[imText1]After the missile launch on July 5th, the South Korean government announced that it would discontinue sending additional rice and fertilizer to North Korea.
At the 19th Cabinet-level talks between the South and North Korea in Busan, Unification Minister Lee Jong Suk reported that North Korea’s return to the 6-party talks would be connected with 500,000 tons of rice and 100,000 tons of fertilizer assistance to the North. Was it a wise decision for the South to discontinue rice and fertilizer support?
In the past, the South Korean government received criticism that it was too subservient to North Korea. Now the South Korean government is showing that it can also use sticks rather than carrots by taking measures to withdraw aid. Even the opposition party and right-wing activists who once criticized the South Korean government are welcoming the rigorous measures.
Undoubtedly, the South Korean government should be commended for displaying such a robust approach. However, one still needs to evaluate whether this policy is the best countermeasure available.
Let me first refer to the conclusion. Rather than suspending its assistance of rice and fertilizer, South Korean government should have taken action to suspend funds for the Mt. Gumkang Tourism project, and the Gaesung industrial complex. There are four reasons for this.
Firstly, suspending support for the Mr. Gumkang Tourism project and the Gaesung industrial complex complies with the UN Security Council’s resolution that was unanimously passed on July 15th.
Following is a request to all nations by the UN resolution.
The UN, “Requires all Member States, in accordance with their national legal authorities and legislation and consistent with international law, to exercise vigilance and prevent the procurement of missiles or missile related-items, materials, goods and technology from the DPRK, and the transfer of any financial resources in relation to DPRK’s missile or WMD programmes.”
The UN resolution urges all member states to discontinue all funds to North Korea that could aid programs for missiles and WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) programmes. The resolution clearly indicates the prohibition of the Korean government to support the development of the Gaesung industrial complex or the Mt. Gumkang tourism project.
If the Mt. Gumkang tourism project and the Gaesung industrial complex are managed by private firms without government subsidy as Unification Minister Lee Jong Suk states, then this would not be in violation of the UN resolution. However, the Mt. Gumkang tourism project and the Gaesung industrial complex are not only managed by private sectors. Resources are constantly being used for governmental policies and systems.
Suspend governmental aid for the Mt. Gumkang tourism project
Furthermore, the South Korean government’s funding for Mt. Gumkang and Gaesung could contradict with the U.N. resolution, leading to conflict with global community. If the South Korean government continued its funding, foreign affairs with the U.S., Japan and other countries would inevitably deteriorate.
Second, suspending rice and fertilizer is using humanitarian aid as a political weapon. Humanitarian aid should never be negotiated with politics. The U.S. has recently reduced its humanitarian aid to North Korea; however this is due to the fact that North Korea refuses to allow adequate measures of transparent distribution.
The U.S. never asserted that it would reduce humanitarian aid due to North Korea’s missile launch. Korean government’s link of humanitarian aid to missile launch shows that Korea is still an underdeveloped country when it comes to human rights and diplomacy.
Thirdly, the postponement of unification of separated families was the result of the withdrawal of humanitarian aid. The moment rice and fertilizer aid was suspended, North Korea announced deferring the unification of separated families. North Korea argues that South Korea unilaterally decided to suspend humanitarian aid, thus it also unilaterally terminated family reunion. Obviously this is North Korea’s obstinacy. However, somebody may argue that South Korean government incited this act.
Even if South Korea announced that governmental aid for Mt. Gumkang and the Gaesung complex were to be suspended in place of rice and fertilizer, it is likely that North Korea would still have announced the deferral of the unification of separated families. However, in that case North Korea would be forced to take full responsibility for its actions.
This is because government funding for Mt. Gumgang and the Gaesung complex corresponds with non-humanitarian economic cooperation. The unification of separated families was dissipated as the South Korean government suspended humanitarian aid. Therefore, the South Korean government is now in a situation where it is partly responsible for this situation.
Fourth, rather than suspending rice and fertilizer aid, withdrawing funding for Mt. Gumkang and Gaesung would have put greater pressure on the North Korean government.
As all are aware, the North Korean government has little interest in the people’s standard of living. It is only concerned with its own survival. By suspending rice and fertilizer it is only the North Korean people that suffer. This will have no affect on the North Korean regime. But as governmental funding for Mt. Gumkang and the Gaesung complex represent direct cash to the government, suspending such funding would result in the tightening of the Kim Jong Il regime expenditure.
Even now, it is not yet too late. An announcement to suspend governmental funding even for Mt. Gumkang should be made. Furthermore, humanitarian aid, such as rice and fertilizer, should be resumed.
If the South Korean government is reluctant to lose face, then it can aid North Korea through other means such as through international organizations. Rather than directly aiding North Korea, sending aid through organizations would be clearly valuable. Moreover, many North Korean people are suffering from the severe damage resulting from devastating flood this summer. Would it not be a wiser decision to consider the people and differentiate the Kim Jong Il regime from the North Korean people?
