North Korea Monitor

Anyone who has ever visited a kindergarten classroom in some other part of the world knows children don’t behave like this. In this footage from a kindergarten in Wonsan, North Korea, we first witness the children at play on the playground, but later on there’s something sinister about the way they’re lined up on the balcony shouting “안녕히 가세요! (Lit: ‘go in peace’ or ‘goodbye’)” in unison without any teacher supervision. I can’t quite put my finger on it, but for some reason this video gives me the chills. 

After almost a month of silence, the Rodong Shinmun–mouthpiece of the (North) Korean Workers Party—has rolled out its standard anti-imperialist invectives for Lee Myung Bak. Among its choice epithets for  Lee were ”sycophant towards the United States,” “anti-North confrontation advocator,” and  “traitor Lee Myung-bak.” The unsigned commentary also warned that Lee would be responsible for regressing inter-Korean relations:

“The Lee regime will be held fully accountable for the irrevocable catastrophic consequences to be entailed by the freezing of the inter-Korean relations and the disturbance of peace and stability on the Korean peninsula (Korea Times)”

Blustery rhetoric and hyperbole is to be expected from the Rodong Shinmun, so it’s important to take the actual contents of this commentary with a grain of salt. Trying to discern the North’s actual intent—whether this is just empty posturing, a cry for help, or something deeper—is more difficult. 

Back in Washington, the State Department made an official statement regarding the sudden downturn in inter-Korean relations. State Department Spokesman Tom Casey told reporters “that some of the rhetoric that we’ve seen is necessarily helpful (Korea Times).” The U.S. has made quite clear what it expects of North Korea: a full and complete declaration. North Korea has balked at providing an adequate declaration that includes details of a highly-enriched uranium program.

“I think [the North Koreans] are still very interested in trying to get through the declaration,” Christopher Hill told reporters at the beginning of a 9-day swing through Asia. Hill still remains optimistic about a resolution in the near future.  “I think tempers are getting shorter. Patience is certainly getting frayed…When and if we meet, whenever it comes, it has to be a meeting in which we really can finally resolve it.” Most significantly, Hill, who believes we are in the final stages of a resolution of North Korea’s nuclear issue, believes differences between the six parties are “getting smaller (Korea Times)”

Hill will not travel to Pyongyang, but State had no comment when asked whether Hill would meet with North Korean nuclear negotiator Kim Gye Gwan in a third country (Yonhap).

Park Syung Je, a scholar at the Asia Strategy Institute in Seoul, predicts this will be the most difficult year for Kim Jong Il. Park’s comments were reported in a Boston Globe article entitled “Urgency grows as severe food shortages loom in N. Korea.” International and meterological conditions have conspired to challenge Kim with one of the more severe crises his regime has faced:

This year is anything but good. Floods last August ruined part of the main yearly harvest, creating a 25 percent shortfall in the food supply and putting 6 million people in need, according to the UN World Food Program.
Over the winter, drought damaged the wheat and barley crop, according to a recent report in the official North Korean media. That crop normally tides people over during the summer “lean season” until the fall harvest.
North Korea’s ability to buy food, meanwhile, has plunged, as the cost of rice and wheat on the global market has jumped to record highs, up 50 percent in the past six months.
Equally important for North Korea, its reliably generous neighbors seem to be operating under new, less tolerant rules for charity.

South Korea is not the only neighbor that has been cutting back on good will. China, too, has been cutting back:

China, the North’s closest ally and main trading partner, also seems to be stiffening its food policies. It has quietly slashed food aid to North Korea, according to figures compiled by the World Food Program. Deliveries plummeted from 440,000 metric tons in 2005 to 207,000 tons in 2006.
The reason for the cuts has not been made public, but some analysts believe it is related to North Korea’s decision in 2006 to detonate a nuclear device

Though North Korean citizens are better able to cope with desperate economic conditions than in times past (as Dr. Petrov pointed out here), I can’t help but wonder if North Korea’s resurgence of hostility is in someway related to the deteriorating food situation. One of Kim’s coping mechanisms is to blame outsiders for domestic problems. During previous famines and trying times, Kim convinced most of his subjects that the U.S. was to blame.  This time around, Kim might be trying to provoke the South for domestic propaganda purposes.

Another related reason for the recent outburst might be that as Kim’ position becomes more tenuous, and he begins to loose the support of key regime figures, the probability that he will lash out at the South grows.  We may be witnessing the beginning stages of this process now. The fact that North Korea is constantly on war footing is well known; as is that fact that many North Korean citizens and soldiers believe that a “glorious war for reunification” is inevitable. If the the food situation reaches a critical level causing the upper echelons of the regime to begin to get resitve– and especially if Kim Jong Il feels backed up in a corner with few options left– open hostilities might be unavoidable.

Couple this with speculation that the Songun policy is on its way out—as some analyses suggest —and military leadership might be looking for an excuse to fortify their own positions. Hyping the military threat from the South would knock top civilian leadership out of their “complacency,” and thus restore the primacy of the military. 

Based on past experiences over the past 50 years, hostile spasms from North Korea are a regular and, for the most part, benign occurrence. As of now, there is no solid reason to believe the current tensions are anything but a cry for attention or an attempt at bullying. But, as this story continues to unfold over the coming weeks and months, we’ll be better able to judge whether the tell-tale signs of regime collapse–or worse–are something to be worried about.

UPDATE: All this talk of increasing hostilties got me thinking: What’s next for North-South relations?

Kim Jong Il has three major options:

1) Back down. Kim would probably not back down unless there was some way he could save face. That would probably mean a formal or tacit agreement between the Northern and Southern governments along with confidence-building measures. But, given Lee Myung Bak’s stated policy of reciprocity, this outcome would be unlikely unless the North were willing to make a concession as well. It also would depend on which issues Lee holds most dear. If reciprocity starts off with small measures that build confidence and gradually moves to encompass larger, more volitile issues, there is a good chance for sucess. If Lee requests the entire farm right off the bat, then see numbers two and three.

2) Continue to escalate the situation. Kim could take any of the following actions to further escalate tensions between North and South: a naval confrontation in the West Sea (many eyes will be carefully watching this year’s May-June crab fishing season); a firefight in the DMZ; a long-range missile test (especially one that skirts Japanese or South Korean territory); cancellation of one of the “reconciliation projects” like Geumgangsan, or Kaesong; a second nuclear test; restarting the Yongbyon facility; withdrawing entirely from the Six-Party Talks; or proliferating nuclear arms.  A limited attack on South Korea or Japan is extremely unlikely, unless the regime really felt it were trapped or on the verge of collapse. An escalation in hostility would be most likely in the event that the South cut off all aid shipments.

3) Maintain the status quo. Probably the most likely option at this stage. This would entail continued diplomatic, rhetorical, and symbolic hostility. Perhaps accompanied by a minor “escalation event” at some point; like slowing down the denuclearization process. Such perpetual hostilities would probably go on indefinitely as long as limited aid were still provided. Or a major diplomatic breakthrough occurs (see number one). Or Kim decides to increase hostilities. In which case, see number two.
 

According to a Chosun Ilbo report, North Korean fighter jets have the buzzed the Northern Limit Line of the DMZ 10 times since the inauguration of Lee Myung Bak on February 25th. Such provocations have occurred in the past but “never with such frequency.” As of late, North Korea has used increasingly belligerent means to express its displeasure with the South’s new conservative government. According to the report:

The South Korean Defense Ministry is closely monitoring the moves, believing the North is intentionally creating tensions in the sea, skies and on the ground. Sources in the South Korean government and military on Sunday said North Korean fighters including MIG-21s took off from North Korean air bases such as Tokchon Air Base in South Pyongan Province, crossed the “Tactical Action Line” set by South Korea, to fly near the DMZ and the NLL on about 10 occasions since the Lee Myun-bak administration’s launch. The TAL is an imaginary line set by the South 20 to 30 km north of the DMZ and the NLL, based on the assumption that North Korean fighter planes can reach skies over the Seoul Metropolitan area just three to five minutes after take-off. Once they come close to the TAL, that is the signal for South Korean fighters to take off from Suwon Air Base and elsewhere.

Bellicose rhetoric is on the rise as well. Over the weekend, KCNA, mouthpiece of the Kim Jong Il regime, threatened South Korea with pre-emptive strikes of its own: “Everything will be in ashes, not just a sea of fire, once our advanced pre-emptive strike begins (AP via the Guardian).” At the same time, the KCNA has accused the South of provoking North Korean forces, threatening that conflict could break out any moment:

The south Korean warlike forces are now taking very disturbing military moves, vociferously asserting that the “northern limit line defends five islands in the West Sea” and “Yonphyong Islet is like a dagger to be thrust into one’s throat while Paekryong Islet the one to be thrust into one’s side”.Military brasshats including the chief of the General Staff of the Navy have held operational confabs on measures to defend the “northern limit line” to the end one after another in these areas. On March 18 the south Korean trigger-happy forces deployed more destroyers and guard ships in the frontline waters in the West Sea of Korea. On March 26 they infiltrated 14 warships deep into territorial waters of the DPRK side southeast of Ssanggyo-ri, Kangryong County, South Hwanghae Province on 13 occasions. The number of warships that intruded into those waters reached 5 or 6 on a daily average. In the meantime, fighter bombers and armed helicopters are kept fully ready to go into action any moment. They also issued an order to batteries of 155 mm caliber howitzers and various type guided weapons deployed on the above-said five islets to be ready to go into action. Combined firepower drills for “striking and destroying” warships of the Navy of the Korean People’s Army and drills for tactical naval maneuvers are staged on Paekryong, Taechong and Yonphyong Islets and in waters around them almost everyday. A situation in which an armed conflict may break out any moment is prevailing in the frontline waters in the West Sea due to the reckless military provocations of the south Korean military warmongers. Any attempt on the part of the south Korean military authorities to “protect” the “northern limit line” at any cost would only spark off a clash in the said waters (see: KCNA 3/28/2008 “ Spokesman for KPA Navy Command Issues Statement”).

The South, for its part, has reacted with calm. According to an AFP report, via Taipei Times, Southern military authorities will take a few days to take stock of the situation before responding:

In a first official reaction, the South’s defense ministry said it had no plans to respond immediately to the North’s message.
“The ministry will decide — within two or three days — on whether it should send a reply or not after scrutinizing North Koreans’ real intentions through consultations with the unification ministry and other agencies,” it said in a press statement.

As for the North’s possible motives, the Hankyoreh speculates that the North’s moves are intended to influence South Korea’s upcoming parlimentary elections and the April 18th summit between Lee Myung Bak and George W. Bush, as well as to telegraph the North’s intention that it too will take a less conciliatory approach to negotiations:

The North’s message is clear. The reclusive state seems to be rejecting the South Korean government’s attempts to link the nuclear problem to inter-Korean relations. It also appears to be refuting remarks made by the United States, which have indicated that as far as the nuclear matter goes, the ball has been put in the North’s court. The North also appears to be hinting that it will not ask the South for humanitarian aid.
[…]
However, Kim Seong-bae, a senior researcher at the Institute for National Security Strategy, said, “The actions taken by North Korea today and yesterday were part of an orchestrated manoeuvre [sic]. In the short term, the actions were aimed at increasing its negotiating power. But if things don’t go smoothly, the actions may indicate North Korea will stand its ground.”

Additionally:

The remarks were also interpreted as being the North’s official response after North Korean Vice Foreign Minister Kim Kye-gwan and Assistant U.S. Secretary of State Christopher Hill met on March 13 in Geneva to try to resolve the impasse between them. Hill is planning to visit South Korea and other Asian nations next week, focusing attention on whether he will again meet with the North Korean Vice Foreign Minister. A senior South Korean government official said, “The remark is not understood to be the North’s final position on the matter as plans for behind-the-scenes talks between the U.S. and North Korea are underway. We need to watch the situation over the next one or two weeks,” the senior South Korean official said.

In a related editorial, the Hankyoreh, which is unabashedly pro-engagement, blamed the latest spat of tension on Lee Myung Bak:

However, an expert who spoke on condition of anonymity was somewhat more pessimistic. He said, “It is difficult for the North to easily decide or change its direction in terms of declaring its nuclear programs. The situation is not so good that we can think optimistically about the matter.” He added that the problem is that “President Lee’s administration hasn’t shown the will to engage in the process.”

UPDATE: In a second editorial on the rapid deterioration of North-South relations, the Hankyoreh reiterated its attacks on Lee Myung Bak,  blaming him for the current situation:

 Against such a non-responsive stance, some experts have raised questions about the crisis management abilities of the South Korean administration of President Lee Myung-bak. The inter-Korean relationship has grown worse following a recent series of hostile remarks made toward North Korea by senior South Korean government officials. In spite of this, however, a “policy of ignorance” being carried out by the new administration is making matters worse, experts have said.

The latest development in rapidly deteriorating North-South relations. From Bloomberg:

North Korea may have fired short- range missiles into waters off its west coast as part of a regular military exercise, a South Korean government official said. The Defense Ministry is trying to confirm the launches.

The official, who declined to be identified because of the sensitivity of the issue, couldn’t say how many missiles were launched. North Korea fired “several” missiles at about 10:30 a.m. Seoul time today, Yonhap News reported earlier.

The launches came as Kim Jong Il’s regime accused the U.S. of delaying six-nation negotiations aimed at dismantling North Korea’s nuclear weapons program.

Efforts by South Korea, the U.S., China, Japan and Russia to persuade North Korea to disarm are deadlocked after the communist country missed a Dec. 31 deadline to declare its nuclear programs. North Korea and the U.S. failed to break the impasse during talks in Geneva earlier this month.

UPDATE 1: From Associate Press:

South Korea says North Korea’s latest missile launches appear to have been part of routine training.

The North reportedly launched the short-range missiles earlier Friday in apparent anger over the new South Korean government’s tougher policy on its communist neighbor.

South Korean presidential spokesman Lee Dong-kwan told reporters that Seoul was “closely monitoring the situation.”

The launches came as the North issued a stern rebuke to Washington over an impasse at nuclear disarmament talks.

The communist country warned that the Americans’ attitude could “gravely” affect the continuing disablement of Pyongyang’s atomic facilities.

UPDATE 2: According to the DailyNK’s sources*, North Korea had been planning on conducting this test for the past few days. The missile tested was a Styx Anti-ship missile. According to one of my own sources, the test may be related to the Six-Party Talks stalement:

우리 군과 정부 관계부처는 북한군이 지난 25일부터 이틀간 서해 북방한계선 부근 해역에 고속정 한 척을 대기시키고 단거리 미사일 발사를 준비하는 모습을 포착한 것으로 알려졌습니다.

Offices related to our [South Korea's] military and government announced that they knew that the North Korean military, starting on the 25th and for the two days after, had a high-speed boat waiting in the vicinity of the Northern  boundry line  and appeared to be preparing to launch a short range missile.

북한군이 발사를 준비했던 미사일은 사거리 46km의 옛소련제 스틱스 대함 미사일로 실제로는 발사되지는 않았습니다.
The missile launched by the North’s military had a range of 46km and was a Styx Missile from the former USSR.  

*No English version as of yet English version here.

UPDATE 3: The Blue House has officially confirmed the test. Blue House spokesman Lee Dong Kwan told reporters in Seoul: 

“We are monitoring the situation…I believe that North Korea would not want to jeopardize inter-Korean relations”

Bloomberg quotes Baek Seung Joo, of the Korea Institute of Defense Analysis who believes

Kim is “putting pressure” on South Korean President Lee Myung Bak’s  administration in an effort to influence its North Korea policy, said Baek Seung Joo of the Korea Institute of Defense Analysis in Seoul. “It is flexing its muscles to warn Lee that inter-Korean relations can be sacrificed if he pursues a hard-line policy.”

UPDATE 4: Jon Herskovitz, via Reuters, added the following:

At about the same time as the reported missile launch, North Korea’s official media launched a rhetorical volley at the United States, blaming it for pushing six-country talks aimed at scrapping the North’s nuclear arms plans into deadlock.

“If the United States continues to delay the resolution of the nuclear problem by insisting on something that doesn’t exist, it could have a grave impact on the disablement of the nuclear facility that has been sought so far,” the North’s KCNA news agency quoted a Foreign Ministry spokesman as saying.

He concluded with this quote by USFK commander General B.B. Bell:

“If North Korea should attack … we will defeat them quickly and decisively and end the fight on our terms,” General B. B. Bell said earlier on Friday, before the reported missile launch.

UPDATE 5: The LA Times also muses about a possible link between today’s test and the stalled Six-Party Talks:

One of the reasons why the North may be feeling ignored is that the United States is preoccupied with a presidential election and seems unlikely to be pushing for any major breakthroughs in the laboring six-nation nuclear talks, Cheng said.

North Korea also is angry at Washington for maintaining that Pyongyang is still pursuing a uranium-based atomic bomb program, and asserts that it has taken steps to prove that the charge is untrue. “The United States is clinging to shabby magic to make us a criminal in order to save face,” the North Korean Foreign Ministry said in a statement carried by the government’s official Korean Central News Agency.

“If the United States keeps delaying the resolution of the nuclear issue . . . it could gravely affect disablement of nuclear facilities,” the statement said.

North Korea had agreed last year to shut down and disable its sole functioning nuclear reactor, at Yongbyon, and other atomic facilities in exchange for aid and political concessions. Washington has insisted that it still has not received a full account of the North’s nuclear activities.

Now Pyongyang may be growing impatient, especially at the end of a harsh winter in which fuel and food shortages could be at their worst.

South Korean President Lee, who took office a month ago, has taken a tougher line toward the communists to the north than his predecessors, including threatening to link future economic cooperation with the resolution of the nuclear standoff, said Hak Soon Paik, a North Korean expert at the South’s Sejong Institute.

More details as I get’em.

The Hankyoreh, as expected, has slammed what it calls the “retrogression on North Korea policy” by the Lee Myung Bak administration. The pro-sunshine policy rag laments that

There has been a major loss of continuity and originality in policy towards North Korea, and the ministry’s report on its activities is a list of vague themes that are out of touch with reality. The tone of policy has been tailored to fit President Lee Myung-bak’s ideology, and it is in no small way possible it will lead to renewed conflict between the two Koreas.

The Hankyoreh begins its rant by deploying the classic pro-North false dilemma: “either we make nice with the ‘Dear Leader’ or we go to war!” Too bad the issue isn’t so cut-and-dry. The “relationship” between North and South over the past decade has been a relationship inasmuch as Neville Chamberlain’s relationship with Hitler was a “relationship.” Of course, the South should not maintain a belligerent policy towards the North, but I don’t think asking for reciprocity is too much. There are various “hues” of relationship possible between North and South that are neither appeasement nor war.

Despite the Hankyoreh’s idealistic objections based on the principle of “uri-minjok-ggiri-above-all-else,” a pragmatic approach is required. The South has every right to ask itself:  “what benefits have we gotten out of this relationship lately?” The answer, of course, is nothing tangible–besides feel-good nationalistic sentiments.

The editorial continues:

The new North Korea policy’s emphasis is negating the accomplishments of Presidents Kim Dae-jung and Roh Moo-hyun. A brief example would be how there is no single mention of the October 4 Summit Declaration and the June 15 Joint Statement, which should be a most basic part of inter-Korean relations. The summit declaration talks about policy goals like a “West Sea Peace Cooperation Zone,” a “Haeju Special Zone,” a shipbuilding yard, a two-stage development plan for Gaeseong Industrial Complex, and repairs on roads and railways, but all of these are missing from the ministry’s report, and now there’s no knowing when there might be prime ministers’ talks or a meeting of the economic cooperation committee. After listening to the ministry’s presentation of its report, President Lee Myung-bak instead spoke with special emphasis about the importance of the Inter-Korean Basic Agreement signed during the Roh Tae-woo presidency in 1991. In other words, he wants to negate the continuity in North Korea policy and turn back the clock on relations by about a decade.

Why should the Unification Ministry’s report mention those inter-Korean projects? What good did they bring to North-South relations? Did they build trust? Goodwill? No! Kim Jong Il couldn’t even be bothered to make the slightest concession to the South. After pouring all that no-strings-attached aid that bolstered Kim’s grip on power, he wouldn’t even allow the South Korean anthem to played prior to the recent World Cup Qualifier. If anything, all that pandering only reinforced Kim’s notion that his DPRK is the only legitimate Korea.  

Finally, the Hankyoreh concludes:

So Lee’s administration is essentially taking issues that need a far more mature level of relations with Pyongyang to even talk about seriously, then skipping everything that would build up to that, and talking only about the final destination. One can see how this is an unrealistic attitude for not taking one’s negotiating counterpart into consideration, given how almost none of the North Korea policy goals Seoul announced before the nineties ever saw fruition.

I agree with the notion that it will take time and confidence building measures to reach the “final destination,” but what happened in the past decade could hardly be described as contributing to a productive, healthy relationship.  On the contrary, through appeasement, North Korean policy makers quickly learned that they need not compromise to maintain their survival in the face of their failed domestic policies; that the South was waiting–on bended knee–to give aid and endorsement with out anything in return. It’s ironic that the Hankyoreh bashes Lee for “not taking one’s negotiating counterpart into consideration.” I think its Kim Jong Il who deserves that criticism. 

For the first time, a high-ranking South Korean military officer has acknowledged the possibility of a pre-emptive strike on North Korean nuclear facilities, though no official plans are in the works to carry out such a strike. Gen. Kim Tae-young, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said as much in a hearing yesterday. Gen. Kim said such an option would only be used if the North’s facilities became a “military threat.” The Joongang Ilbo reports:

“We would identify possible locations of nuclear weapons and make a precise attack in advance,” Kim said when asked what he would do if North Korea were to develop the capability and intent to attack the South with nuclear weapons. Kim was the commander of the First Army and is a specialist in military strategy and tactics. “Our goal is to prevent North Korea’s nuclear weapons from exploding in our territory,” he told lawmakers.

North Korea ordred South Korean officials to leave Kaesong in retaliation for remarks made by the unification minister, says the Hankyoreh:  

North Korea expelled most of the South Korean officials from the inter-Korean office in the Kaesong industrial complex early Thursday, a government source said.

The measure was taken in protest of South Korean Unification Minister Kim Ha-joong’s recent remarks that it would be difficult to expand the complex without North Korea’s denuclearization, the source said.

“The South Korean government pulled 11 out of the 13 officials residing in the inter-Korean joint office in the Kaesong complex at about 3 a.m. Thursday after the North demanded the withdrawal of all of the officials,” the source said.

Only two South Korean officials, both in charge of facility maintenance, remain in the office.

The expulsion comes on the heels of recent comments by both President Lee and Unification Minister Kim calling for greater reciprocity in North-South relations. The Korea Times has more details on what was said:

The President made it clear that his government would engage in open dialogue with North Korea on the basis of national consensus and in cooperation with the international community

[President Lee's]  remarks were construed as the President’s intention not to implement South Korean-backed big-ticket cross-border business projects until substantial progress is made in the international talks on North Korea’s nuclear weapons program, North Korea experts said.

During the second-inter Korean summit in Pyongyang last October, former President Roh Moo-hyun promised North Korean leader Kim Jong-il a package of business projects using South Korean taxpayers’ money, inviting severe criticism from conservatives.

Lee said, however, existing inter-Korean business programs, such as a South Korean-backed tour of Mount Geumgang in the North and the operation of a joint industrial complex in North Korea’s border city of Gaeseong, should be continued, though there is still “room for improvement.”

Unification Minister Kim Ha-joong backed Lee’s policy line on North Korea demanding more reciprocity from the communist neighbor. Kim pledged the government would control the pace of inter-Korean economic cooperation in line with progress at the six-party nuclear talks involving the two Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia.

After years of abstaining for fear of upsetting the ‘Dear Leader’ up North, the South Korean government will vote in support of a UN resolution on North Korean human rights. The resolution will grant UN special rapporteur on human rights in North Korea Vitit Muntarbhorn another year-long mandate to investigate NK human rights abuses and calls on North Korea to respect human rights. (see this DailyNK interview with Muntarbhorn, a Thai national, from January of this year).

According to Chosun Ilbo’s analysis:

The decision confirms expectations that the new government in Seoul is taking a harder line with the North. A government official, speaking on the customary condition of anonymity, said, “Previous administrations treated the human rights issue of North Korea from a nationalist standpoint. But the new government’s basic policy is to regard human rights as a universal value. The government will show the first example of concrete action in the upcoming UNHRC vote.”

At the same time, Chosun Ilbo released an editorial calling on the National Human Rights Commission of South Korea to take a tougher stand on North Korean human rights violations, noting,

“Article Three of South Korea’s Constitution stipulates North Korea as being part of the territory of the South. That means North Koreans are entitled to the same rights as South Koreans. This is why we accept North Korean defectors. The NHRC needs to know about the inhumane pain suffered by North Koreans and must investigate the difficulties faced by North Korean refugees in China and Southeast Asia. The NHRC must publicize the reality facing North Koreans. If we don’t, then we will have nothing to say to our North Korean brethren after reunification, if they ask us what we had done to help them during such hard times.”

The North’s bienniel Aprils Spring Friendship Art Festival has been cancelled, reports United Press International. Some analysts see this as a sign of further deterioration of North’s economy, currently facing its worst food shortages in years. Most significantly, the Art Festival pays homage to the birthday of Kim Il Sung. Is this an ominous sign?

North Korea’s April Spring Friendship Art Festival will be held once every two years beginning this year, in what some say is a sign of deteriorating economic conditions in the reclusive communist nation, Yonhap news agency reported Sunday.

An aid group in Seoul, South Korea, said last week that North Korea is bracing for worsening food shortages. Moreover, the World Food Program has warned North Korea could face its worst food shortage in years because of last year’s floods and a winter drought.

The South Korean news agency said the North began the spring festival in 1982 on the occasion of the founding leader’s 70th birthday. For the festivities, Pyongyang customarily hosts big-name foreign musicians and art groups.

Last year, the North Korean paid airfares and accommodations for British opera singer Suzannah Clarke and the popular U.S. gospel music group Casting Crowns, Yonhap reported.

This news comes on the heels of reports that food distribution in Pyongyang has ceased (see: “The Beginning of the End: Food Shortages Reach Pyongyang” over at One Free Korea).