-
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of
the impact of the US-DPRK Singapore Summit on security and
human rights on the Korean Peninsula.
-
(CB)
My Lords, I beg leave to ask a Question of which I have given
private notice. In so doing, I declare an interest as the
co-chairman of the All-Party Parliamentary Group
on North Korea.
-
(Con)
My Lords, the Government welcome the summit as an important
first step towards securing a denuclearised North Korea. This is in the interests of
regional peace and international security. More needs to be
done. We hope that this marks the beginning of a substantive
process, leading to concrete actions from North Korea towards complete,
verifiable, irreversible denuclearisation. We continue to
have grave concerns about human rights in North Korea and expect more
discussions and actions to follow.
-
My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for that reply. While
inevitably remembering broken promises on denuclearisation
made in 1994 and 2007, is the noble Earl not right that this
is a moment to give a cautious welcome to the Singapore
summit and to work with the United States, China, Japan and
the vibrant democracy in South Korea to turn hopes into
substance? Would not the best memorial to the 1,000 British
servicemen who died in the Korean War be the formal ending of
the state of war that has continued since 1954? Meanwhile,
will the Minister confirm that, in the short term, Security
Council sanctions will stay in place until we see real
evidence of denuclearisation, and that in due course we will
press for human rights, said by the United Nations commission
of inquiry to be sui generis—without parallel anywhere in the
world—to become part of the negotiations, as they were in the
Helsinki process?
-
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that question and I
agree with much of what he said. As far as sanctions are
concerned, the noble Lord is quite right that UN sanctions
will remain in place under 10 UN Security Council
resolutions, the most recent of which was adopted in December
2017. But the noble Lord is also right to say that this is a
step forward. It was the first meeting between a sitting US
President and a North Korean leader, and this is a very
important step forward.
-
(Lab)
My Lords, immediately after the summit President Trump said
at a press conference that he did raise the issue of human
rights with the North Korean leader. In fact, he said at
the press conference:
“I want significant improvement. I want to start that
process. Although you cannot finish that process for a while,
but you cannot go back”.
Can the Minister tell us what he thinks President Trump meant
by that statement, and what sort of process we will actually
see that will deliver change for the people of North Korea who have suffered so
horrendously?
-
The noble Lord is quite right; the suffering of the people of
the DPRK is of utmost importance and something we must never
forget. As the noble Lord said, yes, President Trump did
mention that human rights issues, including the treatment of
Christians, were discussed and would be discussed further. It
is very important that these discussions continue, and the
last but one paragraph of the communiqué states:
“The United States and the DPRK commit to hold follow-on
negotiations, led by US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, and
a relevant high-level DPRK official, at the earliest possible
date”.
-
(Con)
My Lords, of course jaw-jaw is better, as we all know, than
war-war, but will Her Majesty’s Government please ensure that
the President of the United States is aware that this regime
is the same as it has been for many decades and that the
dictator Kim Jong-un is the same man that had his
half-brother murdered not two years ago at an airport in
Malaysia and, indeed, had his uncle executed shortly after he
came to power. The human rights abuses remain and we must be
incredibly cautious in this.
-
My Lords, my noble friend makes some very good points and we
must never forget those atrocities—but it is so important to
have regular dialogue with the DPRK. We continue to raise our
concerns through our embassy in Pyongyang and in multilateral
fora such as the UN General Assembly in New York and the
Human Rights Council in Geneva—but my noble friend is quite
right.
-
(LD)
My Lords, bizarre as some of the images from Singapore might
be, clearly, as other noble Lords have indicated, we have to
welcome any moves to reduce tension on the Korean peninsula,
though we should indeed be very cautious. What efforts might
be made to encourage the United States Administration to look
at Iran in a similar light—or is that far too much to hope
for?
-
My Lords, I think I answered something on Iran some time ago,
but I fear my memory does not go back that far. Of course,
Iran is of great importance and we discussed a number of
matters during that exchange. I will draw it to the attention
of my noble friend the Minister and write to the noble
Baroness.
-
(CB)
My Lords, President Trump argued that there should be a
formal ending to the Korean War, which actually came to an
end with a ceasefire. That, of course, is a matter for the
belligerents, of which the United Kingdom was one. Have there
been any representations by President Trump to the British
Government in respect of that matter?
-
My Lords, we are in regular dialogue with the US and our
international partners on the subject of the DPRK. As for the
actual detail of what has been discussed, in particular the
matter that the noble Lord raises, I am not aware that this
has been raised as yet.
-
(Lab)
My Lords, while the Singapore summit is clearly better than
the alternative, which was escalating belligerent rhetoric
between the leaders of two nuclear-armed states, I invite the
noble Earl to agree with the words of Mark Fitzpatrick, the
very well respected executive director of IISS, who yesterday
wrote that,
“void of verification measures, the Singapore summit result
pales in comparison to the Iran nuclear deal, from which
Trump withdrew a month ago. The hypocrisy is beyond words”.
-
My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Browne, makes a very good
point. The goal has to remain the complete, verifiable and
irreversible denuclearisation of North Korea and the removal of its
ballistic missile capability. This is what is required to
protect UK national interests in the region and uphold
international security. The noble Lord brought up the subject
of Iran again, and I know what he says.
-
(Con)
My Lords, friends of mine served as national servicemen in
Korea; I served elsewhere in my national service time. Is it
not interesting to note just how long that war has remained
unended? While I certainly support the comments of the noble
Lord, , about the need to
proceed with great caution, it is high time that that war was
brought to an end.
-
My noble friend is quite right. My own godfather was
imprisoned during that war. I remember his recollections. The
many lives that were lost in that conflict should also be
remembered and we must look forward to the formal point that
the noble Lord mentioned.
-
(Lab)
My Lords, this is potentially a major step forward that of
course should be welcomed. But is there not a danger that it
might expose the limits of a personalised and unpredictable
diplomacy, and should not more heed be taken of the concerns
expressed by Japan and other regional allies?
-
My Lords, we are in close contact with our allies in the
region. The Foreign Secretary has been in regular contact
about the DPRK with his counterparts in the United States,
European countries, South Korea, Japan and China. Many of
those countries, China in particular, could help take this
forward.
-
(Con)
My Lords, my noble friend mentioned China. Does he accept
that the cutting of exports from China to North Korea by anything between 70%
and 90% had an enormous effect on bringing these talks to
pass? Does he feel that the Chinese will resume those
sanctions if progress is not made on verification of the
denuclearisation of North Korea?
-
My Lords, my noble friend refers to sanctions. These
sanctions have been very effective. They are the toughest
sanctions imposed on a country this century. As my noble
friend will be aware, China has lent its influential voice to
the universal condemnation of North Korea and has supported all
United Nations Security Council resolutions, including the
most recent one.
