Why Has North Korea Responded Positively to the Nuclear Talks in 2007

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Semoon Chang
{"title":"Why Has North Korea Responded Positively to the Nuclear Talks in 2007","authors":"Semoon Chang","doi":"10.3172/NKR.4.2.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"IntroductionI have repeatedly pointed out the adverse impact of numerous U.S. economic sanctions on North Korea's trade. I have written, for instance, that the large trade deficit, unless compensated somehow, is not sustainable.1 Further, since China and Japan were the only two steady importers of North Korean products from 2000 to 2005, if one or both countries turned against North Korea by joining the U.S.-led economic sanctions, it would be difficult for North Korea not to feel the impact. And so it came to be. \"Japan rapidly tightened its economic relations with North Korea during the past year or two,\" I wrote in 2007, \"including a total ban of imports from North Korea, over the issues of kidnapping and nuclear weapons, leaving China as the only country that has a key influence on North Korea's trade. Prospects are that North Korea's exports may decline, making North Korea's trade deficit issue even more difficult.\"2 Even with these premonitions, it was a pleasant surprise to see the way in which North Korea responded to the nuclear talks later in 2007.The objective of this paper is to explore the economic reasons behind North Korea's positive response to the nuclear talks in 2007, by hypothesizing that the North Korean leaders altered their approach partly because of the adverse impact of economic sanctions on North Korea's trade that had reached an unsustainable stage, and partly because of a greater calculation of benefits and costs by the North Korean leaders since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the process of which began in 1989.Key Economic Sanctions against North KoreaThe economic sanctions that have been imposed against North Korea since the beginning of the Korean War in 1950 are chronologically explained elsewhere by me.3 Among the many sanctions imposed on North Korea are three that currently have a direct impact on North Korea's trade. One is the U.S. denial of a most-favored nation (MFN) trade status on North Korea's exports, which was imposed on September 1, 1951. Because of the widespread use of the MFN tariffs, these are known as Normal Trade Relations (NTR) tariffs. Without MFN status, tariffs on North Korean exports to the United States can be so high that it would be impossible for North Korea to even consider exporting anything to the United States.Another important sanction was levied when North Korean agents blew up Korean Air 858 on November 29, 1987, when the plane was on its way from Baghdad to Bangkok. The explosion killed 115 passengers and crew members. On January 20, 1988, North Korea was placed on a list of countries that support international terrorism, on the basis of the U.S. Export Administration Act of 1979. The importance of this sanction is that placement on the list made it impossible for North Korea to borrow development funds from international financial institutions, including the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.4The third key economic sanctions may be termed collectively the \"U.S.-led Proliferation Security Initiative, announced by President George W. Bush in May 2003, which is designed to interdict weapons of mass destruction shipments to and from countries of proliferation concern, such as North Korea.\"5 Ever since President Bush labeled North Korea, Iran, and Iraq as an \"axis of evil\" in his State of the Union address on January 29, 2002, there had been a gradual tightening of sanctions until 2007. The October 2002 discovery of North Korea's nuclear program, and North Korea's subsequent announcement that it was renewing the program, broke the terms of the 1994 Agreed Framework, and led to a rapid downturn in the relations between North Korea and the United States. The worsening relations were followed by a broad tightening of North Korea's illegal financial transactions. The broad tightening culminated in Banco Delta Asia's termination of business dealings with North Korea as of February 16, 2006. Banco Delta Asia had long been suspected of handling North Korea's illicit activities overseas, such as laundering of counterfeit U. …","PeriodicalId":40013,"journal":{"name":"North Korean Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"North Korean Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3172/NKR.4.2.6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

IntroductionI have repeatedly pointed out the adverse impact of numerous U.S. economic sanctions on North Korea's trade. I have written, for instance, that the large trade deficit, unless compensated somehow, is not sustainable.1 Further, since China and Japan were the only two steady importers of North Korean products from 2000 to 2005, if one or both countries turned against North Korea by joining the U.S.-led economic sanctions, it would be difficult for North Korea not to feel the impact. And so it came to be. "Japan rapidly tightened its economic relations with North Korea during the past year or two," I wrote in 2007, "including a total ban of imports from North Korea, over the issues of kidnapping and nuclear weapons, leaving China as the only country that has a key influence on North Korea's trade. Prospects are that North Korea's exports may decline, making North Korea's trade deficit issue even more difficult."2 Even with these premonitions, it was a pleasant surprise to see the way in which North Korea responded to the nuclear talks later in 2007.The objective of this paper is to explore the economic reasons behind North Korea's positive response to the nuclear talks in 2007, by hypothesizing that the North Korean leaders altered their approach partly because of the adverse impact of economic sanctions on North Korea's trade that had reached an unsustainable stage, and partly because of a greater calculation of benefits and costs by the North Korean leaders since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the process of which began in 1989.Key Economic Sanctions against North KoreaThe economic sanctions that have been imposed against North Korea since the beginning of the Korean War in 1950 are chronologically explained elsewhere by me.3 Among the many sanctions imposed on North Korea are three that currently have a direct impact on North Korea's trade. One is the U.S. denial of a most-favored nation (MFN) trade status on North Korea's exports, which was imposed on September 1, 1951. Because of the widespread use of the MFN tariffs, these are known as Normal Trade Relations (NTR) tariffs. Without MFN status, tariffs on North Korean exports to the United States can be so high that it would be impossible for North Korea to even consider exporting anything to the United States.Another important sanction was levied when North Korean agents blew up Korean Air 858 on November 29, 1987, when the plane was on its way from Baghdad to Bangkok. The explosion killed 115 passengers and crew members. On January 20, 1988, North Korea was placed on a list of countries that support international terrorism, on the basis of the U.S. Export Administration Act of 1979. The importance of this sanction is that placement on the list made it impossible for North Korea to borrow development funds from international financial institutions, including the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.4The third key economic sanctions may be termed collectively the "U.S.-led Proliferation Security Initiative, announced by President George W. Bush in May 2003, which is designed to interdict weapons of mass destruction shipments to and from countries of proliferation concern, such as North Korea."5 Ever since President Bush labeled North Korea, Iran, and Iraq as an "axis of evil" in his State of the Union address on January 29, 2002, there had been a gradual tightening of sanctions until 2007. The October 2002 discovery of North Korea's nuclear program, and North Korea's subsequent announcement that it was renewing the program, broke the terms of the 1994 Agreed Framework, and led to a rapid downturn in the relations between North Korea and the United States. The worsening relations were followed by a broad tightening of North Korea's illegal financial transactions. The broad tightening culminated in Banco Delta Asia's termination of business dealings with North Korea as of February 16, 2006. Banco Delta Asia had long been suspected of handling North Korea's illicit activities overseas, such as laundering of counterfeit U. …
朝鲜为何对2007年六方会谈做出积极回应
我曾多次指出,美国的多项经济制裁对朝鲜贸易造成了不利影响。例如,我曾撰文指出,除非以某种方式得到补偿,否则巨额贸易逆差是不可持续的另外,从2000年到2005年,中国和日本是唯一两个稳定的北韩产品进口国,如果其中一个或两个国家加入美国主导的对北经济制裁,北韩很难不感受到影响。事情就这样发生了。“在过去一两年里,日本迅速收紧了与朝鲜的经济关系,”我在2007年写道,“包括全面禁止从朝鲜进口,原因是绑架和核武器问题,这使得中国成为唯一一个对朝鲜贸易有关键影响的国家。”北韩的出口有可能减少,这将使北韩的贸易逆差问题更加棘手。尽管有这些预感,但看到朝鲜对2007年晚些时候核谈判的回应方式,还是让人感到惊喜。本文的目的是探讨经济原因朝鲜核谈判积极回应2007年,假设,朝鲜领导人改变他们的方法部分是因为对朝鲜的经济制裁贸易的不利影响,达到了不可持续的阶段,还有部分原因是一个更大的收益和成本的计算朝鲜领导人自苏联解体以来,始于1989年的过程。对朝鲜的主要经济制裁自1950年朝鲜战争开始以来对朝鲜实施的经济制裁按时间顺序由我在其他地方解释在对朝鲜实施的诸多制裁中,有三项目前对朝鲜的贸易有直接影响。一是美国从1951年9月1日起拒绝给予北韩最惠国待遇。由于广泛使用最惠国关税,这些关税被称为正常贸易关系(NTR)关税。如果没有最惠国待遇,朝鲜对美国出口的关税可能会很高,以至于朝鲜甚至不可能考虑向美国出口任何东西。1987年11月29日,朝鲜特工炸毁了从巴格达飞往曼谷的大韩航空858航班,这是另一项重要的制裁。爆炸造成115名乘客和机组人员死亡。1988年1月20日,根据美国1979年的《出口管理法》,北韩被列入支持国际恐怖主义的国家名单。此次制裁的重要性在于,将北韩列入制裁名单后,北韩将无法从包括世界银行和国际货币基金组织在内的国际金融机构获得发展资金。第三项主要经济制裁可以统称为2003年5月乔治·w·布什总统宣布的“以美国为首的防扩散安全倡议”。该协议旨在阻止大规模杀伤性武器进出朝鲜等担心扩散的国家。”自从布什总统在2002年1月29日的国情咨文中把北韩、伊朗和伊拉克列为“邪恶轴心”以来,直到2007年,对北韩的制裁一直在逐步收紧。2002年10月发现北韩的核项目,以及北韩随后宣布将重启核项目,打破了1994年《框架协议》的条款,导致北韩与美国的关系迅速恶化。在两国关系恶化之后,各国对朝鲜的非法金融交易进行了广泛的收紧。2006年2月16日,汇业银行(Banco Delta Asia)终止了与朝鲜的业务往来。长期以来,汇业银行一直被怀疑处理朝鲜在海外的非法活动,比如洗钱假U. ...
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
North Korean Review
North Korean Review Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信