North Koreans will 'die from malnutrition within months'

[unreal.livejournal.com]

US postponement of food aid decision after death of Kim Jong-il is related to denuclearisation talks, experts claim

Humanitarian groups fear that the death of Kim Jong-il could worsen North Korea's dire food situation, after the US postponed a decision on potential aid.

The country has relied on foreign supplies since the devastating famine of the mid-90s killed hundreds of thousands of people. But the World Food Programme (WFP) and NGOs have warned that the situation is particularly bleak this year.

Aid groups warned that North Koreans would die from malnutrition within months unless donations increased. The WFP launched an emergency programme in April, but has received less than a third of the funding it needs.


"We are concerned. Time is of the essence," said Ken Isaacs of Samaritan's Purse, a US-based NGO that helped to distribute the last American food aid in North Korea, almost three years ago.

David Austin of Mercy Corps, who visited flood-hit regions in September, warned: "The longer you delay this decision, the more suffering there's going to be." He said it would take six weeks to three months to set up new deliveries, and warned that based on current conditions, people's food rations would be cut "quite substantially" by April.

"As that goes on and on, you'll see the effects of stunting in people's growth and their development. You'll see children dying," he said.

A WFP assessment last month found that harvests improved this year despite heavy rains and flooding in late summer. However, many people had experienced prolonged deprivation and North Korea still faced a food deficit of some 414,000 tons.

"Health officials interviewed reported a 50% to 100% increase in the admissions of malnourished children into paediatric wards compared to last year, a sharp rise in low birth weight, and the mission team observed several cases of oedema [a symptom of extreme malnutrition]," it added.

Reports have suggested that the US could offer 240,000 tons of aid. It says the decision is unrelated to denuclearisation, but experts point out how closely talks on the two issues have run and say North Korea has greatly improved access for monitoring and assessment – the grounds that the state department gives for requiring further discussions.

"We're going to have to keep talking about this, and given the mourning period, frankly, we don't think we'll be able to have much more clarity and resolve these issues before the new year," spokeswoman Victoria Nuland told a news conference.

Kim Hartzner of the Danish NGO Mission East said the current conditions were equivalent to North Korea producing enough to feed its population for only 10 months of the year, and buying another two weeks' worth of food.

The WFP programme was supposed to provide the other six weeks' worth – but because it has insufficient funding, can supply only two.

"In broad numbers, they lack one month of food for the entire year," he said.

He warned: "Everyone is warning it's going to get worse and worse, but nothing happens. I fear it's going to be the same situation as in the African Horn: in four or five months you will see quite a lot of people dying and people will say, 'Why didn't we do something four or five months ago?'"

He said one of the girls he had treated on a recent visit to North Korea was six years old yet weighed less than his children when they were one. Her hair was greying and her upper arm circumference was just 10cm.

Source: guardian

Comments

[gumiho.livejournal.com]

giving humanitarian aid to north korea is not as straightforward of an issue as this article makes it out to be.

[waltz-in-code.livejournal.com]

mte

[asnindie.livejournal.com]

The only way aid should be allowed if Aid workers go in and distribute the food themselves. We all know Pongyang will just take all the food for it's generals and let the people starve to death.

[gumiho.livejournal.com]

it's not even that.. the sunshine policy is a failed policy; the north korean people need the impetus for a revolution, not a temporary band-aid.

[asnindie.livejournal.com]

But how can they rise up without the knowledge or even the ability to round up protesters. NK state run a tight ship that puts you in concentration camps if you even show the slightest bit of opposition. It's like the movie Brazil (if you've seen it).

[gumiho.livejournal.com]

see linked article.
also, not sure how that argument relates to giving humanitarian aid?

[asnindie.livejournal.com]

More about how impossible it is to start a revolution in NK.

[gumiho.livejournal.com]

significantly more difficult and unlikely than the arab spring, yes. i would hesitate to say impossible. everything is just conjecture at this point. all i know is that humanitarian aid to north korea will forever be temporary aid--which will only further the lifespan of the regime, a tired cycle.

[asnindie.livejournal.com]

Everyone agrees with that. China is keeping the regime going because they fear Refugees flying in to their borders because they'd rather see a unified Korea. I think the bigger issue is the NK army, only an internal revolution could bring the NK down but with their army that's practically impossible. You could just wait till the regime decays and collapses in to itself but that'll mean alot of causalities. And an all out war would put Seoul in big danger. Nk situation isn't easy at all.

[gumiho.livejournal.com]

lol ok, i'm not saying i have a solution, just that humanitarian aid isn't it. there are already a lot of 'casualties' under the regime, which will not go away with any amount of temporary aid. seoul is perpetually in danger with an unstable regime that has nuclear warheads pointed toward it.

[asnindie.livejournal.com]

That's why it's a delicate issue and most want to avoid an NK meltdown by giving them aid and hoping one day they'll change their mind. The time is now to strike and bring NK down but with so many global issues I think most people don't care as long as NK's hostilities don't rise to some sort of international conflict.

[gumiho.livejournal.com]

and hoping one day they'll change their mind
..yeah, not going to happen.

most people don't care
pretty much. it's just easier to throw some charity money at the problem than deal with it head on.

[elizajet.livejournal.com]

The problem with that is the lack of contact with the outside world, except the higher-ups. If you are dying of starvation and have no idea why it's happening, or your family is threatened with death if you dissent, the more logical thing would be to flee vs. dissent and uprising.

Don't get me wrong, I agree that a revolution should happen, but I don't know if denial of aid would create that impetus. Perhaps an emphasis on increasing their exposure to the outside if possible, I'm not sure?

It's a complicated situation with a number of powerful players, which makes it very very complicated.

[pepsi-twist9.livejournal.com]

Increasing their exposure to the outside is more likely get you arrested. Can't really help if you're behind bars.

[elizajet.livejournal.com]

I didn't mean enabling the North Koreans themselves, I was talking about somehow increasing their chances to learn about what's going on outside, whether it be through underground materials or leaflets, who knows?

[gumiho.livejournal.com]

this is already happening, they are certainly aware that the outside world is better off than they are.

[gumiho.livejournal.com]

maybe; everyone reacts in different ways, and obviously none of us know the answer. adrien hong seems to think that mass exodus is a necessary precursor though, so not mutually exclusive with an uprising.

[gumiho.livejournal.com]

an interesting article which delves a bit into the humanitarian aid issue: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/12/19/how_to_free_north_korea?page=0,0

[asnindie.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the article. China is the key here tbh.

[akaich0u.livejournal.com]

Thank you. I came here to say this.

[benihime99.livejournal.com]

Way to go US.
Cause we all know the north korean "gov" cares more for it's people than for it's nuclear weapon right?

[lilipute.livejournal.com]

(http://tinypic.com?ref=e9hena)

[modernabsurdity.livejournal.com]

:(

[sai12.livejournal.com]

Its sad of course...sad everywhere there are people dying of starvation. But....I doubt giving food to N. Korea is so easy.....:/

[oonalala.livejournal.com]

Why is the North Korean people's survival dependent on food aid from the US? Do China, Russia, or any of the other countries with which NK has diplomatic relationships not have enough to spare? (Serious question.)


It's a horrible situation all around, but I agree with what others have said. Sending food or money or any other kind of aid into a country that is completely corrupt and doesn't actually care that much if their people live or die isn't really going to solve the issue.

[k0dama.livejournal.com]

Because they had a horrible famine in the 90s, and now there isn't proper distribution/work power to maintain a sustainable farming situation.

Oh yeah, and they don't trade with anyone except China, so when there's a food shortage, there's just nothing they can do.

[oonalala.livejournal.com]

I understand why NK can't produce enough to feed itself right now, but I really don't understand why China isn't feeding them instead. If one of China's concerns is prevent a massive influx of NK refugees across their border, I would think China would want to provide NK with all kinds of food to prevent it. Starving people don't sit still, they migrate.

[akaich0u.livejournal.com]

China is in fucking cahoots with its Communist lil bro that is the NK government. They ain't giving shit.

[k0dama.livejournal.com]

I think having North Korea surrender because they're out of resources is probably one of the better solutions to the whole problem.

Sure beats them invading South Korea and destroying a lot of buildings and people.

[pladpuss.livejournal.com]

Even if they did provide aid most of it wouldn't even make it to civilians possibly even none of it.