North Korean Economy Watch

According to previous reports, Beijing’s border control policies have stiffened up in preparation for the 2008 Olympics.  The Daily NK reports these policies are adversely affecting North Koreans visiting family and conducting business in Jilin.

The Daily NK claims that North Koreans pay appx. US$400-500 in bribes and processing fees to obtain a passport, exit visa, and Chinese entrance visa. (The article does not explain how these prices break down, although it would be interesting to know how much Beijing charges North Koreans for various visas.)  China typically issues North Koreans family visit visas which are valid for three months, but if a North Korean visitor can secure a residence and employment, this can be easily extended for up to a year.  As a result, many North Koreans stay with family for the full year and try to earn some money to take home.

Because of the Olympics, Beijing is now apparently rejecting all family visit visa extensions and stepping up patrols for illegal “visitors.”  This means the North Koreans who paid hefty sums to be in China have to go underground if they wish to stay in the PRC.  They will also face additional hardship in recovering “travel costs.”  Additionally, many North Koreans who are married to Chinese face greater chances of being deported.

Interestingly, this policy was not ordered by local organizations but by the Jilin Provincial Communist Party.

Read the full article here:
China Rounds Up Defectors in Preparation for the Olympics
Daily NK
Lee Sung Jin
7/26/2008

Brendan Carr over at Korea Law Blog dug up some information on law firms operating in the DPRK.  All the information he posts is worth reading, but here are some highlights:

[T]he prospect of working as a foreign lawyer in Pyongyang has been on my list since I’ve been a lawyer.

Michael Hay, a foreign legal consultant in Seoul since 1990, actually did this—striking out from “Big Four” firm Bae, Kim, & Lee in 2001 [domain lapsed] to focus on being a full-time North Korea consultant. He established KoreaStrategic Inc. as a consultancy (its domain lapsed in June 2006, though), then with a splash announced the formation of Hay, Kalb & Associates as the first foreign/North Korean joint venture law firm in Pyongyang. The Hay, Kalb website, too, disappeared sometime in 2005, and I lost touch with Mike Hay around the same time. I remain curious to know about his adventure up North; I’m sure it’s been fascinating. However, he was always extremely tight-lipped about what he was doing there. Other than that he was focusing on North Korea “full-time, all the time” it was hard to get any specifics out of him.

There are two other law firms advertising their services and office presence in North Korea: Italy’s Birindelli e Associati (now Chiomenti after being acquired) and Singapore’s Kelvin Chia Partnership. 

But today I found that the International Financial Law Review’s IFLR Legalwire, to which I hadn’t previously subscribed, recently (May 2008) reported on Birindelli partner Sara Marchetta’s experiences in Pyongyang. It’s fascinating stuff, published in two parts—go read Part 1 and Part 2. The article gave the impression that Hay, Kalb was still trading, which is promising, but Marchetta says that Birindelli kept no expatriate lawyer there year-round, because there were only four or five clients a year needing legal services, mostly in resource-extraction and processing ventures.

From Marchetta’s interview, I thought the following observations were worth noting:

Obtaining copies of laws: 

The first issue is looking for legal resources  – the law- as it is extremely complicated to get them.  Even if you are a law firm and have people who are well-connected, its still a very long process to get a copy of a law.  Even if the law has already been enacted and should be public, you still need special permission.  If the law has not yet officially been translated into English, then you need to obtain special permission to get it and translate it.

The second thing is that the intended implementation of the law in a western sense does not exist.  Especially when you go out of Pyongyang and Kaesong [North Korea’s special economic zone], everything is pretty much left up to political decision: whether you can stay here or there, what you do and cannot do…

Just to give you an example: in terms of a corporate tax, you go to a place, make an investment and you pay a corporate tax even if you don’t profit.  It’s sort of a tax for being there.  Corporate tax ends up being interpreted as a presence tax , which is paid independently of whether you make profits or not.  In a few cases, we did find this type of interpretation, which is obviously extremely bizarre.    So it is really a matter of general legal culture – which is totally lacking – and education of the administrative middle to low levels.

Does [this environment] hinder getting things done?  Yes and no. Yes in the sense that getting a deal done takes more time because you do not have all of the information available at the beginning.  No in the sense that once there is the intention of getting the deal done, there is a lot of facilitation from the bureaucratic and governmental point of view.  If they say yes, its basically yes and it will happen.

How big is your office in Pyongyang:

It is currently staffed with two people.  We have no expatriates.  It is a joint venture as we are there in cooperation with a DPRK government entity called the Korean Justice Committee [KJC].  It is equivalent to the Chinese Ministry of Justice.

Are your lawyers at the office North Koreans?

Yes, they are North Korean lawyers. One of them is a pure lawyer, the other one is more someone who is well-connected in the government and has also PR and English capabilities.  One side has the legal knowledge, and on the other side, fluent in English that they use to work with foreigners.

Does your JV status with the KJC give you an advantage over foreign firms?

As a matter of fact, from an operational point of view: yes.  From the client’s point of view, I don’t know.  I have no idea.  I don’t think this is something that is hindering the expansion of our client base in Pyongyang, but I am not sure if it enhancing it.

What types of clients do you serve?

We serve companies looking at setting up a presence in the DPRK.  These are large companies that deal with natural resources, like mining or consumer goods, and most of them have already a presence in China.

What are teh key sectors of Work?

Well we deal with mining projects.  This means that yo go there, you test the product and if it’s okay then you give the technology to be extracted in a proper way.  You do part of the processing of the mineral and export it.  This is one deal.  On the other side, before advising on an investment we advise our clients on precessing contracts.  Obviously this can be done not just for mining, but for shoes, clothes, and any other product that can be exported.  The deal structure is basically these two.

Looking forward, is there enough going on to fairly classify the DPRK as an “emerging market”?

Not in terms of a domestic market.  I don’t think that the domestic market is going to develop very much, but the DPRK is a good place for processing contracts.  I mean, you send raw materials and they send back the finished product.  There is also a strong market for natural resources and low-to-medium technology projects.  There, you can produce basic chemicals, basic pharmaceutical products and some consumer goods.  The Chinese are doing clothing here, doing shoes, and a lot of other things.

Do you predict enough work growth to expand?

Not for the time being for a number of reasons.  One, we do not see an increase in DPRK-related work.  We have two, three, four, maximum five clients a year and that’s basically it.  So this is the main reason.  Then you have always the political issue.  It’s always there.  The political wind is really swinging a lot and it changes by the season and is very much affected by the situation of the six-party talks.  So for the time being, we are looking at what is happening and we are doing what we can do, but we do not have plans to enlarge our presence in the DPRK for the time being.

From Dr. Leonid Petrov in the Asia Times:

Russia cooperation with North Korea
Since the early 2000s, overall relations between Russia and the DPRK have been improving. The DPRK’s importation of refined oil from Russia saw its first increase in 2002-2003 (from $20 million to $96 million) and was caused by the beginning of the US-DPRK nuclear confrontation and the subsequent demise of the international Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization project that was to construct a light water reactor nuclear power plant in North Korea.

During 2004-2005, petroleum trade between Russia and North Korea grew from $105 million to $172.3 million. Until the six-party talks produced their first results, in the list of Russia’s exports to the DPRK, oil products dominated at 63%. Rampant corruption in both countries also let a trickle of Russian oil to be smuggled to North Korea unaccounted for.

In 2006, Russia was the DPRK’s third-largest trading partner after China and South Korea and absorbed 9% of the total $3.18 billion spent by the North on imports (approximately $286 million). The Kremlin’s approval of international sanctions against the former communist ally was accompanied by the curtailment of trade with the North. At the time of North Korea’s nuclear test in October 2006, Russia’s trade statistics showed that exports of petroleum had dropped 91.1% compared to the same period of the previous year.

The pragmatic mood in bilateral relations prevails, and these days Russia delivers oil and food to North Korea only in accordance with its obligations associated with progress at the six-party talks. This year, Russia has already delivered 100,000 tonnes of fuel oil to the DPRK in two batches and, according to Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexei Borodavkin, a top Russian envoy to the six-party talks, will deliver another 100,000 tonnes by October 2008. In June, the Russian government announced it would provide 2,860 tonnes of flour to the DPRK. According to an official KCNA news agency report, this food aid arrived at the border city of Sinuiju in the DPRK’s northern Pyongan province in early July.

Recently, for the first time in the post-Soviet era, North Korea saw a major Russian investment. In the city of Pyeongseong, the Russian auto plant KamAZ opened its first assembly line, specializing in the production of medium-size trucks named “Taebaeksan-96”. Although less than 50 trucks were assembled in 2007, this cooperation became an important milestone in the development of bilateral relations. While the project doesn’t violate United Nations sanctions on North Korea, it shows Moscow’s drive to expand its influence in the country. Ironically, the more trucks assembled the heavier North Korea’s dependence on imported fuel, engine oils and other petrochemical products.

The importance of the DPRK’s Rajin-Seonbong special economic zone to Russia’s national interests continues to grow. The state-run monopoly OAO Russian Railways is currently upgrading its railway connections with North Korea in Khasan-Tumangang, investing at least 1.75 billion roubles (US$72 million) into this project, and plans to participate in an ambitious plan to rebuild a trans-Korean railway. By connecting Rajin (and the rest of northern Korea) to its Trans-Siberian railroad, Russia hopes to benefit form the transit of South Korean and Japanese cargo which could be sent via its territory to Central Asian and European markets. Pyongyang seems to endorse these plans and other Russian initiatives, but does not commit any financial resources.

Eighty percent of overall bilateral economic trade between Russia and North Korea consists of cooperation, barter and investment-in-kind between the regional areas. The most active Russian regions trading with the DPRK are Eastern Siberia and the Far East. Maritime province (Primorsky Krai) itself exports to North Korea more than $4 million worth of refined oil per year. There are no oil fields in Maritime province and oil has to be borrowed through a chain of federal bureaucratic structures from the oil-rich areas of Eastern Siberia. Instead of money, the local governments agree to receive the labor of North Korean workers.

North Korean laborers in Siberia and the Far East were common under the Soviet system and they are still visibly present. In 2004, the Russian Federal Immigration Service issued 14,000 visas for foreign laborers, of whom North Koreans numbered 3,320 in 2005 and 5,000 in 2006. Since the DPRK has no other way to pay in goods or services, its government started paying for oil imported from Russia by dispatching thousands of laborers at zero cost. Following strong demand from local companies, just in 2006 regional authorities of Primorsky Krai agreed to issue an extra 5,000 working visas to North Koreans. This openness is contrary to local government policy that normally restricts the entry of labor from China.

DPRK citizens are sent to Russia to work as woodcutters and builders but some have also managed to find work in the agricultural and marine industry. Through the presence of these laborers, Russia has enjoyed a partial repayment of the DPRK’s post-Soviet debt through North Korean workers being contracted to work in mines and lumber mills in Russia’s Far East.

The wages they are able to make in Russia are far greater than what they would make at home. However, the foreign worker quota is set not by provincial governments but by Moscow, which often tries to put a stop to these programs due to the complexity of the matter. Part of this opposition stems from the fact that the North Korean workers in Russia still fall under DPRK laws and, therefore, are subject to intrusive supervision.

Among the most difficult but negotiable issues in the way of Russia-North Korea cooperation remains the problem of external debt. During the Soviet era, the DPRK incurred a debt of approximately $8 billion, which Pyongyang still owes to Moscow but cannot repay. This debt remains a stumbling block in most negotiations on new aid and development programs. However, this debt can potentially make trilateral Russian-Korean relations closer and stronger.

In January 1991, soon after the opening of diplomatic relations with South Korea, Moscow received $3 billion from Seoul in the form of a three-year loan. The collapse of the Soviet Union left this loan largely unpaid. The new Russian government in the 1990s provided South Korea with armaments worth $150 million to be counted as payment in kind for the remaining debt. In 2003, after bilateral negotiations on this issue were completed, part of this Russian debt was canceled and the remainder was rescheduled to be paid over the next 23 years.

Taking into account its own debts to the South, Russia could easily write off a significant portion of North Korean debt. To resolve this question, a certain agreement between all three parties is needed. To engage in a mutual and reciprocal round of debt cancelation, Russia might choose to see the North and the South as one country. Such an agreement would have unblocked the road for broader cooperation between Russia and the two Koreas, and simplified Russia’s energy cooperation with China and Japan.

The full article is worth reading here:
Russia is key to North Korea’s plight
Asia Times
Leonid Petrov
7/24/2008

Institute for Far East Studies (IFES)
NK Brief No. 08-7-22-1
7/22/2008

On July 18, the North Korean Cabinet publication, “Democratic Choson’, revealed that the cabinet had recently adopted the ‘Border Bridge Trade Complex Management Activities Provision’.

According to the newspaper, the provision spells out to whom the rules and regulations must be applied regarding the orders and management activities of the border bridge trade complex. In addition, “by being adopted, the provision firmly creates regulations on foreign economic activities that cross over border bridges and has prepared the legal support for unceasing improvements of the border bridge trade complex’s management activities.”

North Korea relies on border trade with Chinese areas such as the city of Dandong, in Liaoning Province, and the Yanbian Korean Autonomous Prefecture, as cross-border trade shot up to over 200 million USD last year.

From Daily Business News Mongolia:

At the submission of the Government of Mongolia, the Parliament ratified Mongolia-North Korea Inter-governmental Agreement on exchanging work forces on the 20^th of July, 2007. According to the Agreement, Ministry of Social Welfare and Labor of Mongolia is to negotiate in the near future with Foreign Trade Ministry on realizing the agreement and exchange of work force, especially number and need of work force, the minimum wage /by USD/, labor conditions /normal and abnormal/, social welfare /social insurance/ and therefore those interested in employing North Korean wok force in 2009 should formulate their TORs accurately as well as submit them to the MSWL within 23 July. Currently orders should be submitted on the basis of position vacancy since number of workers is not specified yet.

Read more here.

UPDATE 2: According to the Associated Press:

[A South Korean] NIS official, who asked not be named, citing an internal policy, told The Associated Press that China had no plans to close all bridge links with North Korea “out of concerns of diplomatic friction with North Korea.”

The official also said China would not ask all North Koreans in China to leave, saying that Beijing plans to crackdown on North Koreans who illegally stay in China and Beijing plans to restrict renewing visas for North Koreans. 

UPDATE 1:  According to the Associated Press, China plans to close all the bridges to the DPRK during the Olympics, starting next month.  This will have a devastating impact on trade with Sinuiju, Manpo, Hyesan, Hoeryong, and many other trading hubs along the Chinese border.

ORIGINAL POST: According to an interesting article in Bloomberg (thanks to reader) China is acting to reduce the chances that North Korea issues will interfere with coverage of the Olympic games in Beijing this summer.

According to the article:

China asked some North Korean work units to leave the country or move their business operations during the Olympic Games, according to documentation from the North Korean embassy obtained by Bloomberg News.

Citing security issues, China asked North Koreans, except trade representatives and government-dispatched personnel, to leave by July 31 and not return until the end of September, the Korean-language statement said. The embassy in Beijing gave the order to North Koreans in a July 11 directive, according to a copy of the document obtained by Bloomberg News.

The order took effect from July 13 and those who delay departure would be fined or not allowed to reenter China, according to the document. Workers scheduled for dispatch to China from July 1 should delay their departure until Sept. 25, it said.

and…

It isn’t clear how authoritative the directive is. Five North Korean businessmen contacted by Bloomberg news provided different departure dates, or said they were not affected by the directive. The people refused to be identified in print, citing possible recriminations.

A press attaché at the Chinese embassy in Tokyo who declined to give his name said he wasn’t aware of the directive and that there would be no way to confirm its existence.

Read the articles here:
China asks some North Koreans to leave ahead of Olympics
Bloomberg
Hideko Takayama
7/15/2008

Report: China to shut down all bridges linked to NKorea during Olympics
Associated Press
7/21/2008

China to step up inspections at border with North Korea during Olympics to stop migrants
Associated Press
Kwang-Tae Kim
7/22/2008

Netherlands Centrum voor Handelsbevordering
27 September – 4 October 2008  
View the information flyer with more information here: it-tour_dprk.pdf

For the past decades, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) also known as North-Korea has been one of the most isolated countries in the world. Until recently, foreign companies could hardly enter this country. Inspired by the economic successes of its neighbouring country China, North-Korea has since a few years opened its doors for foreign enterprises. The DPRK established several free trade zones to attract foreign investors. In 2002 North Korea started to experiment with the Kaesong Industrial Region, near the South-Korean border. Moreover, other areas were designated as Special Administrative Regions, such as Sinŭiju near the border with China.
 
Currently, China and South-Korea are the most important trade partners of North-Korea; their mutual trade is growing fast. Also for European companies there are many opportunities to trade with North-Korea. During the recent seminar: ‘Doing Business with North-Korea’ (The Hague, 30 May) the representative from North-Korea highlighted that there are business opportunities in several fields, including Textile Industry, Shipbuilding, Agro Business, Logistics and Information Technology.

DPRK finds itself at the beginning of a new era of openness. In North-Korea there is a need for many foreign products and investments. The Chamber of Commerce Amsterdam, GPI Consultancy and the Netherlands Council for Trade Promotion are organizing an economic mission to investigate the business opportunities for foreign companies in this country. This unique economic mission to North-Korea will take place from 27 September to 4 October 2008. Our partner in North-Korea is the Pyongyang Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Renze Hasper, Member of the Board of the Chamber of Commerce Amsterdam, will be the mission leader of this economic mission. 
 
The program includes individual matchmaking, company visits, network receptions and dinners. Furthermore, a visit is being planned tot the Kaesong Industrial Region.

GPI Consultancy is responsable for the IT-program of the mission. As an example, the program for the IT-delegates has been attached; they will visit firms in Pyongyang in the field of software development, animation, cartoons, computer games and BPO (Business Process Outsourcing). Similar matchmaking visits will be arranged for delegates from other business sectors.
  
The mission is open for participants from other countries as well.
If you are interested in joining this trade mission, please contact:

Paul Tjia
GPI Consultancy
P.O. Box 26151,
3002 ED Rotterdam,
The Netherlands
E-mail: paul@gpic.nl
tel: +31-10-4254172 
fax: +31-10-4254317
Website: www.gpic.nl 

Some enterprising Swedes are attempting to manufacture and export jeans from North Korea.  As far as western countries go, Sweden has been one of the leaders in commercial interaction with the DPRK.  Although, according to Erik Cornell, they were frequently burned. 

The project, Noko Jeans, would be the first jeans manufacturer in North Korea.  Here is some info from their website:

Noko Jeans – jeans from North Korea

Noko Jeans began with an e-mail sent to North Korea, fueled by the enthusiasim of being able to contact the country directly. We thought Noko Jeans would end there, before it even began. It didn’t. Instead, and despite our lack of experience in international trading, it swiftly grew to a much more serious level.

Initiated and managed by three Swedes with a background in advertising and PR, Noko Jeans is our attempt to approach and get closer to North Korea, and it is our attempt to answer the question: is it possible to do what no one has ever done before? Is it possible to design, produce and import jeans from North Korea?

Greetings from North Korea!

After months of research, loads of headache and, lastly, several meetings with North Korean government representatives, we are finally allowed into the country. As official visitors, and by invitation of the state. Take off: 27th of July.

We are just now beginning to sense that this experiment actually might come true. Please stay with us as we tell you the unique process – and story – that is Noko Jeans.

Institute for Far Eastern Studies (IFES) 
NK Brief No. 08-6-26-1
6/26/2008

One kilogram of rice in North Korea, the price of which shot up to as much as 4,500 DPRK won last month, has reportedly fallen in price this month by up to 2000 won.

According to a North Korean source, on June 10, one kilogram of rice was selling for between 2,500 & [] 2,700 across the country, quoting prices from cities such as Horyong and Chongjin (North Hamgyong Province), Wonsan (Kangwon Province), Sinuiju (North Pyongan Province), Kangye (Changang Province), Kangso (South Pyongan Province), and Haeju (South Hwangae Province). The source explained, “as soon as rice prices skyrocketed, smuggling in the border region picked up and permission to export 100,000 tons [of grain] came from the Chinese government, and as this occurred, the import food eased a little.”

The source also said that spreading news of food aid from the United States was also an important factor in the falling grain prices.

However, the source stressed, “While the price is falling, food prices are still more than three times what they were last year, so citizens with no money have a hard time feeding themselves…in agricultural regions with no money, famine is spreading regardless of falling grain prices.”

It was also reported that on June 11, a shipment of corn arrived at Chongjin Port (North Hamgyong Province) and distribution to workers has begun, while on the 12th, polished rice, corn, and other grains entered Heungnam Port (South Hamgyong Province) was distribution began the next day. Corn was priced at 800 won per kilogram, easier to purchase than the 1,200 & [] 1,300 won prices found in markets, but more than two times as expensive as market prices at this time last year.

Good Friends, an organization working to aid North Korean people, reported in its newsletter, “Between the end of June and beginning of July, workers in Pyongyang will receive 2 kg of polished rice, 7 kg of milled corn, and 5kg of Southeast Asian rice, for a total of 14 kilograms of rations per person…in the areas surrounding Pyongyang many people cannot work due to starvation,” and they had a hard time swallowing news of these rations.

UPDATE 3 (2013-3-15): Michael Rank offers more information on the DPRK – Taiwan nuclear waste deal:

North Korean-Taiwan nuclear waste deal thwarted over export permit
By Michael Rank

A Taiwanese report says one reason the North Korean nuclear waste deal fell through was that Taipower didn’t obtain an export permit for the waste from the Taiwanese Atomic Energy Council (AEC).

It also says that Taipower claims no final deal was ever signed, so there is no question of the agreement being violated. It quotes Taipower official Huang Tien-huang as saying the North Koreans blocked them from viewing the processing site at Phyongsan (Pyeongsan, 평산, 平山), while the AEC also had procedural problems with the North Koreans, leading it to refuse an export permit.

North Korea has hired a (presumably Taiwanese) lawyer, Tsai Hui-ling, to plead its case, and is claiming NT$300 million (US$10 million) compensation. Tsai can be seen on this English-language video clip.

A PRC report quoting Taiwanese reports says the first stage of the deal worth US$75.66 million envisaged shipping 60,000 barrels of nuclear waste, and a further 14,000 barrels in the second stage, with a total value of $150 million and that the North Koreans were after the deal as a source of foreign exchange at the height of the famine. There have been ten rounds of negotiations to try to resolve the dispute, the report says, adding that Taiwan decided in 1999 that it would process the waste domestically.

As I reported in 2008, North Korea signed a deal with a Chinese company to recycle industrial waste that is so polluted that other countries have refused to handle it.

A slightly fuller Chinese report than the one I cited earlier names the Chinese company involved as Dalian-based Huatai Recycling Resources Co Ltd and says it has close links with the North Korean National Defence Commission, foreign ministry, environment ministry and foreign trade ministry.

It also says the North Koreans have four large recycling sites at Sinuiju and Nampo, two for lead batteries and two for electronic goods, and that they are able to recycle a wide array of equipment, from plastics to refrigerators as well as computers, phones and scanners, including goods that are banned for recycling in China.

It is not clear if the Chinese-North Korean deal was actually implemented.

UPDATE 2 (2013-3-2): The DPRK intends to sue Taiwan for breach of contract in its failure to begin the Taiwan – DPRK waste management project. According to the China Post (Taiwan):

North Korea is poised to sue Taiwan Power Co. (台電) for damages of NT$300 million, over an alleged breach of a contract signed more than 16 years ago, according to lawyers working on Pyongyang’s behalf.
Litigation will begin March 4, North Korea’s legal counsel said.

In 1996, Taipower allegedly committed to a contract with North Korea in which nuclear waste from Taiwan would be shipped and stored in the isolated communist nation, according to reports.

However, the plans were halted due to North Korea’s then-inadequate waste storage facilities and the sudden eruption of international uproar over the scheme, with Taiwan paying US$8.72 million to preserve a five-year option period in 1998, according to the lawyers, who added that North Korea continued to invest in its waste storage facilities under the assumption that the deal would be completed.

After over 10 rounds of negotiation over the past 15 years, North Korea is now accusing Taipower of complacency and negligence, citing a lack of communication and effort to fulfill the agreed-upon obligations.

In light of North Korea’s unexpected litigation, Taipower has said that such a dated case needs a comprehensive internal review before a response can be formulated.

The lawsuit marks a surprising development in the ongoing row over the proposed plan to construct a fourth nuclear power plant in Taiwan, as the ruling and opposition parties wrestle over the terms of the proposed referendum, which would decide the fate of the plant.

UPDATE 1 (2009-1-8): A Taiwanese official is under investigation for activities related to the Taiwan – DPRK waste management deal. According to the AFP (via Singapore’s Straits Times):

The Apple Daily reported on Thursday that prosecutors had begun investigating claims that Chen might have pocketed 300 million Taiwan dollars of financial aid in 2004 and 2005 in exchange for North Korea handling the island’s nuclear wastes.

The daily, which did not name its sources, alleged the cash would be given to a high-ranking North Korean official through a contact who promised to help Taipei set up a ‘direct communication channel’ with Mr Kim Jong-Il’s regime.

However, Taiwan did not establish any form of contact with North Korea nor send its nuclear waste to the communist state after the foreign ministry paid the money, the report said.

Self-ruled Taiwan is formally recognised by only 23 countries and does not have diplomatic ties with North Korea.

Read the full story here:
Funds were for N.Korea
AFP via Straits Times
1/8/2009

ORIGINAL POST (2008-6-30): According to Michael Rank in the Telegraph:

North Korea is planning to recycle waste that is so polluted other countries refuse to handle it.

Through a Chinese-language website (link here) the country is seeking supplies of plastic and electronic waste which “can be processed in [a North Korean port] but which other countries and territories are restricted from dealing in”, reflecting the country’s dire economic plight and its scant regard for international norms.

Isolated and desperately poor, North Korea is a beginner so far as toxic waste is concerned, although in 1996 it signed a deal with Taiwan to dispose of its nuclear waste from atomic power plants.

South Korea reacted furiously to the deal and Taiwan was eventually forced to back down and cancel the agreement.

North Korea also offered to recycle the North Sea Brent Spar oil storage platform, which Royal Dutch Shell had proposed dumping in the deep Atlantic in 1995.

This caused an environmental furore, with Greenpeace claiming that the structure was full of oil and burying it at sea would result in serious pollution.

An enterprising young North Korean official in London unexpectedly offered to come to the rescue, suggesting that his country could dispose of the structure, saving Shell and the British government from further embarrassment.

The offer was turned down as Shell didn’t want to be seen turning to a regime as dubious as North Korea, but Greenpeace’s own reputation took a serious knock when it was forced to admit that it had enormously over-estimated the amount of oil remaining in Brent Spar’s storage tanks.

North Korea’s waste recycling plans are part of a much bigger, £5 million ($10 million) project to enlarge a port on its west coast and develop it into an export base including a duty-free zone.

“There are no limits, any business taking advantage of [North] Korea’s low labour costs for intensive processing is welcome,” the website states.

Although the port is not named, it is almost certainly Nampo, which is close to the capital and is the largest harbour on North Korea’s west coast. The development covers 30,000 square metres (320,000 square feet) and is “expandable”.

The port currently accepts vessels of up to 10,000 tonnes but the plan is to increase this to 50,000 tonnes.

The project is pitched at Chinese companies, and interested parties are asked to contact a firm in the Chinese city of Dandong on the North Korean border.

A deal with China would help to counterbalance a recent agreement with state-owned Russian Railways to build a £50 million ($100million) container terminal on North Korea’s east coast as part of a £1.5 billion ($3 billion) plan to create a rail corridor linking South Korea with Europe via North Korea and Russia.

Russian Railways wants to turn the port of Rajin into a hub capable of handling 320,000 containers a year for shipment from South Korea to Europe.

Russia and China have fought bitterly over rights to refurbish Rajin. A few years ago China appeared to have won out when a 50-year deal was announced with the Chinese border city of Hunchun, but this came to nought and Russia was the ultimate winner in the battle to revitalise the north-eastern port and ultimately link it with Europe.

The original source, a Chinese language website, is here.

To read the full story click here:
North Korea in bid to recycle toxic waste
Telegraph
Michael Rank
6/30/2008