling for tougher new sanctions against the DPRK;

C. whereas the DPRK withdrew from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 2003 and officially declared in 2009 that it had developed a nuclear weapon;

D. whereas in reaction to Resolution 2094, North Korea declared the 1953 armistice accord that ended the Korean War null and void, closed its military hotlines with the United States and South Korea, and launched threats of a nuclear strike against the United States and South Korea;

E.  whereas the proliferation of WMD and their means of delivery, both to state and non-state actors, represents one of the most serious threats to international stability and security;

F.  whereas there is a need to strengthen the NPT as the cornerstone of the global non-proliferation regime and to recognise that bold political leadership and a number of progressive, consecutive steps are urgently needed in order to reaffirm the validity of the NPT and to reinforce the agreements, treaties and agencies that make up the existing proliferation and disarmament regime;

G. whereas the EU has committed itself to making use of all instruments at its disposal to prevent, deter, halt and, if possible, eliminate proliferation programmes which cause concern at global level, as clearly expressed by the EU Strategy against the Proliferation of WMD adopted by the European Council on 12 December 2003;

H. whereas with its military-focused economy, North Korea, far from achieving its stated goal of becoming a strong and prosperous nation, has instead increasingly isolated and impoverished its people through its pursuit of weapons of mass destruction;

Human rights

I.   whereas the DPRK has for many years continuously violated the rights of its citizens, depriving large parts of the population of food, applying collective punishments, forced labour and public executions, and interning more than 200 000 people in prison and ‘re‑education’ camps;

J.   whereas freedom of movement and access to information is highly restricted, and the government does not allow organised political opposition, free and fair elections, free media, or freedom of expression or association;

K. whereas the people of DPRK have been exposed to decades of under-development, with poor health care and high levels of maternal and child malnutrition, in a context of political and economic isolation, recurrent natural disasters and international increases in food and fuel prices;

L.  whereas in November 2012 the World Food Programme (WFP) and the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) estimated that 2.8 million vulnerable people, representing slightly more than 10 per cent of all North Koreans, face under-nutrition and a lack of vital protein and fat in their daily diet;

M. whereas as a result of these hardships, tens of thousands of North Koreans have fled the country, despite running a high risk, if discovered, of collective punishment and disappearance in prison camps;

N. whereas government agents have abducted thousands of foreign nationals over the years, the majority of them South Koreans, the whereabouts of most of whom remains unknown;

Nuclear non-proliferation

1.  Condemns the nuclear test and missile activities carried out by the DPRK and demands that it abstain from tests in the future;

2.  Condemns the official announcement by the DPRK that the country reserves its right to carry out a pre-emptive nuclear strike; calls on the DPRK to abide by the Charter of the United Nations which obliges the Member States to refrain from the threat or use of force against other states;

3.  Urges the DPRK to return to the NPT and to ratify the additional protocol on International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards; underlines the need for all state parties to the NPT to continue to comply with all aspects of their treaty obligations; calls on the DPRK to re-establish its pre-existing commitments to a moratorium on missile tests and to sign and ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT);

4.  Expresses its deepest concern at the growing tension on the Korean Peninsula and the aggressive rhetoric by the DPRK leadership, and calls on the parties involved to refrain from any action that might aggravate tensions, including military exercises;

5.  Notes the consensus among the members of the UN Security Council in their reaction to the recent nuclear test by the DPRK, and calls on them to undertake joint and coordinated political and diplomatic efforts to end the military confrontation on the Korean Peninsula and to find sustainable political solutions; suggests a new confidence-building initiative for the Korean peninsula at regional level shaped along the lines of the Helsinki process;

6.  Appeals to the People’s Republic of China – as a permanent member of the UN Security Council and the DPRK’s main trading partner – to use its good offices towards the de‑escalation of the situation;

7.  Urges all the participants in the Six Party talks to intensify their efforts on the full and expeditious implementation of the 19 September 2005 Joint Statement issued by China, the DPRK, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation and the United States, with a view to achieving verifiable denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula;

8.  Underlines in this context the need to intensify worldwide efforts towards nuclear disarmament, as these outdated weapons have lost their deterrent function for the permanent members of the Security Council, while posing a growing proliferation risk, and calls on all nuclear-weapons states to lead by example with unilateral reductions in their arsenals;

9.  Calls for interim and confidence-building measures such as the creation of nuclear-weapon-free zones, negative security guarantees, data exchange and renunciation of the first-strike option;

10. Calls on all parties concerned to advance the goal of complete nuclear disarmament based on an international treaty for the progressive elimination of nuclear weapons worldwide, and reiterates its opposition to the use of nuclear energy for both military and civil purposes (except for medical needs) because of the inherent dual-use risks;

Human rights

11. Expresses its deepest concern over the deteriorating human rights situation in the DPRK, which has been described by past and present UN special rapporteurs for North Korea as being in a category of its own, as egregious, widespread and systematic, and as possibly amounting to crimes against humanity;

12. Calls on the government of the DPRK to act upon the recommendations contained in the report of the special rapporteur as a matter of urgency and to cooperate with the UN special procedures with a view to improving the human rights situation of the citizens of the country;

13. Considers that the gravity of the situation and the lack of response by the North Korean Government urgently demand a higher level of attention from all UN members, and calls for the establishment of a Special UN Commission of Inquiry on the human rights situation in DPRK; welcomes the Joint EU- Japanese initiative in the UN Human Rights Council;

14. Expresses its particular concern about the severity of the food situation the country is facing and its impact on the economic, social and cultural rights of the population, underlines that the primary obligation to feed people lies with the state, which must take all measures necessary to rectify the existing flaws in the production and distribution system that have contributed to the shortage of food; calls on the Government of the DPKR to reduce military expenditure and ensure an equitable re-allocation of resources so as to respond effectively to the food crisis and other areas needing development;

15. Calls on the Commission to maintain existing humanitarian aid programmes and channels of communication with the DPRK; urges the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to ensure safe and unhindered access for humanitarian assistance, which is delivered impartially on the basis of need in accordance with humanitarian principles;

16. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the Governments of the Members of the UN Security Council and the UN Secretary-General.