Lets eyeball the sanctions hmm? It's not just how many times we "throw sanctions" but also finding the particular thing to get them to move.
UNSCR 1718 (2006) banned a range of imports and exports to North Korea and imposed an asset freeze and travel ban on persons involved in the country’s nuclear program. This trade ban included “battle tanks, armoured combat vehicles, large caliber artillery systems, combat aircraft, attack helicopters, warships, missiles or missile systems.” The resolution also prohibited imports of luxury goods to the country.
[1] Large-scale arms, nuclear technology, and related training on nuclear weapons development were prohibited from being provided to North Korea. All states were to cooperate in inspecting cargo suspected of trafficking nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons into the country.
UNSCR 1874 (2009)
The provisions of the resolution include:
- Authorizing member states to inspect, "in accordance with their national authorities and legislation, and consistent with international law", North Korean cargo on land, sea, and air, and to destroy any goods suspected of being connected to the DPRK's nuclear programme.[2]
- Requiring the North Korean government to return immediately to the six-party talks and renounce its announcement of withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.[3]
- Preventing financial services that could contribute to the nuclear or ballistic missile related programmes.[4]
- Instructing member states not to provide financial assistance to the DPRK nuclear programme, or enter into loans with the country, except for humanitarian or developmental reasons.[4]
- Extending the arms embargo on North Korea by banning all weapons exports from the country and most imports, with an exception to small arms, light weapons and related material – though member states must notify the Security Council five days prior to selling the weapons.[5][6]
- Demanding that North Korea halt its nuclear weapons program and conduct no further nuclear or missile tests.[5]
- Asking member states to notify the Council of steps they are taking to implement the sanctions within 45 days.[7]
- Affirming the Security Council's commitment to a peaceful, diplomatic resolution to the situation.[7]
Resolution 2087, (January 2013
Not really a "new" sanction here, JS) after a satellite launch, strengthened previous sanctions by clarifying a state’s right to seize and destroy cargo suspected of heading to or from North Korea for purposes of military research and development.
[3][1]
Resolution 2094 (March 2013) after the third nuclear test. It imposed sanctions on money transfers and aimed to shut North Korea out of the international financial system.
[3][1]
Resolution 2270, (March 2016) after the fourth nuclear test, further strengthened sanctions.
[7] It banned the export of gold, vanadium, titanium, and rare earth metals. The export of coal and iron were also banned, with an exemption for transactions that were purely for "livelihood purposes".
[8][1] Contains exceptionally comprehensive sanctions against North Korea beyond responses to the development of WMD, which are expected to have a profound impact across many facets of North Korea.
[3]
The main provisions of the resolution include weapons transactions,
proliferation of nuclear activities, maritime and air transport, export control of WMD, foreign trade, and financial transactions. The resolution also affirms that any transfer of weapons for the purpose of maintenance and services constitutes violations, and it designates a number of North Korean bodies to be subject to sanctions, including the
National Aerospace Development Administration, the Ministry of Atomic Energy Industry, the Munitions Industry Department, the
Reconnaissance General Bureau, and
Office No. 39.
[4]
Furthermore, members of the international community, including South Korea, Japan, and the European Union, began to impose independent
embargoes on North Korea, trying to fill gaps in the current sanctions. South Korea’s
Ministry of Foreign Affairs said on April 5, 2016, about a month after the adoption of the resolution, that “There has been visible progress on various fronts, such as the ban on port entry of the sanctioned vessels of
Offshore Marine Management (OMM), registration cancellation of UN members’ vessels carrying the North Korean
flag of convenience, enhanced inspection of North Korean cargo, expulsion of North Koreans involved in illicit activities, and cancellation of teaching or training of North Koreans.
[5]
Yonhap News Agency of South Korea reported on April 3, 2016, a month after the adoption of Resolution 2270, that the effects of sanctions were being detected in North Korea as seen in the soaring market prices and the food shortage affecting even members of the National Security Agency.
[6]
The sanctions of the resolution, if faithfully implemented by member states, are expected to deal a severe blow against the illicit arms smuggling and also the foreign currency earnings of the North Korean regime, forcing the regime onto the path of change.
[7]
Resolution 2321, (November 2016) capped North Korea's coal exports and banned exports of copper, nickel, zinc, and silver.
[9][10] In February 2017, a UN panel said that 116 of 193 member states had yet not submitted a report on their implementation of these sanctions, though China had.
[11] Also in February 2017, China announced it would ban all imports of coal for the rest of the year.
----
Cut & Paste w/assessment:
United States sanctions
In February 2016, President Obama enacted the North Korea Sanctions and Policy Enhancement Act of 2016, which passed the House of Representatives and the Senate with nearly unanimous support.
[3] This law:
- requires the President to sanction entities found to have contributed to North Korea’s weapons of mass destruction program, arms trade, human rights abuses or other illegal activities.[3]
- imposes mandatory sanctions for entities involved in North Korea's mineral or metal trades, which comprise a large part of North Korea's foreign exports.[3]
- requires the US Treasury Department to determine whether North Korea should be listed as a "primary money laundering concern," which would trigger tough new financial restrictions.[3]
- imposes new sanctions authorities related to North Korean human rights abuses and violations of cybersecurity.[3]
This followed the
North Korea Sanctions Enforcement Act of 2013 which the Senate failed to pass.
South Korean sanctions
South Korea imposed sanctions against North Korea following the 2010 sinking of the South Korean naval ship, the
Cheonan. These sanctions, known as the
May 24 measures, included:
[3]
- banning North Korean ships from South Korean territorial waters.[3]
- suspending inter-Korean trade except at the Kaesong Industrial Zone.[3]
- banning most cultural exchanges.[3]
In 2016 President Park Geun-hye ordered the Kaesong complex shut in retaliation for the nuclear test in January and the rocket launch in February.
[3]
Japanese sanctions
In 2016, Japan's sanctions against North Korea included:
[3]
- banning remittances, except those made for humanitarian purposes and less than 100,000 yen in value.[3]
- freezing assets of suspect individuals and organisations in Japan.
- prohibiting North Korean citizens from entering Japan.[3]
- renewing the ban on North Korean ships entering Japanese ports and extending it to include other ships that have visited North Korea.[3]
- banning nuclear and missile technicians who have been to North Korea from entering Japan.[13]
European Union
The European Union has imposed a series of sanctions against North Korea since 2006. These include:
[3]
- an embargo on arms and related materiel.[3]
- banning the export of aviation and rocket fuel to North Korea.
- banning the trade in gold, precious metals and diamonds with the North Korean government.[3]
- banning the import of minerals from North Korea, with some exemptions for coal and iron ore.
- banning exports of luxury goods.[3]
- restrictions on financial support for trade with North Korea.[3]
- restrictions on investment and financial activities.[3]
- inspections and monitoring of cargoes imported to and exported from North Korea.[3]
- prohibiting certain North Korean individuals from entering the EU.[14]
Assessment
A report by the United Nations Panel of Experts stated that North Korea was covertly trading in arms and minerals in defiance of the sanctions.
[15]
The academic John Delury has described the sanctions as futile and counterproductive. He has argued that they are unenforceable and unlikely to stop North Korea's nuclear weapons program.
[16]
On the other hand,
Sung-Yoon Lee, Professor in Korean Studies at the
Fletcher School, and Joshua Stanton, advocate continued tightening of sanctions, targeting Pyongyang's systemic vulnerabilities, including blocking the regime's "offshore hard currency reserves and income with financial sanctions, including secondary sanctions against its foreign enablers. This would significantly diminish, if not altogether deny, Kim the means to pay his military, security forces and elites that repress the North Korean public".
[17][18]
