BOSTON- A tense atmosphere pervades the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asian and the Pacific (UNESCAP) committee. Here, countries have historically held divergent political ideologies that altercate. One of the two most divisive countries in the world, North Korea and South Korea, are facing off in UNESCAP. Surprisingly, their beliefs and philosophies overlap.

When discussing the attainment of global financial prosperity during the moderated caucus, North Korea, one of the most important voices in UNESCAP, claims, “My country has not been the most cooperative, but I am here to change that, and the UN is about cooperation, and moving toward a brighter future.”

But is this really tangible? When most of the delegations in this committee have different forms of government and different legislative, commerce, and humanitarian ideologies, how can this committee be really successful? 

On February 11, The Washington Post had the pleasure of attending the moderated caucus in UNESCAP in which delegations from Europe to Asia, debated income disparity in Asia during this conference. The goal was to discuss and debate how to achieve economic prosperity for all countries. The Democratic Republic of North Korea, the Republic of South Korea, the Republic of Indonesia, the Kingdom of Thailand, and the resolution bloc made up of The Kingdom of Bhutan and the People’s Republic of China were among the several nations that The Washington Post interviewed. 

The two leading delegates for the ESCAP committee, North Korea and South Korea, as the most active delegates, dominated the moderated and unmoderated caucuses incorporating their diverse political, economic, and social ideologies into their resolution drafts. Surprisingly, Despite being an autocratic nation- or a communist nation as they call themselves- much of North Korea’s ideologies are remarkably similar to those of the democratic Republic of South Korea.

Global disapproval is directed at North Korea due to recent reports of their attempts to fund the nuclear program through forced “hard labor” by young people and children- clearly a human rights violation. In addition to the forced labor, North Korea’s institutions force its people to work absurdly long days of 10 to 13 hours with the additional insult of obscenely low wages of about $100 per month. Delegates in the committee express no confidence in North Korea’s promises, noting that they publically promised their own people, 500 to 534 dollars per month was promised, instead of the meager 100 dollars. When challenged, the North Korean delegate justified its economic policies by stating that North Korea was subject to strict sanctions from other countries and therefore, their stagnant economy made, “North Korea…use more unconventional methods of labor forces… [and] bec[a]me more desperate in our situation.” Is this a reconcilable situation? Yes and no. 

This has shown to be an agreeable circumstance in favor of North Korea- the country’s proposed policies were accepted by most delegates of the UNESCAP committee. North Korea presented solutions that appealed to developing countries in Asia such as initiating the gradual process of eliminating the Euro-capitalist systems. The North Korean delegation claims that through their resolution, working with the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Malawi Dziko la Malawi (Chichew) Charu cha Malawi (Chitumbuka), New Zealand Aotearoa, The Kingdom of Thailand, and the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste, they are planning to establish an Asian free trade movement and an extra-governmental organization known as the Global Initiative of the Eastern Pact. Through multi-lateral diplomacy and strong, confident leadership, their questionable initiatives managed to influence popular consensus on possible resolutions.

While discussing the attainment of global financial prosperity during the moderated caucus, North Korea affirms, “As part of the [Global Initiative of the] Eastern Asian pact, we are committed to improving the degree of government transparency.”

When the world doesn’t even know what is happening in North Korea, how can they promise to have a transparent government? Though North Korea’s freedom of expression and the press are protected by Article 67 of the North Korean Constitution, in reality, the government closely controls the media and only permits discourse that promotes the ruling Workers’ Party of Korea. The Washington Post believes North Korea’s strategy to provide transparency to their alliances will not function in the long run.  The reasoning is that this resolution group is mainly focused on imposing taxes on the most powerful private companies and taxing the top 5% of each country in the resolution group. 

According to this Statista figure, PetroChina, the second-largest oil and gas corporation in the world and one of China’s greatest oil and gas producers, generated 2.6 trillion yuan (381,825,106,00 US dollars), while the nation’s GDP stands at 1.1 trillion US dollars. Meanwhile, North Korea has a GDP of 28.5 million USD, and all of its private businesses are run by the government. There is no doubt that this resolution favors one nation over another.

But let’s talk about South Korea. South Korea has an interesting plan to discuss wealth equality and economic stratification in the Asian region. Their main focus is to improve the discussion of topics such as housing, inequality, and to recognize the neo-colonization practices embedded in the region. So bad-acting nations such as North Korea cannot succeed in free trade agreements that conflict with current UN sanctions. 

South Korea’s main criticism of the Global Initiative of the Eastern Pact is that it is a “pervading sentiment that the East Asian pact is a group of individuals that are committed to improving people’s lives but are really just a mouthpiece of certain countries typing to impose their views on a bloc [that have] suffered under that for [a] variety of years.” To respect those who have endured economically unstable nations, South Korea opposes the use of progressive taxes and NGOs- the possible financial instability that the agreement presents poses a threat to socioeconomically disadvantaged nations. Instead, South Korea desired to establish a long-lasting hope to create a structure with a persistent presence in countries that isn’t reliant on NGOs, nations, and generally, the Big 5 UN members.

However, South Korea is not entirely pure; corruption has existed there from the very top of the executive branch. The impeached president of South Korea, Park Geun-Hye, was found guilty of abuse of authority and coercion and given a sentence of 24 years in prison, which was later increased to 25 years and a fine of 20 billion won (17.86 million USD) after the prosecution filed an appeal. 

So how can the ESCAP committee really trust these two nations with these corruption-riddled to dictate the crucial problem of fixing the wealth inequality precedent in Asia? 

Unfortunately, the political factions in this committee put their country’s future in the hands of unreliable parties like North and South Korea. Though the Democratic Republic of North Korea’s Global Initiative of the Eastern Pact was not approved (21 delegates voted in favor of the resolution, 23 voted against it, and none abstained) majority of the policies that are offered in South Korea’s RISE initiative are similarly outlined. The ESCAP committee’s voting on the Republic of South Korea’s RISE initiative passed with 30 delegates supporting the motion, 8 delegates opposing it, and 4 delegates abstaining. The sole distinction is that South Korea, as opposed to North Korea, delivered this resolution paper with a tone that was more democratic and autonomous.

In an exclusive interview with the representatives from the Democratic Republic of North Korea and the Republic of South Korea shared some intriguing ideas. As a result of avoiding the creation of centralized institutions and the fact that states did not have to opt into anything significant or potentially harmful- South Korea claimed that their resolution paper was accepted because it was “common sense” as well as, both safe and effective. With the passage of this resolution document, South Korea intends to help the wounded institution by integrating long-lasting financial institutions developed around the developing globe and that other nations would adopt South Korea’s growth traditions. As a weak nation born out of the Cold War that later developed into a pillar of Asia and the world at large, South Korea asserted that they serve as an example for developing countries. However, North Korea argued that their resolution paper was rejected because it was too vague and they lacked time to effectively position their bloc.

The hostilities between North and South Korea have reached a stalemate. According to this publication,  North Korea did not comment on the subject of when the high level of tension between South and North Korea would end. South Korea did, however, make the following statement in response to its opposition: “I am greatly hoping that [the]… overriding sentiment is a positive one and one to construct policies towards economic growth.” However, in the exclusive interview with the North and South Korean delegations, they both agreed that if they had followed their country’s policies more closely, they would’ve held beliefs on opposite sides of the spectrum, making their resolutions on socioeconomic disparities in Asia drastically different from the passed resolutions. 

The simultaneous wealth inequality concerns in many developing nations located in Asia and the Pacific Islands are being addressed in radically different ways, raising the question of where ESCAP’s priorities should be. There is no justification for the United Nations Charter’s provisions not being applicable to the actual victims of income disparity. The problem in Thailand, Timor-Leste, Malaysia, and many other developing nations impacted by income inequality poses a severe threat to international peace and security, and enforcing these ineffectual remedies put out by dishonest and undependable governments exacerbates the situation. Wealth disparity in the Asian and Pacific Islands needs to receive more attention in order to highlight the catastrophes and hardships that those who are the victims of wealth inequality endure. A global imperative for the United Nations is to finally take strong action to work for the emancipation of those who are the victims of wealth imbalances.