Debating NK's food crisis

By John Burton

Questions are being raised over the extent of North Korea's current food crisis, with supporters of humanitarian aid saying that help is urgently needed to avoid a famine, while critics claim that Pyongyang is exaggerating the situation.

The debate reflects deeper ethical questions that have long dogged humanitarian aid to North Korea: Is it helping prop up the totalitarian Kim regime or does the global community have a moral responsibility to aid those most in need no matter the nature of their government?

At issue are recent estimates by two U.N. agencies, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Food Program (WFP), that North Korea in 2018 suffered its worst harvest in a decade. They calculated that North Korea produced 4.9 metric tons of crops last year, resulting in a food shortfall of 1.36 tons.

The FAO suggests that 10.9 million people, or about 43 percent of the country's population, are now at risk of food shortages, while about a fifth of North Korean children face “chronic malnutrition.”

Although North Korea's food situation is bad, it is not approaching the catastrophic levels of the mid-1990s when the famine killed up to a million people. Until recently, the country's agricultural production was gradually improving, reaching nearly 6 million tons in 2016. The recent dip is due to a combination of factors, including mismanaged agricultural policies, bad weather and international sanctions.

Aid critics claim that the figures paint a misleading picture of the seriousness of the food situation since the U.N. has limited access to the country and must rely on data provided by the government.

Another point of dispute is whether humanitarian food shipments are reaching those most in need. There are allegations that much of the food aid is siphoned off by officials to supply the military or sold to market traders. Consumption data is hazy since the WFP does not have an accurate idea of how much food is supplied through the public distribution system as opposed to being bought in the informal markets.

Moreover, it is argued that North Korea has the financial resources to solve the food problem on its own. It is estimated that it would take about $650 million for Pyongyang to import food annually on a commercial basis when it is spending far more on tourist infrastructure projects and the military.

Nonetheless, there are several good reasons why the international community should continue to provide food aid to North Korea. One is that humanitarian aid, whether in the form of direct food supplies or projects to increase agricultural production, has improved the country's food situation when it is left relatively unhindered.

Between 2004 and 2009, when humanitarian aid to North Korea was in its most robust phase following the mid-1990s famine, the share of the population facing malnutrition fell to around 35 percent. The percentage of wasting and stunting among children under 5 years of age and the child mortality rate also declined, according to the Global Hunger Index (GHI). But increased restrictions on aid and donor fatigue in the 2010s has meant that these numbers, except for child mortality, have started to rise again. The latest GHI, which was issued last year, placed North Korea among the top countries most at risk from hunger.

Humanitarian aid also provides an opportunity to help break the current diplomatic stalemate over North Korea's nuclear and missile programs. With talks between Washington and Pyongyang at an impasse, moves by the U.S. and the U.N. to ease restrictions on humanitarian access in North Korea could help restart negotiations. Kim Jung-un's demand that the U.S. ease sanctions before he proceeds with the denuclearization process may reflect worries in Pyongyang about the chronic food shortage facing the country.

The U.N. could relax its control on the export of agricultural and medical equipment to North Korea and allow dedicated banking services for humanitarian groups working there. The U.S. could lift travel restrictions on American aid workers.

North Korea needs to do its part as well by allowing the U.N. to conduct more rigorous monitoring of the food situation in the country. Closer oversight “will be critical for ensuring this assistance gets to its intended recipients,” while “potential donors will likely be more willing to contribute to this emergency relief program if they are confident that sufficient monitoring mechanisms are in place,” said Keith Luse, head of the National Committee on North Korea, which supports humanitarian efforts.

The main goal on both sides should be to avoid politicizing hunger relief. Although postwar food crises in many countries were caused by political mismanagement, this did not prevent the West from offering aid to such places as Somalia and the Congo. As President Ronald Reagan once said, “A hungry child knows no politics.”

John Burton (johnburtonft@yahoo.com), a former Korea correspondent for the Financial Times, is now a Washington, D.C.-based journalist and consultant.