6. Calls on the Member States that are also NATO members to propose that a moratorium be placed on
the use of depleted uranium weapons in accordance with the precautionary principle as defined in theCouncil resolution adopted at the European Council meeting in Nice and the European Parliament’s resolu-tion on the subject;
7. Asks NATO to consider other types of munitions until the results of the investigations on depleted
uranium are known;
8. Calls on the Council Presidency and the High Representative for the CFSP to provide it with regular
reports on deliberations within the Council and its bodies relating to the issue of the ‘Balkan syndrome’;
9. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments of
the Member States, the Secretary-General of NATO and the United States Congress.
15.NorthKorea
B5-0037/2001
European Parliament resolution on relations between the European Union and the Democratic
People’sRepublicofKorea
The European Parliament,
,dash having regard to its earlier resolutions on the food shortage in North Korea and in particular those of
15 May 1997 (1), 23 October 1997 (2) and 12 March 1998 (3),
,dash having regard to its resolution of 23 March 1999 on relations between the European Union and the
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (4) following on from the visit of its ad hoc delegation to the
DPRK in December 1999,
,dash having regard to its resolution of 23 March 1999 on the Agreement on terms and conditions of the
accession of the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) to the Korean Peninsula EnergyDevelopment Organisation (KEDO) (
5),
,dash having regard to the report of its second ad hoc delegation which visited the Democratic People’s
Republic of Korea in October-November 2000,
A. whereas the historic June 2000 summit meeting between the ROK and the DPRK appeared to repre-
sent a significant turning point in the development of relations between north and south, whereas theprocess of reconciliation will have to be sustained and enhanced, and whereas efforts are being madeto normalise relations between the DPRK and the US and Japan,
B. whereas the DPRK historically has encouraged terrorism,C. regretting that the Union has to date not been able to establish a common policy towards North
Korea,
D. deploring in particular the fact that some EU Member States have decided to grant North Korea dip-
lomatic recognition without consulting the other States,
E. stressing that support for the KEDO programme cannot by any means be a substitute for a policy
established by the European Union and its Member States towards North Korea,
(1) OJ C 167, 2.6.1997, p. 157.
(2) OJ C 339, 10.11.1997, p. 153.
(3) OJ C 104, 6.4.1998, p. 236.
(4) OJ C 177, 22.6.1999, p. 51.
(5) OJ C 177, 22.6.1999, p. 47.18.9.2001 EN C 262/169 Official Journal of the European Communities
Wednesday17January2001
F. stressing that the aim of EU policy towards North Korea must be to ensure, for all North Korea’s
citizens, respect for fundamental rights, democracy and the rule of law,
G. whereas the continuing food crisis has to be seen as a sign of the disastrous state of agricultural
production, accompanied by general economic crisis, for which the policies of the DPRK governmentmust take a share of the blame,
H. whereas the humanitarian and human rights situation in the DPRK continues to be extremely precar-
ious, whereas it is uncertain whether the situation will improve in the near future, and whereas the EUcontinues to be a major contributor of humanitarian aid to the DPRK,
I. whereas the informal political dialogue started between the European Union and the DPRK
in December 1998 has continued, and whereas seven EU Member States have already established,and six Member States are in the process of establishing, diplomatic relations with the DPRK,
1. Welcomes recent developments on the Korean peninsula, recognises the importance of continued
dialogue in the resolution of inter-Korean issues and encourages the process of rapprochement and coop-eration underway between the ROK and the DPRK; supports the pursuit of the ‘sunshine policy’and the
further opening-up of the DPRK to the international community;
2. Considers that the summit process and the broadening of other levels of contact is having a symbolic
and practical effect; stresses that these first signs of rapprochement will have to be consolidated and
enhanced if the process is to maintain credibility;
3. Believes that, as a major international actor in a multi-polar world, the EU can contribute to the
consolidation of the process of rapprochement; supports the EU and its Member States in their efforts to
ensure progress in the process of rapprochement and a responsible DPRK attitude in matters of nuclearand ballistic non-proliferation, in particular regarding the issue of exportation of missiles and missile tech-nology, progress on a dialogue on human rights, and the access of the population to external aid;
4. Stresses that future political developments on the Korean peninsula will in due course depend exclu-
sively on the sovereign decision of the Korean people;
5. Encourages, therefore, the development of an open and constructive dialogue between the EU and
the DPRK, focusing on human rights, the creation of a genuine civil society in the DPRK, and the estab-lishment, as soon as practicable, of regular exchanges between the EU and the DPRK at different levels ,dashpolitical, parliamentary, academic and civil society;
6. Would welcome, as a further parliamentary contribution to the process of developing a constructive
EU-DPRK dialogue, a return visit from the DPRK;
7. Recommends that the EU increase its humanitarian aid to the DPRK but stresses that free access for
NGOs and aid agencies to distribution sites, as well as the admittance to the DPRK of new NGOs toreplace and/or augment existing agencies, is a sine qua non for the provision of increased humanitarian
aid; stresses, too, that easier access to the DPRK, e.g. for journalists and international observers, couldinform the outside world about the extent of the humanitarian crisis and result in further aid;
8. Calls for a new nutrition survey to be taken in the DPRK, along the lines of the 1998 EU/UNICEF/
WFP survey, in order to better assess the current situation, and calls for the DPRK to grant admittance tothe DPRK and freer access/movement within the country for those carrying out the survey;
9. Highlights the need for the EU to explore ways of integrating, in the medium term, European huma-
nitarian assistance into an agenda for sustainable development, covering in particular the agricultural sec-tor and the non-nuclear energy sector by means of enhanced technical assistance, and calls on the DPRKgovernment, in this regard, to improve the Commission’s access for monitoring and contact with technicalministries, as well as provision of information and documentation concerning all assistance;C 262/170 EN 18.9.2001 Official Journal of the European Communities
Wednesday17January2001
10. Welcomes the recent second round of family visits, originally due to have taken place in
early November 2000, and encourages the DPRK to cooperate with the ROK so that regulated travelarrangements enabling people to visit family members in the other part of the country can be introducedwithin a reasonable period of time;
11. Regrets that the Council has not taken into account the proposal of the Commission that funding
for KEDO be significantly increased, and insists on the need for a proper revision of Heading 4 (ExternalActions) of the financial perspective in order to allow for a more adequate EU contribution to KEDO;regrets the lack of coherence shown by the Council in that it is asking for a more significant role for theEU on the KEDO board but is undermining the EU, and the Commission, as its representative, by effec-tively further cutting funding from its previously already low level;
12. Asks that the EU also have a representative at Kumho, as have other board members, namely Japan,
South Korea and the United States;
13. Calls, therefore, on the Council to reconsider the EU contribution to KEDO, in order to bring it
more into line with the contributions of the other members represented on the board;
14. Agrees that, in the absence of increased funding, the EU’s place on the KEDO Executive Board can
no longer be easily justified;
15. Regrets the failure of Member States to coordinate their approach regarding the establishment of
bilateral relations with the DPRK and thus calls for the establishment of formal diplomatic relationsbetween the EU and the DPRK; also calls on the remaining Member States which do not currently recog-nise the DPRK to give careful consideration to establishing diplomatic links;
16. Recognises the initiating role played by the Commission in furthering the EU-DPRK dialogue and
welcomes the contacts established between the Commission and the European Parliament in this context;
17. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments
of the DPRK, ROK, the United States and Japan, and the KEDO Executive Board.18.9.2001 EN C 262/171 Official Journal of the European Communities
Wednesday17January2001