Evidence of meeting #93 for Foreign Affairs and International Development in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was region.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair (Hon. Robert Nault (Kenora, Lib.)) Liberal Bob Nault
Colleagues, let's bring this meeting to order and get down to business.
Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we are studying Canada's engagement in Asia. Before us, representing the United Church of Canada, is Patricia Talbot. As well, by video conference from Honolulu, we have Christine Ahn, representing Women Cross DMZ.
Can you hear me?
Liberal
Carole Samdup Program Coordinator, Canada Tibet Committee
Yes, I hear you very well. Thank you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bob Nault
Perfect.
I don't know why I never know this in advance, but who is starting?
I suppose I get to pick, so I'll choose Ms. Talbot.
Patricia, the floor is yours.
Patricia Talbot Team Leader, Global Partnerships Program, General Council Office, The United Church of Canada
Thank you very much, Chairman Nault, Vice-Chair Laverdière, and members of the committee, for the opportunity to meet with you today. It is a pleasure and a privilege.
I represent The United Church of Canada and I bring you the greetings of the 42nd moderator of the United Church of Canada, the Right Rev. Jordan Cantwell, and of our general secretary, Ms. Nora Sanders.
As you may know, the United Church is a uniquely Canadian institution, a union of several national churches. It was founded by an act of Parliament in 1925.
Our identity is Canadian, yet we understand ourselves to be part of a global family. That is lived out as we support and accompany global partner churches and organizations with whom we share a vision of a just and peaceful world. Through two of our predecessor churches, the United Church has a history of more than a century of mission engagement and relationships in northeast Asia—in China, Japan, Korea, and more recently in the Philippines. Today, however, I am going to focus my remarks on Canada's relationship, interest, and opportunities with Korea.
The United Church's history with the people of Korea began in a formal way in 1898, when the so-called Canadian Mission was established in Wonsan, on the northeastern coast of what is now the DPRK. Canadian missionaries related to the United Church have lived, served, died, and are buried in what is now North Korea as well as South Korea.
The United Church's Canadian Mission was known for a blended commitment to Christian mission and the social well-being of people, particularly the underprivileged. United Church Canadian Mission emphasized health, in the form of clinics and hospitals; education, especially for girls and impoverished women; and leadership development and capacity building.
Canadian United Church missionaries served in Korea during the Japanese occupation, the Korean war, and the immediate aftermath. After division, United Church presence was limited to the south. Those affiliated with the United Church supported Korean efforts for independence, for democratization, and for human rights.
Today, I would say that the yearning of partners of the United Church in the south and in the north is to promote reconciliation, peace, and reunification in the Korean peninsula. This yearning is shared by many Canadians who are linked to Korea by ties of family and friendship and through shared endeavour in areas of commerce, education, arts and culture, and more. The United Church of Canada, with its 2,800 congregations in Canada, stands with Korean partners and Canadians who seek a just, sustainable peace on the Korean peninsula. We are committed, as the United Church, to do what we can in the mutual journey toward that future.
As your committee prepares to travel to the region, I want to name what may be obvious. I hope that a visit to South Korea may in fact focus on the Korean peninsula and the situation there.
Canadians have an historic commitment to the well-being of the Korean people and a legacy of trust. This moment, a highly complex and even dangerous one, is an opportunity for Canada to engage on the global stage as a bridge-builder committed to the peaceful settlement of disputes.
Having been mostly silent until recently on the Korean peninsula/North Korea file, both bilaterally and multilaterally since about 2010, Canada will need to work to re-establish its credibility on North Korean issues. I think that doing so would be an important building block for reasserting Canada's political and security commitment to the Asia-Pacific region.
What can Canada do? I would like to name four areas for the committee to consider and explore. Before I do so, bear in mind that partners in Korea tell us that peace and human security on the Korean peninsula and the end of nuclear weapons there can only be achieved through genuine engagement without preconditions, the end of military exercises and missile tests, and constructive dialogue towards a peace treaty and negotiated peace.
In your review of Canada's engagement with Asia, I would suggest that you might consider exploring four areas related to Korea.
First of all, consider how Canada might provide support for South Korean president Moon Jae-in and his commitment to inter-Korean dialogue and reconciliation and peace on the peninsula. With the upcoming mix of summits—you know that one happens next week—I think President Moon deserves support from Canada. His approach is obviously very different from President Trump's. The January summit that took place here in Canada, co-hosted by Canada and the U.S., gave significant support to the approach of the Trump administration. It's fitting that Canada give support to the approach of its South Korean ally.
I suggest that this committee might explore how Canada could assist President Moon's efforts to formally end the state of war in the peninsula and begin the process toward a comprehensive peace treaty to replace the 1953 armistice agreement. That agreement would be essential for normalizing relationships between the north and south.
How can Canada help in preparing the table for global talks? The talks really do need to be global. How can those present at the table include all who need to be there, including women from north and south, the U.S., China, and Russia?
As area number two, instead of applying maximum pressure, think about how Canada can maximize dialogue and engagement with North Korea. I suggest two ways you might want to consider this. First of all, consider how Canada can ease up on the sanctions being faced by humanitarian agencies working in North Korea. Our collective experience is that sanctions and the isolation of North Korea have actually encouraged the North Korean nuclear program and have severely harmed ordinary North Koreans. The United Church is on record with this stance and has recently sent a letter, co-signed by Canadian Voice of Women for Peace, to the UN Security Council committee on sanctions. I've given a copy of that to the clerk of the committee.
Another way of maximizing engagement is to encourage and enable people-to-people dialogue, contact, and interaction. This is what churches, civil society, and humanitarian agencies have had lots of experience doing. Whether it's through North Korean farmers coming to the Prairies, through the Mennonites, or through North Korean students studying at Canadian universities, or someone such as Hayley Wickenheiser going to North Korea to do a hockey clinic, we know that people-to-people encounter is essential for authentic dialogue towards peace. I would also suggest that it takes courage, commitment, and a determination to hang in for the long haul to build relationships of trust.
Area three is to give Canada's ambassador in Seoul full authority to represent Canada in Pyongyang. This worked well previously. We established diplomatic relations in North Korea in 2001 to support then-president and Nobel peace prize winner Kim Dae-jung. We had several very able diplomats representing Canada in both South Korea and North Korea. That ended in 2010, a decision that many felt did Canada's interests no good and actually contributed to the decline of Canada's role in the region. This is a time of dialogue, and I firmly believe that Canada can assist in the communication, interpretation, and honest brokering that's needed at this time.
Area four is the last one. Ensure that women's voices and their participation are part of the peace process. Part of Canada's particular contribution to the process can be to facilitate the involvement of women's networks and broader civil society in the process towards peace. That means women from both North and South Korea being present during the process. As we know, the engagement of women is crucial for the peace process to move forward. This government has adopted a feminist foreign policy and a feminist international assistance policy, and in November 2017 it passed its second national action plan on women, peace and security. Make sure this is lived out concretely in the Korean situation. As Minister Freeland has said, “The path to peace needs empowered women. Where women are included in peace processes, peace is more enduring...”.
We appreciate very much your willingness to meet with civil society representatives in Canada. We encourage you to do so in Korea as well.
I have given the staff of the committee contacts for you in South Korea with engaged Christian church leaders, women's networks, and other respected civil society leaders. They stand ready and willing to meet with and talk with you.
I conclude, Mr. Chairman and committee members, with the prayer that you may experience wisdom and discernment in the important leadership that you give the people of Canada and your constituents, and for the grace, patience, and persistence in this important task of not only reviewing Canada's engagement in Asia but also, I hope, in pursuing the path to a more just, peaceful, and sustainable world.
Thank you.
Liberal
Founder and International Coordinator, Women Cross DMZ
Thank you so much for this incredible opportunity to provide some historical and geopolitical context ahead of your trip to South Korea. It has been a tremendous honour for me and Women Cross DMZ to work closely with Canada's leading feminist women's organizations, such as the Nobel Women's Initiative; the Canadian Voice of Women for Peace; and the Women, Peace and Security Network; as well as with Minister Freeland, Parliamentary Secretary DeCourcey, and Global Affairs Canada. You have all been model neighbours.
By way of introduction, I am the founder and international coordinator of Women Cross DMZ. We are a global movement of women mobilizing for peace on the Korean peninsula. In 2015, on the 70th anniversary of Korea's division by Cold War powers, Women Cross DMZ led 30 women peacemakers from 15 countries, including two Nobel peace laureates; America's feminist icon, Gloria Steinem; and numerous other peace activists across the Korean demilitarized zone from North to South Korea.
We held women's peace symposiums in Pyongyang and Seoul, where we discussed with hundreds of Korean women the impact of the unresolved conflict on their lives. We walked with 10,000 Korean women on both sides of the DMZ, in the streets of Pyongyang, in Kaesong, and in Paju, calling for an end to the Korean War with a peace treaty, for the reunification of families, and for women's leadership in the peace-building process.
Three years ago, we would never have imagined that our calls for a peace treaty were within our grasp, yet here we are at this historic moment, and what happens in the coming months will determine whether peace or war prevails on the Korean peninsula.
Canada, which sent the third greatest number of soldiers to fight in the Korean War and has one of the largest Korean diaspora communities and whose robust civil society has a long history and track record sending humanitarian aid and engaging with North Koreans, can play a vital role to support peace on the Korean peninsula and stability throughout Northeast Asia.
As you may know already from your trips and study before your upcoming trips to South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines, Northeast Asia is the world's fastest-growing economic region, with a population of over 1.5 billion. It is also undergoing intense militarization, with massive arsenals of nuclear weapons and sophisticated weaponry that gravely threaten the peace and security of everyone in the region.
Underlying this militarization is, foremost, the unresolved Korean War, which was halted on July 27, 1953, when military leaders from the U.S., North Korea, and China signed the armistice agreement and promised to replace the ceasefire with a permanent peace treaty. This never occurred, and as Patty noted, an entrenched state of war has prevailed.
Formally ending the Korean War would lead to greater security on the Korean peninsula and in Northeast Asia by reducing tensions in the region and countering this escalating militarization. Twenty nations, including Canada, participated in the Korean War. Canada must be a leader in helping to end it.
As Patty noted also, next week, South Korean president, Moon Jae-in will be meeting with North Korean chairman, Kim Jong-un. They will discuss how to end the historic conflict between the two Koreas, which will then be followed by the Trump-Kim summit. No standing U.S. president has ever met with a North Korean leader, and we may never get this opportunity again if both sides can't come to an agreement. Many fear what President Trump himself has said will happen if they can't come to an agreement—military conflict to achieve the denuclearization of North Korea.
It is important to note that we are not here today in this window of diplomatic opportunity because of the Trump administration's maximum pressure campaign, which has only caused great suffering to the North Korean people, but rather because of President Moon and his masterful diplomacy and commitment to a final resolution of the Korean War.
It was just 11 months ago that Moon Jae-in became president after an extraordinary people's movement rose up to bring down the neo-conservative president, Park. His election was a victory of people power, where over 16 million South Koreans—that is one out of three—took to the streets for five months and held candlelight vigils. He ran to end corruption and improve inter-Korean relations and he won in a landslide victory. Today, he still enjoys a 74% approval rating. In his first major foreign policy speech last year in Berlin, President Moon offered North Korea a peace treaty to end the Korean war if they agreed to denuclearize.
As tensions escalated between Washington and Pyongyang, Moon condemned North Korea's nuclear missile tests, but he also sent a clear message to Washington that “no one should be allowed to decide on a military action on the Korean Peninsula without South Korean agreement.” That's because in the opening days of a conventional military conflict, 300,000 people would be killed, and were nuclear weapons to be used—and we know North Korea possesses an arsenal of at least 20—25 million people would be impacted.
Fearing pre-emptive U.S. strikes on North Korea and the likely counter-retaliation against 30,000 U.S. troops on 87 bases in South Korea, President Moon quickly seized the window afforded by the Olympics and called for a truce. Kim Jong-un reached back and sent hundreds of athletes and performers to the Olympics, including his sister, Kim Yo-jong, who was the first member of the Kim dynasty to set foot on South Korean soil since the war.
The world witnessed the transformative power of engagement at the Olympics when the two Koreas marched together in the opening ceremony carrying a one-Korea flag. Yet as the entire stadium rose and cheered for Korean unity, Vice-President Pence and Japanese Prime Minister Abe remained seated. It was a sober reminder of Japan's colonial occupation of Korea from 1910 to 1945, which led to Korea's tragic division by Cold War powers. Many Americans don't even know this, so I am reiterating this fact. In 1945, two young State Department officials basically tore a page from the National Geographic and drew a line across the 38th parallel, giving Seoul to the United States and Pyongyang to the Soviets. That is how Korea was divided and how millions of Korean families still remain separated. That is the tragic history. No Korean was consulted.
Given how much is at stake, it is crucial that the prospect of peace or nuclear war doesn't rest solely on the outcome of a Trump-Kim summit, but the collective engagement by state and non-state actors working together to see through a lasting peace.
Canada, which helped the U.S. and Cuba normalize relations, has established itself as an honest broker to help bridge understanding between historic enemies with its commitment to be a global player in promoting peace and stability around the world. Particularly through its feminist foreign policy, Canada can play a vital role now by helping to ensure the full and equal participation of women from the Korean peninsula and Northeast Asia in a peace-building process.
As official track 1 processes are under way, there is an urgent need to create space for the inclusion of civil society in the Korean peace process, particularly women representing peace movements. Yet northeast Asia, which has significant differences in language, culture, and ideology, lacks regional mechanisms for addressing peace and security, much less frameworks that involve civil society or women activists. Canada can help support regional mechanisms that can convene multiple voices and interests, most significantly the active participation of women's groups given our positive impact towards reaching peace settlements.
There is now robust evidence on the constructive role women's peace movements play to help realize peace agreements, which have been codified now into international and national policies, such as U.N. Security Council resolution 1325 and, as Patty noted, Canada's women, peace and security policy. Canada can play a significant role supporting a women-led regional peace process by strengthening transnational civil society networks and creating a safe space for women from South Korea, North Korea, U.S., China, Japan, Russia, and other stakeholder nations to establish trust, discuss alternatives and engage with official processes.
Peace processes are about more than just stopping an armed conflict and establishing power sharing arrangements; they establish the foundation for a post-war society. In this moment of rapid change and uncertainty, anything is possible.
Just yesterday at the summit with Shinzo Abe in Florida, President Trump said, “We hope to see the day when the whole Korean peninsula can live together in safety, prosperity and peace.” He added, “This is the destiny of the Korean people...”. What an unbelievable statement, which we would not have imagined just a few months ago. This is, however, a fleeting moment, and if women are not involved in the official peace process and in shaping the way security is defined, they will have far more difficulty adding in transformative initiatives later on.
Let me close by saying that this moment calls for forward-looking states such as Canada to extend its feminist foreign policy to support critical windows of opportunity like this one facing the Korean peninsula and Northeast Asia, to ensure that women's rights, gender equality, and genuine human security are at the heart of a Korea peace agreement.
Women Cross DMZ and the Nobel Women's Initiative are partnering with women's peace organizations in South Korea to convene an international women's peace gathering in South Korea from May 23 through 27. Patty Talbot will be on that delegation. It will include a women's peace symposium at the National Assembly and a peace walk in Paju, along the southern border of the DMZ.
We have invited a delegation of North Korean women to come. We have just learned that they will be participating in a May 24 meeting hosted by the UN in Beijing, so we are hopeful that they may indeed join us.
Last week I was in South Korea. In Seoul I met with Ambassador Eric Walsh., He told me that you may be in South Korea at this time, and he has agreed to host a reception for our delegation on May 25 at the Canadian embassy in Seoul.
It would be a great honour for you to meet these courageous women in Korea and other countries around the world, risking their lives to build world peace. I will gratefully submit the names and contact information for key South Korean women leaders whom you should meet on your trip to South Korea.
Thank you so much for this opportunity.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bob Nault
Thank you very much.
Now we are going to go right to Ms. Samdup for her presentation. Try to keep it fairly succinct. Otherwise, there will be no time for questions.
We'll go right to Carole.
Program Coordinator, Canada Tibet Committee
Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee, for inviting me to speak today about Canada's engagement in Asia.
My comments will be very specific, in that I'm looking at only one specific part of Asia, and that is Tibet.
As many of you will know, Tibet is located in the western part of China. To the south it borders India, Nepal, and Bhutan. Much of Tibet is a high plateau, averaging approximately 14,000 feet, known as the Roof of the World.
In the early 1950s, Chinese forces launched a military encroachment on Tibet. That eventually led to the takeover of the government and the exile of His Holiness the Dalai Lama. Since 1959, the Central Tibetan Administration in India has governed the Tibetan diaspora and steadfastly promoted non-violence and dialogue as its key strategies for reconciliation with China.
Unfortunately, under Chinese rule Tibetans face an onslaught of human rights violations—violations of their economic, social, and cultural rights as well as their civil and political rights. These violations have been well documented by organizations such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. I'm not going to restate them for you here today. Instead, what I'd like to do is highlight four areas—like Ms. Talbot before me, I have four areas to highlight—that I believe are areas in which Canada can and should engage with China over the issue of Tibet.
The first of these is to encourage the resumption of the Sino-Tibetan dialogue. Envoys of the Dalai Lama met with representatives of the Government of China on 10 occasions between 2002 and 2010 in an effort to resolve conflict through dialogue. Since 2010, however, that dialogue has been stalled and has not resumed.
The Central Tibetan Administration advocates what it refers to as the “middle way” approach as a pathway to peace. The middle way seeks genuine autonomy for Tibet within the Chinese state and in accordance with China's existing framework for regional autonomy.
I believe that Canada is well-placed to encourage resumption of the Sino-Tibetan dialogue based on the middle path approach, which is not at odds with any Canadian policy and in fact reflects many aspects of the Canadian experience. Canada's familiarity with the challenges of both indigenous and provincial autonomy arrangements serves as a practical example of how to move this project forward.
When the elected leader of the Tibetan Administration, Dr. Lobsang Sangay, spoke before the Subcommittee on International Human Rights last year, he emphasized that Tibetans are ready to meet their Chinese counterparts any time, anywhere. I encourage the members here today to consider whether and how Canada might facilitate that process.
The second issue I would like to raise is climate change. Tibet is sometimes referred to as the Earth's third pole or as the world's water tower. These descriptors are more than just campaign slogans. They refer to the strategic importance Tibet plays within the global effort to confront climate change. The references are derived from Tibet's unique topography as the world's highest plateau, encompassing the source of Asia's six largest rivers flowing into the world's ten most densely populated countries. Tibet is home to the world's third-largest store of ice and largest source of accessible freshwater on the planet, attributes that represent a common cause between the Tibetan and the Canadian people.
Rising temperatures on the Tibetan plateau also have downstream impacts right across Asia, affecting the pattern of monsoon rains on which much of the region depends. In December 2017, Canada and China announced the cooperation agreement around climate change and environmental protection. The agreement offers yet another opportunity for Canada to engage Chinese counterparts around the Tibetan issue and in doing so to promote policies that will address the important climate challenges in Tibet today.
The third issue I would like to raise is trade. It's an interesting observation that even as China has experienced significant levels of growth, Tibetans remain poor amidst that growth. In fact, the UNDP reports that Tibet is the poorest region of the country.
Because Tibetans experience poverty along with political marginalization, a potential free trade agreement between Canada and China raises numerous red flags. The Canada Tibet Committee is not for or against the FTA, and we don't view this discussion as a choice between advancing human rights or trade. Instead, we are concerned that increased trade and investment from Canada could entrench existing inequalities in Tibet or generate other negative impacts on human rights. We have therefore called upon the Government of Canada to carry out a human rights impact assessment, to be completed early in the process or preferably before formal negotiations are announced.
My fourth issue is reciprocal diplomatic access. You will have read the statement made by Minister Dion in 2016 in response to an Order Paper question. In his statement, the minister described multiple bureaucratic obstacles put in the way of Canadian diplomats seeking to visit Tibet, even when the purpose of their visit was to monitor Canadian-funded projects. When Canadian diplomats were finally able to gain access, their movement was restricted and their activities closely monitored.
Meanwhile, eight official delegations from Tibet were welcomed in Canada between 2009 and 2016, with absolutely no restrictions placed on their travel within the country or on whom they could meet while they were here.
In the United States, the proposed reciprocal access to Tibet act is currently pending in the U.S. Congress. My hope is that Canada will also take action to encourage compliance with this most basic diplomatic principle. The result—more and better access to Tibet—will be a significant step forward in our efforts to monitor the situation inside the country.
In closing, the Central Tibetan Administration has declared 2018 to be a “year of gratitude” towards countries that have supported the Tibetan people over the past many years. The Canada Tibet Committee will be hosting an event in the Canadian Parliament to thank Canada, and I invite each of you to attend and to meet with members of Canada's Tibetan community in person.
Until then, thank you again for this opportunity to speak to you today.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bob Nault
Thank you very much, Ms. Samdup, and to the other two witnesses.
Now we're going straight to questions and will start with Mr. Genuis, please.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I really appreciated all the witnesses' testimony.
I'm going to start with Ms. Samdup, but hopefully I'll have time for questions for the other witnesses.
Ms. Samdup, thank you so much for the work you do. It's work I know and appreciate well, obviously.
I want you to speak a little bit about the issue of religious-based persecution in China. I'm assuming it affects the Tibetan community significantly. My sense is that there has been a bit of a change in the mechanism of that persecution. At one time it was about basically saying you couldn't practise your faith, and now it's about trying to co-opt that faith and have everything under the control of the Communist Party, even going so far as this officially atheist regime's saying that they will determine the reincarnation of the next Dalai Lama.
Can you share a bit with the committee about the kind of persecution along those lines that the Tibetan community faces in China?
Program Coordinator, Canada Tibet Committee
Will we answer each question as it comes?
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
You can go ahead and answer, and I'll follow up.
Program Coordinator, Canada Tibet Committee
Okay, thank you.
As you know, the Tibetan culture is identified in large measure by the practice of its religion, and as you also know, the Government of China gets very nervous when any organized group functions and grows, and behaves independently. You put these two things together, and you have a lot of challenges.
In recent years, what we've seen is increased efforts by the Government of China to actually control the activities of the monastic institutions, the religious institutions. For example, they have now placed committees within each monastic institution to manage daily affairs, to monitor who can join and who cannot join, to keep numbers at a certain level, to look at what is being taught, and whether politically correct principles are being enforced in the regular teachings and practices of the monks and nuns in these institutions.
With respect to the Dalai Lama's succession, China has said that it will be the one to choose who the next Dalai Lama is. This is obviously something that is of serious concern to the Tibetan people. They have a traditional method of choosing reincarnations of high lamas, and His Holiness the Dalai Lama has said himself that he may not be reincarnated, or that he may completely revolutionize how Dalai Lamas are selected. Certainly within the next years, however, the issue of the Dalai Lama, which is so closely identified with the Tibetan cause, will be something for the Tibetan people themselves to determine, and of course we will be looking for support from other countries to ensure that this is allowed to happen as it should.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Thank you.
For a while, there was optimism about China, with the idea that China would sort of inevitably change. Now, I think there's a lot more pessimism about China seeming to be moving backwards in terms of human rights and the solidification of authoritarian control under one person.
When I had the opportunity to meet with His Holiness, one of the things that struck me about him was his clear optimism and persistence in spite of decades of struggle. In terms of the objectives you're pursuing, I'd be curious whether you think there is a case for optimism about China, and how Canada could help push on these specific issues, including toward a deeper political change in the mentality of the regime towards faith communities, minorities, aggression towards its neighbours, and so forth.
Program Coordinator, Canada Tibet Committee
I think there's always hope. We have to function on hope; otherwise, what would the option be?
Certainly, what we've seen is a lot of resistance, not only inside Tibet but inside China more broadly. There's a lot of resistance and a lot of activism, with people seeking their rights.
Just last week, we saw a movement of LGBT activists who stood up and fought a prohibition on promoting their cause on social media in China, and they succeeded. They achieved their goal, so it is possible and there is always hope.
We see the same in Tibet, where people are struggling to maintain their culture and to practice their language. They're speaking up. They're doing what they can. The important thing would be to ensure that other countries around the world give their support where they can, and that the whole issue of Tibet not be relegated to the past or treated as an issue where other objectives supersede the importance of the principles represented by the Tibetan cause.
Liberal
Liberal
Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Thank you, chair.
I'd like to put my question to Ms. Ahn.
As a backdrop, I want to reference the North Korean famine of 1994 to 1998, in which two to three million people died—some 10% to 15% of the population. Having that in the back of our minds, is the North Korean infrastructure particularly prone to mass famine when indiscriminate sanctions are put into place—the kinds of sanctions we're seeing under this maximum pressure campaign?
Founder and International Coordinator, Women Cross DMZ
Thanks for referencing that famine period when two million people, as you say, perished in North Korea. There is a recent study by UNICEF saying that the current sanctions could lead to up to 60,000 North Korean children starving as the result of this maximum pressure campaign.
As regards North Korea's infrastructure or its susceptibility to famines, I would say that because of the division of the Korean peninsula, North Korea has historically been an industrial base, and South Korea has actually been the breadbasket. Obviously, Korea itself is a largely mountainous country; some 80% of the peninsula, I believe, is largely mountainous. They already have limited arable land for food production and have two growing seasons, and were faced by a global economy in which, when they were going through the famine, because of their economic situation, they were unable to access—
Liberal
Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Thank you. I got at the essence of what I was looking for.
Could we make sure that the UNICEF report is tabled? I'd like to see it. It's a January report. Has there been an update? They said that 60,000 children potentially could be starving to death. Has that begun? There's a point of no return when people who malnourished all of a sudden start dying; turning it back then becomes very difficult.
Succinctly, are we close to that point? We are getting into the summer season, but come the winter, should there be no resolution, what could the consequences be, if you are aware? If not, then we'll move to the next question.
Founder and International Coordinator, Women Cross DMZ
In a meeting I had with some representatives of the UN who had travelled with the under-secretary to the DPRK, they noted that they had met with the UN humanitarian aid agencies operating in the DPRK, who paint a picture of pretty dire situation.
I agree with you that we are facing the harvest and the summer season, but at the same time, I think this is a perennial problem. That's why, as Patty Talbot noted, there needs to be a formal resolution of the situation so that the sanctions don't continue to impede North Korea's economy. This is a moment when there is potential possibility for the north to join the international community. I believe we must pursue a political resolution.
Liberal
Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Thank you.
What I'm getting at is that the type of sanctions that are applied clearly haven't led to denuclearization; the program seems to have accelerated. It thus hasn't been impacted; rather the impact seems to be upon the people, and the most vulnerable of them. We know that 60,000 children are at risk. We also know that there are significant problems of getting pharmaceuticals among the most vulnerable—those who are sick and children. That seems to be the unfortunate outcome of this maximum pressure sanctions regime, which seems to be an indiscriminate regime.
I thus have a question. When the South Korean foreign minister asked to send food aid—and that, of course, was opposed very stringently by the Trump administration and others—did his call have widespread public support among South Koreans for their brothers and sisters in North Korea?
Founder and International Coordinator, Women Cross DMZ
It did, absolutely. Eight out of ten South Koreans support inter-Korean reconciliation. Part of Moon Jae-in's popularity has very much to do with his mandate from the Korean people.
We recently have been engaging with the Korean Sharing Movement, the largest humanitarian citizen-led organization in South Korea, which during the “sunshine policy” years sent massive humanitarian aid.
They want to go beyond humanitarian aid. They want to help with the economic development of that country. They want to do green development, environmental programs, but they are very hamstrung by these UN Security Council sanctions. Hopefully Canada can play a role to challenge this maximum pressure campaign, which, as you noted, has not led to the denuclearization but to further advancement of North Korea's nuclear missile program.