When, as the article below makes clear, the food will not go to the starving peasants who really need it, but as always when we make these kinds of donations to these kinds of countries - it will go to the government workers and the elites - who will laugh at our stupidity in once again feeding the enemy.
Op Ed: Should we feed North Korea?
By Dorothy Stuehmke
April 21, 2011
North Korea has recently made a desperate international appeal for food aid. Reports from aid workers and international nongovernmental organizations warn of a major food shortage. As the United States deliberates whether to restart a food aid program in North Korea, it must consider the following questions: Is there a true humanitarian need, can we address the potential risk of food diversion and can a properly monitored program allow us to engage with the vulnerable citizens of one of the most isolated countries in the world?
The concern about potential food aid diversion arises out of the political class system in North Korea. The government considers its most loyal citizens to be the elite, who mostly live in the capital of Pyongyang, and the military. However, everyone else — whose loyalty is seen as questionable and/or who has not had the good fortune of being born into the right family — lives outside Pyongyang in areas that are an afterthought for the North Korean government. And it is this vulnerable part of the population that would be the intended beneficiaries of any food aid program.
According to a month-long assessment conducted by the United Nations World Food Program and the Food and Agriculture Organization released in March, there is a true humanitarian need among these vulnerable people. The U.N.'s report also concludes that 6 million people (one-fourth of the population) are in dire need of food.
But with the importance that the North Korean government has given to the elite and the military, the major concern is will those who need this aid be the actual recipients of it? The 2008-09 food aid program agreed to by the U.S. and North Korea offers the best model for addressing this concern. The agreement set up unprecedented standards in access and monitoring, allowing the U.S. to really get to the people who needed food the most.
I traveled eight times to North Korea as a U.S. government official to oversee implementation of that program. I participated in some of the more than 3,000 monitoring visits conducted during the 10-month-long program to oversee the journey of U.S. food from its arrival in North Korea to the institutions where we distributed food to our beneficiaries. This type of thorough monitoring made it difficult for any significant amount of food aid to be diverted to the military or elite. In addition, in a country where rice is viewed as such an important part of a meal, the wheat, corn and corn-soy blend that we strategically provided is not palatable to the elite, further minimizing diversion concerns.
The food aid program also offered an incredible opportunity to engage with regular North Korean citizens. People who spoke Korean were permitted in North Korea to monitor and administer the program, something not allowed under any previous food aid program. As a Korean speaker myself, I experienced how knowing the language brought extra depth and cultural insight to the encounters with nonelite North Koreans outside Pyongyang. When I drove through those closed societies far from the capital, the visits to homes, schools, orphanages and public distribution centers gave these North Koreans an unforgettable experience: contact with foreigners and Americans. It gave them a window on the outside world and perhaps a different perspective of the U.S. Through my interaction with them, I was able to confirm how much they appreciated our help and that they clearly knew the food aid was coming from the U.S.
Granted, the North Korean government made attempts to deviate from the terms of the agreement, and it prematurely ended it. But overall, for the 10 months we lived and worked in North Korea, much was accomplished in terms of our humanitarian and diplomatic objectives.
In the event that negotiations for another food aid program with North Korea resume, the Obama administration is justified in requiring that North Korea adhere to strong monitoring standards. And although there is always room for improvement in monitoring and access, the 2008 agreement offers a proven model and foundation for any future food aid effort.
Through a properly monitored program, we have the power to preserve the lives of and engage diplomatically with an otherwise unreachable population in North Korea. As human beings and as Americans, we should not miss this opportunity.
Dorothy Stuehmke, the senior advisor to the U.S.-North Korea 2008-09 food aid program for the U.S. Agency for International Development, served in the Office of Korean Affairs at the U.S. Department of State from 2006 to 2008.
Copyright © 2011, Los Angeles Times
Share70(41)
Related storiesFrom the L.A. Times
Nigeria election results spark riots across the divided country’s north
Debt worries stymieing U.S. financial aid to help Arab nations in transition
A gray area over food dyes
Around the Web
LV HEALTH: Which foods are addictive? |mcall.com
Federal Budget Plan Cuts Food Aid, Stewardship Programs |courant.com
Is Noise Bad For Our Health? |ctnow.com
Comments (41)Add / View comments | Discussion FAQ
mydictum at 3:24 PM April 22, 2011
It's China's fault. Without their assistance, Kim would have gone a long time ago and the North Korean people could have been rescued from the hell that is their country under the "Dear Leader." Worst of all, our multinational corporations, in their quest to win the race to the bottom, enable China by flooding their country with billions of dollars of investment and millions of jobs that used to employ their fellow Americans. What should be criminal is instead applauded as good business because, like China, they don't care. The ends justify the means. Well if thats how the game is going to played, lets play--no more aid for North Korea. Force the Dear Leader and China to deal with the stench of millions of starving humans in their mist.
China is a Stalinist regime willing to embrace capitalism to the extent it allows them to use the West's own greed to fortify their own economic power and spread their political influence around the world. After all, there are alot of other dictators who would love to do business with a world power whose official policy is "do what you want to your own people--just do what we say when we say it." We can all see how that policy is working out for the people of North Korea.
SoCalSir69 at 3:06 PM April 22, 2011
The notion of feeding other countries is totally insane! More than 35 million Americans struggle with hunger daily in this country. Our government is not responsible for the entire world. Why don't we take care of our own nation, our own people and our own problems before trying to help other countries that hate us. SHAME!
Cheese_Wonton at 11:34 AM April 22, 2011
I think the US, Japan and South Korea ought to refuse to help North Korea. This will be very hard for the South Koreans to do, however, and it could do great harm to our relationship with South Korea. Likewise Japan will probably be accused of treating the Koreans as heartlessly as they did during their colonial period. Even with these risks, I think the US and it's allies must now refuse to help the North.
The worst thing an Asian can suffer is loss of "face". Face has a much stronger meaning there than it does here or in European societies. For Asians it is unforgivable. But, nothing short of their loss of face will bring them down. This is a good opportunity to let their people see just how incompetently they have been led, and by extension it is also a very good opportunity to shame the miserable thugs who rule China. China might intervene militarily if things degrade sufficiently in the North, but that too is a good thing, as it repudiates a long held Chinese policy and forces them to publicly acknowledge failure to the world.
_______
In the interests of Order and Method: My Schedule of Regular Posts:
*Monday through Friday morning - schedules of President, VP and Secretary of State and her diplomats
*Monday through Friday afternoon - List of topics Limbaugh discussed on his program that day
*Monday through Friday througout the day - My posts on anything that I feel like talking about. At least one or two a day, sometimes more.
*Saturday through Sunday morning - An addition to my booklist of political books - covering Democrats, Republicans and other interested parties.
No comments:
Post a Comment