‘Korea Aid’, nonsensical development cooperation and diplomacy must be repealed 

It is nothing but a shameful and disposable event disregarding the purpose of the ODA and international convention.

On June 1st, President Park Geun-hye finished her visit to three African nations. According to the press release, a mobile development cooperation project ‘Korea Aid’ was launched in Ethiopia, Uganda and Kenya as a result of the visit. The press reported that a vehicle equipped with medical devices, food and audio-visual system will be visiting different villages to provide necessary services. However, it seems obvious that the project has been improvised because of the visit of the president. It is simply a onetime event that ignores not only the intention of the ODA but also the principles and the efforts of the international society to increase the effectiveness of foreign aids. The opinions and the demands of local residents were, without doubt, neglected. It is such a shame on Korean ODA, and thus, this nonsensical development cooperation project ‘Korea Aid’ must be repealed right away.   

The health sector of Korea Aid for girls, women of childbearing age, and maternity claims that it will provide ultrasound pictures. The fact that the maternal and neonatal mortality of African region was mentioned as the third goal of the SDGs of the international society demonstrates that seriousness of this problem. Then, should providing baby pictures be considered the urgent priority in this region? Most of the people in African countries use local health clinics and have very little faith in medical services provided by foreigners. Hence, supporting local clinics to function properly would be the more sustainable way to provide health care services to the African residents. Because the locals cannot rely on irregular mobile services, having residing health care providers is also essential. However, Korea Aid does not consider any of these facts. This haphazard project would not have been created if the opinions of the residents and the experts were heard, and there was some understanding on development cooperation standards authorized by the international society.

There is also a lot of doubt on the purpose and the effectiveness of K-Meal, the food sector of Korea Aid. Its purpose is to improve the nutritional state of the underprivileged by providing Korean dishes such as two kinds of rice products and Bibimbap. First of all, K-Meal’s ambition to improve the nutritional state using these meals is absurd and unachievable. In addition, it completely ignores the local culinary culture whose main dishes are consisted of different types of rice and food from those used the Korean cuisine. Therefore, this is nothing but a onetime event with no respect to which of necessary nutrition the locals lack, whether there is a way to supplement it with local ingredients, whether involved governments plan to provide support.  Simply introducing and tasting Korean food should not be disguised as a project to improve the nutritional state of the local residents.

What about the cultural projects run by the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism? Their main programs are showing health education movies and introducing Korean culture with a single truck. Episodes in health, sanitation and gender sensitive movies are unrelated to the current situation of African girls. For example, the episode about educating girls who refuse to go to school does not reflect the lack of opportunities for African girls to be educated because of house chores, early marriage, and pregnancy. Apart from these “educational” videos, they plan to show video clips about Korean culture, tourism, national image, Pyeongchang Winter Olympic, K-pop music video and Korean movies in the truck. Samulnori, Taekwondo and B-boy performances could also be added later. None of these projects can possibly considered a development cooperation project. Shamefully, it reveals that the government, which treats ODA as a mean of promoting Korean wave, has a low awareness level regarding global cooperation projects. 

As stated above, Korea Aid is consisted of projects, which fail to take local conditions into account and are far below international standards because they are planned hastily to show off the president’s visit to Africa. Korea Aid is not mentioned anywhere in the 2016 and the 2017 General Plan of ODA reviewed by the Korean Official Development Assistance Council under the Prime Minister’s Office. Lousy plans were unavoidable, given that the Blue House has demanded ministries ignorant of the ODA to propose ODA projects.    

The international society has been reconsidering hardware centered development cooperation such as buildings, facilities and equipment, and is now giving a priority to effectiveness, responsibility and sustainability of the development plans. It has already been long since the international aid switched its attention to increasing the capability and the ownership of recipients by focusing on supporting efforts of recipients that are trying to enhance their system and providing aid to strengthen the software. Korea Aid is not only digressing away from the global trend of raising the quality of the aid but also destroying the efforts and the outcomes to improve the Korean ODA system accordingly to the standards and the recommendations agreed in the international society. ODA should not be misused for unpredictable and shameful events, and Korea Aid must instantaneously be repealed.   
 

경찰청-KOICA, ‘필리핀 경찰 수사역량 강화사업’ 재검토해야

필리핀 경찰의 부패와 인권 탄압 심각한 수준

KOICA 혁신과제에 따라 ‘평화, 인권, 민주주의 ODA’ 추진해야

어제(5/28) 필리핀을 방문한 이철성 경찰청장이 오늘 ‘한국형 순찰 차량 130대 전수 기념식’ 행사에 참석한다. 경찰청이 ‘치안한류’ 명목으로 한국국제협력단(KOICA)과 협력하여 진행하고 있는 총 660억 불 규모의 ‘필리핀 경찰 수사역량 강화사업’의 일환으로 진행되는 행사이다. 그러나 필리핀 안팎에서 문제제기가 이어지고 있는 필리핀 경찰의 심각한 부패와 인권 탄압 실태를 고려할 때, 경찰청과 KOICA는 ‘필리핀 경찰 수사역량 강화사업’이 필리핀의 인권과 민주주의에 악영향을 끼치지 않을지 충분히 검토하고, 필요하다면 사업 자체를 재고해야 한다. 

물론 필리핀의 열악한 치안환경은 오랫동안 문제가 되어왔다. 한국인 피살도 빈번하게 발생하여 치안환경 개선이 필요한 것은 사실이다. 그러나 현지 언론은 필리핀 정부 기관 중 경찰과 군대가 가장 부패했다고 평가하고 있으며 경찰이 살인, 납치, 금품갈취, 마약 등 강력사건에 연루되는 경우도 빈번하다고 밝히고 있다. 뿐만 아니라 필리핀 경찰의 공권력 남용에 의한 인권 탄압 역시 심각한 상황이다. 취임 직후 ‘마약과의 전쟁’을 선포한 두테르테 대통령은 경찰에 즉결 처형 권한을 부여했고, 그 결과 총 4,075명(정부 집계, 2018.3월 기준)이 재판 없이 사살되었으며 이 중 74명이 어린이인 것으로 알려졌다. 경찰의 즉결 처형은 사법 절차를 무시한 초법적인 살인으로 유엔을 비롯한 국제사회가 깊이 우려하고 있는 사안이다. 필리핀 경찰의 집회시위에 대한 강제 진압도 큰 문제가 되고 있다. 2016년 4월 극심한 가뭄 피해를 견디다 못한 필리핀 농민들의 시위 현장에서 경찰의 발포로 3명의 사망자가 발생했을 뿐 아니라, 같은 해 10월 마닐라 미국 대사관 앞에서 열린 대규모 반미시위를 경찰이 해산하는 과정에서 한국산 경찰 승합차가 시위대를 깔아뭉개는 일도 있었다. 최근에는 도널드 트럼프 미국 대통령 방문을 반대하는 시위대를 경찰이 물대포를 사용해 강제 해산했으며, 보라카이 섬 폐쇄 관련 현지 주민들의 반대 시위를 대비해 소총과 죽봉으로 무장한 경찰을 현장에 배치하기도 했다.

‘필리핀 경찰 수사역량 강화사업’은 순찰차, 승합차, 오토바이, 수사 기자재 등 경찰 장비 제공과 경찰 전문가 파견, 필리핀 경찰관 초청 교육 등을 주 내용으로 삼고 있다. 하지만 현재 필리핀 경찰의 심각한 인권탄압과 공권력 남용이 만연한 상황에서 한국이 ODA 명목으로 필리핀 경찰의 공권력을 강화하는 사업을 추진하는 것은 매우 신중할 필요가 있다. 특히 지난 2월, KOICA는 ‘평화, 인권, 민주주의와 성 평등 등 보편적 가치 실현에 기여’를 10대 혁신과제 중 하나로 선정하며, 현재 진행 중인 사업을 포함한 KOICA 사업이 협력대상국의 평화, 인권, 민주주의에 미치는 영향을 평가하고 그 결과에 따라 사업 시행 여부를 결정하겠다고 밝힌 바 있다. 한국 정부가 필리핀 경찰에 ODA로 기자재를 제공하기 전, 먼저 필리핀 경찰의 심각한 인권 침해 상황에 대해 재평가해야 하는 이유이다. 그러나 KOICA가 ‘필리핀 경찰 수사역량 강화사업’을 면밀히 평가하고 추진하고 있는지 의문이다. 

따라서 KOICA는 해당 사업을 재평가할 필요가 있으며, 그 과정에서 필리핀과 한국의 시민사회단체 의견을 청취해야 한다. 평가를 통해 해당 사업이 필리핀의 평화, 인권, 민주주의 실현에 악영향을 미친다고 판단될 경우 중단해야 마땅하다. 나아가 ‘안보체계 개혁’ 지원을 명분으로 한 경찰의 ‘치안한류’ 사업 역시 전반적으로 재검토되어야 한다. 그동안 한국이 전수하는 경찰 교육은 시위 진압 방법이 주를 이뤄왔고, 이는 한국 기업의 살수차, 시위 진압 장비 수출과 연계되었다. 익히 알려져 있듯이 한국 경찰의 공권력 남용과 시위 진압 과정에서의 인권 침해 문제는 한국 사회의 주요 개혁과제이기도 하다. 경찰이 ‘인권 경찰’을 강조하며 공권력 남용 부분에서의 개혁 의지를 밝히고 있는 만큼 기존의 치안한류 사업 내용 역시 달라져야 한다. 그것은 당연히 협력국의 인권 침해를 지원하는 일이 없도록 하는 것이다.

* [논평] 원문보기/다운로드

Korean Government’s Disclosure of ODA Information Is Disappointing at Best

Korea discloses less information than Japan, a non-IATI member state.
With such minimal information disclosure, it is far behind to uphold the principles of openness, transparency, and sharing in government affairs.

On August 11, 2016, the Korean government announced that it became “the first Asian government” to disclose, voluntarily, information on Korea’s official development assistance (ODA) activities to the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI). The action seemingly amounts to a meaningful first step toward ensuring transparency in governmental development assistance according to a widely accepted international standard. However, the Korean government in fact provided nothing more than the most basic of ODA information, and has failed to meet the standard of transparency demanded by the international community.

The Korean government disclosed information on 13 of the 39 items required by the IATI, concerning the executive agencies and projects involved in ODA. Of the seven elements of the organization standard, the Korean government disclosed only the organization-identifier, name, and the reporting organization. Of the 32 elements of the activity standard, the Korean government provided 10 elements only, including title, activity-date, recipient-country, and sector. Such information is hardly enough to allow the IATI to understand Korea’s ODA projects in detail or to identify whether such projects are working effectively as intended. By contrast, Japan, an observer state of the IATI, disclosed information on 21 elements of the IATI Standard. Even if we were to concede that this year marks the first instance for Korea to implement the IATI Standard, the amount and quality of information the country has disclosed do not support the Korean government’s proud claim to be the first Asian country to do so. In Asia, Korea and Japan are the only two countries that are member states of the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

It is important for both donor and recipient countries to disclose their ODA information transparently. Governments are accountable to taxpayers and therefore have the fundamental responsibility of making sure that the ODA projects, run on taxpayers’ money, do not duplicate or cause any wastes, and function as planned and intended. Disclosure of information is also critical to consolidating public support for ODA in donor countries, and enables governments of recipient countries to plan and devise their policies systematically. The level and quality of ODA information disclosed by the Korean government, however, are barely fit to achieve these purposes. It is impossible to compare and monitor the details of ODA with such minimal information only. Nor is the information enough for the governments of recipient countries to develop and implement meaningful development plans. As a member state of the IATI, the Korean government should make available a far greater range of information regarding the specific types of assistance and capital involved and the terms and conditions attached thereto.

There is a long way before Korea substantially improves the transparency and effectiveness of its ODA. In the Second Master Plan for International Development Cooperation (2016-2020), the Korean government stated that it would consider increasing the amount of information to be disclosed according to the IATI Standard. The Korean government, however, has yet to present a specific implementation plan. Considering the Korea’s ODA fragmentation it is important to disclose information about not only the Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA) and the Economic Development Cooperation Fund (EDCF), but also all the agencies of the central government that are undertaking their own ODA projects today.

One may disclose information, but mere disclosure does not ensure the openness, transparency, and sharing of information if the disclosed information remains inaccessible. The Korean government has ambitiously launched the “Government 3.0”, aspiring toward greater transparency and sharing of public information under a new paradigm of governance. Yet the strategy remains a mere slogan in numerous governmental organizations and departments. Disclosure of information entails the duty to make the disclosed information available and accessible. Data should be provided in forms amenable to analysis and application, and via channels that are easily accessible to users. The ODA information the Korean government has provided, however, consists of attachments only, making it impossible for the general public to search and access them on the Internet. In order for Korea’s first step toward greater transparency in ODA to be more than just vain words, the Korean government must make efforts to ensure the availability, accessibility, and application of the information it provides.