Home

NEGOTIATIONS AND DIALOGUE YES, 'JOINED AT THE HIP' NO

E-mail Print PDF
 4 OCTOBER 2017

PEOPLE FOR NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT

WWW.PNDNSW.ORG.AU

HUMAN SURVIVAL PROJECT

JULIE BISHOP RIGHT:
NEGOTIATIONS AND DIALOGUE YES,
'JOINED AT THE HIP' NO.
First, talk about talks



Foreign Minister Julie Bishop is perfectly correct in saying that the need of the moment as far as the crisis with the DPRK (North Korea) is concerned, is first of all for the temperature to be taken down, and then for a patient process of dialogue and negotiation to take place out of the public limelight and as far away from anyones twitter account as possible.

However, Julie still characterizes what must take place in terms of 'pressuring' the DPRK to do what WE want them to do. This is unlikely to work, and has failed thus far. The first question that must be asked, and asked with complete sincerity of the DPRK is simply:

“What would it take to allow us to step back ten centimeters from the brink, and talk about talks?”

The stakes could not be higher: We are actually looking at a possible nuclear war between the US and the DPRK, that would kill millions. Some people at least, do not seem to understand this or do not care. This is extremely alarming.

While the US would eventually make the rubble in the DPRK bounce, it is unlikely to be able to prevent retaliatory strikes by at least a few DPRK missiles, on Seoul, Guam, Okinawa, Pine Gap, Tokyo and other Japanese cities, and possibly – if the DPRKs missiles are able to loft a 250Kt warhead that far – on US cities and possibly on Australian cities including Sydney.

Turnbull's 'Joined at the Hip' statements merely give Australia a place on Kim Jong Un's 'Map of Death'. We are currently NOT part of that map and we'd prefer to keep it that way.

A 250Kt strike on Sydney would create a fireball almost from Pyrmont to the Art Gallery, and third degree burns out to Five Dock and Rodd Point. The author of this press-releases apartment block in Lilyfield would be demolished.

Julie's emphasis on negotiation and dialogue is on the contrary the way to go. What is required is an open-ended process, completely without preconditions. Its frequently said that we 'don't negotiate for the sake of negotiating'. This is completely untrue – we DO negotiate for the sake of negotiating. 'Jaw jaw' is always better than 'war, war', especially where there is a possibility that nuclear weapons could be used. Furthermore, whenever negotiations are under way, the DPRKs behavior is significantly less provocative than when it has given up on the possibility of negotiation.

The Australian government must emphasise to its 'great and powerful friend' the need to keep the DPRK back-channel happening, whatever demented tweets may come from the President.

John Hallam
PND UN Nuclear Disarmament Campaigner
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

H61-2-9810-2598
M61-411-854-612