Ms Julie Bishop (Curtin, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Hansard source

As a result of the extremely provocative acts of North Korea this week, there is now a new and disturbing security landscape in North-East Asia. The decision of the North Korean military regime to detonate a nuclear device earlier this week was particularly provocative after its test firing of a long-range missile in early April. It is deeply concerning to read reports that North Korea has raised the level of its rhetoric, saying it is no longer bound by the terms of the armistice that ended the Korean War in 1953. North Korea has subsequently threatened a military strike against South Korea. It is also reported to have restarted its nuclear reprocessing plant to produce additional weapons grade plutonium and has fired numerous short-range missiles.

These actions represent a direct challenge to the authority of the United Nations. The ballistic missile and nuclear tests are a clear breach of United Nations Security Council resolution 1718 of 2006 which demands that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea not conduct any further nuclear test or launch any ballistic missile. The resolution was passed in response to North Korea’s first nuclear test in October 2006 and it was absolutely clear in its requirement that North Korea desist from any further development of nuclear weapons. The Security Council has previously described North Korea’s nuclear weapons program as having the potential to destabilise the region and beyond.

While the world is understandably focused on North Korea and the necessity for a multilateral response, our focus and support must also go to our close ally, Japan, and our strong strategic and trading partner, South Korea. Seoul is only 30 kilometres from the border with North Korea and would bear the brunt of any military outburst from the north, and there are still around 28,000 United States troops stationed in South Korea. This morning, the US-South Korea Combined Forces Command was placed on higher alert, and surveillance over North Korea is to be upgraded in response to the nuclear and missile tests and threats of war. Japan has been placed in an extraordinarily difficult security position by the actions of North Korea. It is bound by its longstanding interpretation of constitutional nonaggression: to only develop military defensive capability.  It is now forced to grapple with the consequences of North Korea actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability which may well mean a shift in Japan’s military stance.

Tokyo is planning a stronger quarantine strategy against North Korea to end all trade with that country. Seoul has joined the Proliferation Security Initiative, a US-led initiative with 90 member countries designed to stop the spread of weapons of mass destruction. For the people of democratic South Korea, North Korea’s bellicose talk of turning Seoul into a ‘sea of fire’ has meant a life forever on the edge, with the fear that the conventional threat posed by one of the highest concentrations anywhere in the world of artillery, rockets and missiles will one day be superseded by the threats of weapons of mass destruction.

North Korea’s delinquency is highlighted by the fact that this regime is responsible for the only two nuclear explosions in the 21st century. The North Korean investment involved in embarking on a nuclear weapons development program is immense and the impact on regional security and stability is profound. The costs imposed on the peoples of the Korean peninsula, in particular, have been cruel in the extreme. The diversion of North Korea’s meagre resources to the regime’s efforts to acquire this weapons technology has robbed a beleaguered people of their basic needs of decent food and decent shelter.

Australia has a direct stake in the de-nuclearisation of the Korean peninsula as a critical element in the interests of longer term peace and stability in our region. We do look to China as North Korea’s major trading partner but also as a responsible stakeholder in the region to bring maximum pressure to bear on the North Korean regime to comply with its international obligations—in particular, the unanimous call by the Security Council for North Korea to abide by resolution 1718.

It would be a mistake for these latest developments to simply be dismissed as a repeat of a familiar cycle of alarmist statements and threats. While there is an element of ‘Groundhog Day’ about North Korea’s behaviour—we have been down this path before; the threat-crisis-response cycle—it is important that the international community ensure that the military regime is not rewarded for its provocative behaviour. In the past there has been a carrot and stick approach to negotiating with North Korea. Provocative behaviour by North Korea has in the past been successful in eliciting concessions and incentives. In exchange for concessions, North Korea has repeatedly promised to halt development of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles. But North Korea has failed to honour these commitments in the past and cannot be trusted to honour future commitments.

The Security Council has said that it will work to develop a new, legally binding resolution with regard to North Korea. The coalition is of the view that all members of the international community should refocus efforts to enforce the provisions of resolution 1718—fully enforce the existing provisions. The calls for additional sanctions must consider past events in terms of the most effective approaches in dealing with North Korea. For example, the United States imposed strict financial sanctions in 2005 and targeted a bank in Macau—the Banco Delta Asia—that was alleged to have been involved in money laundering and other activities that supported the North Korean regime. The United States sanctions are reported to have effectively crippled that bank and brought pressure to bear on the regime. Many analysts have also pointed to the greater willingness of North Korea to resume the six-party talks in the wake of that action.

That raises the prospect that similar actions to limit North Korea’s access to finance through banking and corporate sanctions should be considered again, and the coalition would urge that the Security Council consider such sanctions. The coalition condemns the actions of North Korea. The coalition stands with our allies the United States, and Japan, with South Korea and with the international community, in finding a resolution that encourages the Security Council to develop a strong framework to deal with North Korea that includes further sanctions. The coalition calls for the full and proper enforcement of all sanctions currently contained in Security Council resolution 1718, and the coalition supports the call for the six-party talks to recommence to see if diplomatic engagement can divert this game of brinkmanship and diffuse the latest frightening scenario being played out on the Korean peninsula. (Time expired)

See this speech in context