Politics of aid

By John Burton

Lost amidst the alarming news over the past week about North Korea's test firing of short-range missiles and the U.S. seizure of a North Korean cargo ship was an expression of support by U.S. President Donald Trump for Seoul's proposal to provide food aid to Pyongyang.

This development highlights that humanitarian assistance is vital to keeping the door open for more talks with North Korea even as the U.S. refuses to ease economic sanctions, which has angered Pyongyang.

Trump endorsed the idea of food aid for North Korea in a phone conversation with President Moon Jae-in last week following the release of a joint food security assessment by two United Nations agencies, the World Food Program (WFP) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), that warned that North Korea faces a chronic food shortage.

The FAO estimated that 10.9 million North Koreans, or about 43 percent of the population, continue to suffer from food insecurity due to falling crop yields and lower rations delivered by the government's Public Distribution System.

About 20 percent of North Korean children face "chronic malnutrition" and the risks could rise since the country's estimated total food crop production in 2018/2019 has fallen to 4.9 million metric tons, the lowest in a decade.

Details about Seoul's proposed food aid program remain unclear, including the amount of food involved, the timing of its delivery and which organizations will oversee the program.

The latest proposal marks a revival of a plan by the Moon administration in September 2017 to send $8 million of humanitarian aid to North Korea, including $4.5 million worth of nutritional products for children and pregnant women through WFP and $3.5 million worth of vaccines and other medical supplies through UNICEF. But the aid program was abandoned after North Korea stepped up missile and nuclear tests toward the end of that year.

Trump reportedly told Moon that Seoul's proposal was "well-timed" and a "positive measure." His support for food aid could help Moon achieve a political consensus on the initiative despite North Korea's recent missile testing.

Trump's endorsement of the aid package should be viewed against the backdrop of a dispute within the U.S. government about how best to deal with North Korea.

Hardliners such as U.S. National Security Adviser John Bolton are urging Trump to maintain sanctions until North Korea completely abandons its nuclear program. But Stephen Biegun, the U.S. special envoy to North Korea, is suggesting that sanctions affecting humanitarian aid should be relaxed to promote diplomatic engagement.

Although U.N. sanctions against North Korea in principle are not supposed to affect humanitarian aid, some items such as farming and medical equipment need sanctions exemptions from the U.N., which can delay their delivery. Deliveries of food and agricultural products are not subject to U.N. sanctions.

The WFP delivered a thousand tons of food in February and March, benefitting 450,000 people, mostly pregnant women and children. In April, the Ministry of Unification approved a plan by Gyeonggi Province to provide nearly $1 million worth of flour to North Korea through a private charity, the Asia Peace Exchange Association.

Humanitarian aid should be seen in the context of encouraging people-to-people exchanges that will serve as confidence-building measures and support Pyongyang's stated desire to pursue economic development and improve living standards. Such assistance helps contribute to such goals as modernizing agriculture. It also promotes continued dialogue, while testing North Korean leader Kim Jong-un's commitment to pursuing his economy-first policy.

However, the issue of humanitarian aid is likely to remain controversial and its implementation subject to swings in political fortunes. Conservative critics in Seoul and Washington will continue to argue that technical and educational assistance undermines the sanctions regime and largely benefits the Pyongyang government and its nuclear program rather than the North Korean people. Progressives will counter that humanitarian considerations must be separated from political pressure on North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons.

We have seen all this before. Liberal governments in Seoul from Kim Dae-jung to Roh Moo-hyun provided generous aid packages despite armed provocations by Pyongyang. Conservative governments led by Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye restricted or completely cut off aid. A majority of South Koreans at one time or the other have either supported or opposed aid depending on circumstances.

Even Trump blasted Moon for "appeasement" two years ago at the height of Washington's "fire and fury" phrase when Seoul suggested the $8 million humanitarian package.

Unfortunately, in Seoul and Washington, any policy on offering aid to Pyongyang is likely to remain inconsistent, while the ordinary North Korean will continue to suffer from hunger, ill health and a lack of access to electricity.

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