No to the North Korean folly

“Firm condemnation” of the North Korean nuclear test that “represents a threat to international security and stability”. Preparations for the informal summit at Lahti (Finland) on 20 October, at which the heads of state and of government of the 25 will discuss immigration, energy policy and competitiveness. Lastly, a “pause for reflection” on the establishment of the planned European Agency of Human Rights. The order of the day of the session of the European Parliament in Brussels on 11-12 October had to be revamped due to the disturbing news that had just come in from Pyongyang. DEFUSING THE NORTH KOREAN THREAT. “The data at our disposal do not permit us categorically to state that there really was a nuclear test, nonetheless it does seem very probable”, remarked EU foreign policy chief JAVIER SOLANA , always very cautious when pointing his finger against any State. Yet Solana does not minimise the problem. If the news of the atomic test turns out to be true, that would confirm “an irresponsible attitude on the part of the North Korean government”, which already represents “a threat at the regional level”. Solana trusts in concerted political and diplomatic action, aimed at putting pressure on the Far Eastern country to force it to abandon its experiments. Collaboration between UNO, EU, China, Russia, Japan and South Korea could be, he suggested, decisive for a multilateral action aimed at “defusing” this “new element of geopolitical instability”. A REGIME THAT POSES A DANGER FOR EVERYONE. According to European Commissioner for External Relations BENITA FERRERO-WALDNER the nuclear test “represents just the latest of a series of challenges launched by North Korea to the international community, further increasing its isolation”. Ferrero-Waldner then recalled that “Europe had furnished no less than 345 million euros in humanitarian aid [to North Korea] since 1995 and that, as it the past, it would continue to fulfil its task. The population has already been caused enough suffering due to the terrible regime that governs it”. Condemnation of the regime headed by Kim Jong-Il was unanimous from all political groups in the EP. According to the Spanish People’s Party MEP JOSÉ IGNACIO SALAFRANCA , the “dictatorial regime of Stalinist stamp” represents “a threat to the international community”, while its leader “keeps the country united in famine”, when “he ought to dedicate its resources to a nobler cause than nuclear proliferation”. In the view of MARTIN SCHULZ , German Socialist, the “moribund Korean regime, through nuclear escalation, is trying to obtain advantages and draw the attention of the international community”. We need, he said, to “contain the regime, though the room for manoeuvre is limited, given that so unpredictable a regime is furnished with nuclear weapons”. NUCLEAR WEAPONS, FAMISHED POPULATION. The Hungarian Liberal MEP ISTVÁN SZENT-IVÁNYI pointed out “a kinship with the case of the Iranian nuclear experiments”, on which the international community is showing indecision and vacillation. IRTS VALDIS KRISTOVSKIS , Latvian MEP of the Europe of Nations group, seconding this view, denounced the “two measures” applied to Iran and North Korea and asked: “how come we accept that Israel possesses nuclear weapons, whereas we refuse to accept that Pyongyang should have them?”. Various MEPs warned that the non-proliferation treaty “is in crisis”. TOBIAS PFLÜGER , German MEP of the European Left group pointed out that “the EU States too are under an obligation to dismantle their own nuclear arsenal, while the UK for example is developing new weapons”. The French Green Party MEP GÉRARD ONESTA denounced “the brutal dictatorship of Kim Jong-Il, who denies his citizens any kind of freedom and has reduced his people to total poverty and famine”. HUMAN RIGHTS AGENCY POSTPONED. Among the other questions discussed in the chamber, the EP failed to reach agreement on the transformation of the current European watchdog on phenomena of racism and xenophobia into an Agency for Human Rights with a wider mandate. MEPs discussed the real objectives and tasks of the future agency, its geographical remit (extension to candidate countries or those close to becoming candidates?) and the advisory role civil society should play in it. The final decision on the matter, which it will be up to the European Council to make, was deferred to the summit in December. The liberalization of professional services was also on the agenda: in this case the Parliament called for – with the adoption by a large majority of the report drawn up by the German MEP JAN EHLER – “the abolition of the compulsory nature of fixed or minimum tariffs”, insisting on the “elimination of unjustified obstacles to competition”.