Climate change and two Koreas

By John Burton

President Moon Jae-in has signaled recently that he wants Korea to play a more prominent role on the global stage when it comes to climate change. He has already promised to cut the country's greenhouse gas emissions and is expected to announce later this year a more ambitious target to curb them in an effort to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050.

Seoul has also announced that it will no longer provide state-backed funds to build highly polluting coal-fired power plants overseas, a significant step since Korea is one of the largest foreign investors in this energy sector.

But Moon and his successors will also need to turn their attention northward if they want to mitigate the local impact of climate change, because North Korea is an environmental disaster area.

The upcoming summer months are likely to once again reveal the vulnerability of North Korea to extreme weather caused by climate change, which has resulted in floods and droughts in the past. If severe weather patterns occur this year, they will only exacerbate the challenges that North Korea is already facing due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

It will also underscore that the two Koreas must cooperate in combating the environmental risks caused by climate change. The Korean Peninsula's relatively close geographical position to the Arctic weather system means that the impact of climate change it experiences is more serious than the global average.

The two Koreas now have separate goals when it comes to climate change. As a leading industrial power, South Korea is focusing on reducing its global carbon footprint by cutting emissions. In contrast, the emphasis in North Korea is on limiting the damage caused by climate change on agricultural production and minimizing the impact of related natural disasters, such as flooding.

Although it is not a major polluter due to its decrepit industrial base, North Korea's environmental crisis is partly of its own making. Deforestation, in particular, is a major problem since the lack of trees, which are cut down for fuel and firewood and to clear land for farming, contributes to flooding during the rainy season. Pyongyang has tried to solve the problem through land management and improving basic infrastructure, but with limited success.

Unlike other aspects of its policy, Pyongyang has been relatively frank about the environmental crisis it faces. It has assumed an unusually open approach when it comes to cooperating with international organizations, such as the U.N., on climate change issues.

Part of this has been motivated by North Korea's desire to receive financial and technical aid from overseas, while trying to burnish its international status by engaging in climate change diplomacy. But international sanctions and distrust over whether Pyongyang has used the assistance it has received effectively have blunted this ambition.

Since they share the same environmental fate, the climate change challenge should provide an opportunity for fruitful cooperation between the two Koreas. But there has not yet been any broad-based inter-Korean dialogue on the issue, while Seoul's related assistance to Pyongyang, such as providing reforestation funds or disaster relief, has been sporadic over the years.

Joint long-range planning on environmental issues would be of benefit to both Koreas since it would result in them working together to achieve the common goal of mitigating the impact of climate change.

Both should have strong motivation to do so. Climate change represents a serious existential threat to North Korea since its severe impact on agricultural production could represent a major contributory factor to the possible collapse of the Kim Jong-un regime. North Korea already came close to this situation in the 1990s during the Arduous March period when natural disasters caused partly by climate change helped bring widespread famine to the country.

Although many South Koreans might welcome a collapse, they also realize that the sudden downfall of the government in Pyongyang would impose a tremendous economic burden on them. Seoul prefers a soft landing approach.

Meanwhile, President Moon has faced obstacles in promoting inter-Korean projects, such as cross-border transportation links, from opponents both at home and abroad. Joint environmental projects under a Green Detente Initiative would likely be less controversial to implement. South Korea has already won praise for its global climate change diplomacy in providing assistance to developing countries.

Seoul could provide expertise to Pyongyang in advising on environmental protection land management policies. Assistance could also be provided to improve energy efficiency and investment in basic environmental technology. None of these measures would pose a national security risk to South Korea. Rather, they would increase the environmental security of both countries.

Climate change represents both a threat and an opportunity for the two Koreas. If handled correctly, inter-Korean cooperation on the issue would help establish trust and reduce tensions, improving the chances of peace on the Korean Peninsula.

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