North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, the country’s third hereditary ruler, gets really bad press. He is seen as a capricious, overweight youngster, fond of executing his generals and threatening the world with war; ruler of an impoverished country ever on the brink of famine, but equipped with nuclear weapons.
There is some truth in this description, but it does not represent the whole story. He might have a penchant for executions, but Kim is also the first ruler of the dynasty to implement market-oriented reforms.
The oft-repeated cliche of North Korea as a “starving Stalinist country” is outdated — it is neither starving nor Stalinist.
Experts agree that over the past decade, the country has not only recovered from the disastrous famine of the late 1990s, but has also experienced significant economic growth.
Pessimists put North Korea’s annual growth rate at about 1.5 percent, while the optimists believe it might be close to 4 percent.
This growth was brought about, above all, by the emergence of the private economy. While on paper private entrepreneurial activities remain illegal, the law is seldom, if ever, enforced. As a result some North Koreans — the more entrepreneurial, lucky, well-connected and ruthless of them — have recreated the market economy from scratch. Nowadays, there are private mines, truck companies and oil refineries in North Korea.
Admittedly, the owner has to register the enterprise as state property, but this fiction misleads nobody. It is estimated that between 30 and 50 percent of North Korean GDP is now produced by the nation’s private sector.
The presence of the new rich businesspeople (many of whom are women) is much felt in Pyongyang and other major North Korean cities. They account for the majority of patrons in the upmarket restaurants popping up across the city. Although meals cost between US$15 and US$25, about equivalent to the average family’s income for a week or two, these places are always crowded.
Property prices in certain locations are going through the roof. A good apartment in Pyongyang costs about US$100,000 and the best homes go for US$200,000. Over the past 10 years, house prices in North Korea have increased 10-fold. Technically, houses cannot be owned privately so people buy and sell “residence rights” only, but few see this as anything but a convenient legal fiction.
There is a spillover effect: While rich people buy houses and European cars, an increasing number of ordinary North Koreans can afford meat at weekends and pure rice gruel every day.
All these changes began in the late 1990s, but late North Korean leader Kim Jong-il, the father of the current ruler, did not quite know what to make of the growing private economy. Sometimes he initiated crackdowns — always partial and never successful — while other times he grudgingly tolerated the changes. Kim Jong-un is different: He quietly encourages the market economy.
The greatest success of the young dictator has been the reform of agriculture, similar to what the Chinese did in the late 1970s. Fields, while technically state-owned, are given for cultivation to individual households and farmers work for a share of the harvest — between 30 and 70 percent.
The results of the reforms were predictable: The past few years have seen record-level harvests and North Korea is now close to self-sufficiency in food production. This year, a major drought prompted concern, but it now seems that farmers, working not for the party’s glory, but for their own gain, managed to fix the problem, and this year’s harvest is going to be high — perhaps even a record-breaker.
If plans for industrial reforms — decentralization and partial privatization of what is left of state industries — are taken into account, the general picture seems clear: Kim Jong-un wants to apply to his country a model of authoritarian capitalism, a so-called “developmental dictatorship.”
This model worked very well in Taiwan and South Korea and now is producing impressive results in China and Vietnam.
This is good news and observers should not be surprised that recent polls among refugees from North Korea — a group not known for their sympathies toward the regime — indicate that Kim Jong-un is popular with his people.
In China, such changes were accompanied by significant political relaxation. North Korea is different: Kim’s economic reforms, however beneficial, are unlikely to lead to more personal freedoms. If anything, the young leader is more repressive than his father.
North Korea has a problem not faced by China nor Vietnam: the existence of a rich twin state in the south. South Korea’s per capita income is at least 15 times higher than that of North Korea, while its population speaks the same language and is officially part of the same nation, which is supposed to eventually, somehow, unify. To put it in context, the per capita gap between the two German states in the 1980s was merely three-fold.
This gap is the reason why the North Korean state has maintained a level of isolation no other communist regime could think of: Even ownership of a tuneable radio is a crime. However, a relaxation could mean the populace learning about South Korea’s unbelievable prosperity and doing what East Germans did 25 years ago in a rather similar situation.
This threat was well understood by Kim Jong-il and was the major reason why he did not dare to launch reforms. His son made a different decision, but to stay in power, he cannot afford any political relaxation, so economic liberalization is now combined with public executions.
This gives Kim Jong-un the chance to succeed in reforming his country without being overthrown and lynched by a revolutionary mob. Alas, the price for this strategy, which makes perfect sense to the elite, will be paid by common people.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US