PRESS CONFERENCE BY UNDER-SECRETARY-GENERAL FOR HUMANITARIAN AFFAIRS

The Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) had been informed from the highest level of the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea that it wanted all international humanitarian operations in the country closed down by the end of the year, Jan Egeland, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and United Nations Emergency Relief Coordinator, said at a Headquarters press conference this afternoon.

That decision was a matter of concern as it was too soon to end the humanitarian programmes, which had made great progress since the mid-1990s, he said.  Having been to that country some years back, he had seen the enormity of the needs during that period.  Since the late 1990s acute malnutrition had dropped from 16 per cent to 7 per cent, and chronic malnutrition affecting 62 per cent of the population had fallen to 37 per cent.  However, 40 per cent of the country’s children had suffered stunted growth and 20 per cent remained underweight.

He said those successes were due not only to progress in food production, but also to the effective humanitarian programme led by the World Food Programme (WFP), the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and others.  To succeed in a dialogue that OCHA was pursuing with the Government, the Office had sought the help of certain Member States in facilitating a phased end to the humanitarian programmes.  He had met today with the country’s Deputy Foreign Minister and hoped that the Koreans would agree that many of the United Nations programmes could be described as development-oriented.

It was also a matter of concern that non-governmental organizations had been told not to have international staff, at least not outside Pyongyang, the capital, he said, adding, “All of this means that very important programmes that have saved a lot of lives will be curtailed at the end of the year.”  Humanitarian workers were impartial and wanted to do their work.  It was to be hoped that they would be able to carry on with their work.

Asked what reasons had been given for the Government’s decision, he said he would not speculate, but it had been argued that humanitarian programmes should not last for too long.  The action also had something to do with aid dependency and national integrity.  Stringent monitoring systems could also be a reason for the Government’s decision.  The OCHA had strict systems all over the world and could not compromise on the strict monitoring of the assistance it provided.

Responding to another question, he said the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had enjoyed a good harvest and it was hoped that there would be more of them.  However, one good harvest should not be enough for the Government to order the closure of a decade of successful cooperation with the international community on food security.  “We want to scale down and phase out when the time is ripe and nothing would be better if that can happen soon.”

In answer to further questions, he told the questioner that OCHA’S assessment was that there would not be enough food to meet the country’s needs.  There would be some additional bilateral aid, and it was well known that the Republic of Korea and China were providing that assistance, but that would not fill the gap that would be occasioned by an ending of food aid from Europe, Japan, the United States and elsewhere.

He said 70 per cent of the medicines and 100 per cent of the vaccines provided by humanitarian organizations could not be labelled development assistance.  The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), UNICEF and the World Health Organization (WHO) would be invited to continue with their development work and OCHA would want to sit down with the authorities and reach a mutually satisfactory solution in order for life-saving programmes to continue.

In response to another question, he said he did not think the WFP would be asked to close down its activities.  “The World Food Programme should certainly stay on, but it’s a big question mark which (of its) programmes will continue.”  In its programme delivery, the WFP had been able to reach the elderly and those defined as the most vulnerable, at least in the countryside.  The big agencies operating in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea were the WFP, UNICEF, WHO and the ICRC.  There were also 11 international non-governmental organizations also there, most of which had been informed that they could only continue with development programmes that they could monitor through international staff based in the capital.  While there had been problems with access in some countries, he could not recall an occasion when a Government had ordered a shut-down of humanitarian operations within such a short period of time.

Asked which organizations were being asked to leave, he said it was the humanitarian programmes that were being closed down, not necessarily the institutions running them.  They had been informed that most agencies could stay and continue with development work but not humanitarian operations.  “But then the big question is how do we define development work?”

Hopefully, many programmes could and would continue, at least until there was mutual agreement that enough food would be available, he told another questioner.  The representatives of a number of countries, including China, the Republic of Korea and Japan, had all said they shared his view that humanitarian programmes should not be discontinued abruptly, but rather phased out when the needs that had necessitated them no longer existed.

Responding to a question about Zimbabwe, he said he hoped to visit that country in mid-November to discuss the future of humanitarian programmes there.  He had received positive responses from donors to whom he had sent letters on the subject.  The aim was to work with the Government in putting in place a food-security programme for the several million people at risk.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record