Archive for the ‘Statistics’ Category

US asks China to cease all oil shipments to North Korea

Wednesday, November 29th, 2017

By Benjamin Katzeff Silberstein

In response to yesterday’s missile test, Trump has asked Xi Jinping to cease all oil shipments to North Korea from China. “All” presumably includes the crude oil that China ships, in unknown but presumably large amounts, via the pipeline that runs from Northeast China through Dandong and to the Ponghwa refinery in Sinuiju in North Korea’s northeast.

It seems unlikely that China would fully cease shipments of oil to North Korea, especially over a longer term period. Should oil shortages get serious to the degree that vital industries, agriculture and other sectors cannot function properly, China would eventually grow concerned over social instability in North Korea that would risk spilling over its own borders.

Should China cut off crude oil shipments, it would mean that North Korea’s ability to acquire oil and fuel products is severely limited. Sanctions cap the amount that UN member states can ship to the country, and gasoline prices have risen to very high levels during the year. Oil imports through channels that go unnoticed in international trade records are probably much bigger than often estimated. Recall Ri Jong-ho’s famed estimate that North Korea purchases 300,000 tons of oil products each year from Russia. Overall, it is not entirely unfeasible that Russia could grow as a source of North Korean oil imports in the future. North Korea also has some capacity to transform domestically sourced coal products into synthetic liquid fuel.

The drastically increased fuel prices in North Korea during the year also suggest that the state may have been grabbing much of what fuel has been available for its own needs, likely to store for military and other uses, suggesting that North Korean strategists have long seen an oil embargo on the horizon. After all, the markets only exist at the mercy of the state, and will always come secondary. Therefore, we don’t know whether military and state storage might currently be larger than estimated in normal times.

At the end of the day, however, should crude oil flows from China be cut off entirely, there’s no denying it would be problematic for North Korea. Though China is unlikely to entirely cut off all crude oil shipments for a prolonged, long-term period, much pain can be caused in the meantime.

For more on this, I wrote about North Korea’s connections to, and reliance on, China in matters such as infrastructure, energy, and telecommunications earlier this year in IHS Jane’s Intelligence Review.

Share

September 2017: NK-China trade figures

Tuesday, October 24th, 2017

By Benjamin Katzeff Silberstein

Here’s a roundup of the September 2017 China-North Korea trade numbers, from various sources. Not surprisingly, most indicators are down. Still, China is letting North Korea import even while exports have been drastically decreased in most goods. A sign of confidence that they will get the money back in future exports from North Korea, perhaps?

Washington Post:

On Friday, China’s General Administration of Customs announced that China’s imports from North Korea fell 37.9 percent in September, the seventh successive monthly decline. China’s exports to North Korea dropped a more modest 6.7 percent in September, Huang Songping, spokesman for the customs department, said at a news conference.

Although there is room for considerable skepticism about official Chinese data — and the numbers can swing wildly month to month — there is reason to believe that there has been a recent slowdown in trade, experts say.

Chinese traders in the border city of Dandong told The Washington Post this month that they were feeling the effect of the sanctions, which were being imposed with unprecedented determination by the authorities.

[…]

North Korea’s deficit with China more than tripled in the first nine months of the year from the same period in 2016, to $1.07 billion, Huang told a news conference, according to Bloomberg News.

Full article:

China’s trade with North Korea slumps as nuclear sanctions finally start to bite
Simon Denyer
Washington Post
2017-10-13
James Pearson of Reuters has been tweeting some numbers:
  • [R]ice exports to N.Korea [down] 85.1% y/y at 2,396t
  • Sept corn exports to N.Korea [up] from year earlier, at 1,160t
  • China imports of N.Korea lead ore 84% y/y
  • China imports of iron ore [down] 98% y/y
  • China imports of N.Korea coal [down]  71.6% y/y

Some of these numbers can also be found reported by Reuters here.

NK News also reported on the numbers:

According to Chinese customs data collated by the Korea International Trade Association (KITA), China’s main exports to the DPRK mainly consist of various kinds of electrical items and machinery.

North Korea spent USD$52 million on importing Chinese electronics and machines in August, trade categories which include items like cell phones and computers.

The DPRK spent a further USD$23 million on importing vehicles from China. While some luxury vehicle exports would breach UN sanctions, the data indicates the majority of the imports consist of electric motorcycles and vehicles used for public transport or construction.

Yet China’s most recent trade figures continue to show that despite its falling income from trade, North Korea has managed to increase its spending on Chinese goods, pushing its balance of trade further into the red.

Without its coal revenues, North Korea has spent double its monthly trade earnings several times throughout 2017, and it’s unclear how long the country will be able to maintain the deficit.

Full article here:
Chinese FM defends growing trade with North Korea
Leo Byrne
NK News
2017-10-24

All in all, drops are pretty dire. Which, of course, also serves China’s geopolitical interests at this time. That’s not to say the numbers can’t be right, only that usual skepticism is warranted.

Share

Sanctions, and the weakness of North Korean food security

Wednesday, October 18th, 2017

By Benjamin Katzeff Silberstein

While some Pyongyangites started off the week by checking out plasma-screen TV’s at a consumer goods fair, Daily NK published an ominous story that reminds the reader of the dark 1990s. Rumors are now circulating of a starvation death in Hyesan:

An increasing number of North Koreans are suffering from the effects of food insecurity and malnutrition, according to inside sources who spoke with Daily NK. A rumor is circulating in Ryanggang and North Hamgyong provinces that the body of someone who starved to death has been seen near the train station in Hyesan City.
“More than a handful of people have come forward and said that they saw the body of someone who starved to death near the Hyesan train station. The food situation was relatively good for the past few years, so it’s such a shame that we’ve returned to dire circumstances so suddenly,” a source in Ryanggang Province told Daily NK.
A source from North Hamgyong Province similarly reported that “a rumor is swirling around the market that a starved body was discovered. There are so many people talking about it that it’s being viewed as a fact.”
The source added that the credibility of the rumors is high, saying, “There was a severe drought at the beginning of the year in North and South Hamgyong provinces and Ryanggang Province. The corn and rice harvest did not meet its targets, amounting to approximately half the volume produced last year.”
Full article:
Food insecurity riles North Korea’s poorest provinces
Kim Chung Yeol
Daily NK
2017-10-18

As crude as it may sound, one cannot draw sharp conclusions from one unconfirmed death by starvation in a North Korean city. But the fact that people think conditions bad enough to believe such rumors to be true says something about the instability of food supply in North Korea right now.

For several years, the supply of food in North Korea has looked remarkably stabile compared to the 1990s. A combination of more freedom for the markets to operate, more leeway for farmers in how they operate, produce and sell their goods (and procure inputs such as fertilizer), larger and more consistent imports from China – these are all factors that have led to better food security overall in North Korea. Market prices have sent a clear message on this.

But perhaps “stabile” was the wrong way to describe food supply. “Consistent” may have been a better way of looking at it. A system is hardly stabile when a combination of relatively usual events for the country – bad weather and changing geopolitical conditions – can shake its core.

As usual with these dynamics, it would be wrong to attribute the changes to one single factor. That is, we cannot say that sanctions –> starvation in some automatic fashion. Rather, several trends have coincided and caused the dire situation:

First, North Korea has experienced a very troubling drought early on in the farming season. As Andy Dinville shows at 38North, using satellite data, weather conditions have been particularly bad this year, significantly harming this year’s harvest.

In any normal year since the early 2000s, when market mechanisms seriously became a routinized part of North Korea’s agricultural economic system, it seems that the effects of a drought could have been offset at least in part by increased imports from China, or other sorts of shifts.

Which brings us to a second factor, namely sanctions and the current tensions, and China’s enforcement of economic pressure on North Korea. Not only does this mean that overall trading conditions are difficult, and that Chinese sellers are wary of trusting that they’ll actually receive payments from North Korean buyers. It also means that goods such as fertilizer for farming are more difficult to acquire. Like the Daily NK article notes:

“Last year, North and South Hamgyong and Ryanggang provinces endured a flood of epic proportions and this year there was a drought, so the agricultural situation in both regions is poor. Additionally, because of the sanctions, it has been harder to procure different kinds of fertilizer necessary for farming, so this has exacerbated the damage.” he continued.
Third, the geopolitical instability naturally makes for a nervous market overall. The price of corn, for example, is up by 47 percent compared to last year. It is important to note that this sort of change in market prices has not been observable during the many instances in the past when international aid organizations have warned of food shortages in North Korea. Hoarding is a natural behavior on any market when actors believe a shortage is looming in the near future. It is a stark sign of the shift in China’s behavior from previous rounds of sanctions that North Korean markets now seem to confirm that China is putting real and heavy economic pressure on the country. The loopholes may still be there but they are much more narrow than usual.
As winter approaches, things aren’t likely to get any easier. Fuel shortages will make heating more difficult and expensive than usual for average North Koreans, particularly as the state soaks up oil and fuel from the market, raising prices further. Things may well get much worse before they get any better.
UPDATE 2017-10-24: 
A reader with extensive experience working on North Korean food security emailed a somewhat skeptical note regarding the food production decrease estimates I cite above. The main point is: even if food production goes down, it may not spell disaster as the past few years harvests have been exceptionally good in comparative perspective. I quote an excerpt here with the reader’s permission:
It really doesn’t look like there is much difference between positive and negative trends, particularly if you just look at the end of August. And his [Dinville] data compares the 2017 harvest with the 2016 harvest, which was probably the best harvest in 30 years. So even if 2017 is a bit lower than 2016, it will still be a relatively stable year and much, much better than 2001. There were no major disasters in the country, as well, aside from the drought and the effects of the flooding from last fall in a few counties in the northeast. My takeaway from his [Dinville’s] data is that there were a few fields (the red “strongly negative” portion) that couldn’t be irrigated sufficiently but we shouldn’t extrapolate to the entire country harvest. Kitchen gardens have also expanded in the country and can help to mitigate a poor harvest, at least for some families.
Share

The July 2017 China-North Korea trade figures, and the 97 drop in gasoline exports

Thursday, August 24th, 2017

By Benjamin Katzeff Silberstein

The July numbers for China-North Korea trade are out. Reuters:

The world’s second-largest economy imported and exported goods worth $456 million in July, down from $489 million in June, according to data from China’s General Administration of Customs.

It was up from $426 million in July last year, according to data on the customs website.

Year-to-date, trade was up 10.2 percent at $3.01 billion.

The data indicates that China’s move to halt North Korean coal imports in February has crimped Pyongyang’s ability to raise hard currency through exports.

Iron ore arrivals from North Korea in July also sank to their weakest since February, while China’s gasoline exports to the isolated state hit their lowest since January 2016.

China’s imports from North Korea were $156 million, down 3 percent from last month and a third lower than a year ago, based on data on the customs website. For January-July, imports were $1.04 billion, down 16.3 percent.

Exports were $300 million, down from $327 million in June, but up from $194 million in July last year. Year-to-date, they were up a third at $1.97 billion.

On Aug. 6, the United Nations Security Council unanimously imposed new sanctions on North Korea banning exports of coal, iron, iron ore, lead, lead ore and seafood, in a bid to choke off a third of Pyongyang’s $3 billion in annual export revenue.

The crackdown on major commodity exports was aimed as punishment for intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) tests in July and is due to take effect in early September.

Last week, Beijing issued an official ban on the imports effective from Aug. 15 as it moved to implement the sanctions.

Sources told Reuters China was also pressuring its iron ore traders to stop buying the commodity from North Korea, tightening the screws on Pyongyang even before sanctions.

The data also comes after state-owned China National Petroleum Corp suspended sales of fuel to North Korea in June over concerns it wouldn’t get paid, cutting off crucial supplies. The suspension is still in place.

Full article:
China July trade with North Korea slows from June as coal ban bites
Josephine Mason
Reuters
2017-08-23

And here:

* July gasoline exports down 97 pct vs year ago
    * Just 120 tonnes shipped to North Korea in July
    * CNPC stopped sales over payment fears - sources
    * Iron ore imports in July lowest since Feb

 (Recasts to lead with gasoline, adds details, changes slug)
    By Chen Aizhu
    BEIJING, Aug 23 (Reuters) - China's gasoline exports to
North Korea evaporated to a dribble in July, according to
customs data, the strongest sign yet that the suspension of
sales of the fuel by state oil major CNPC has cut critical
supplies to its isolated neighbour.
    Beijing's General Administration of Customs said on
Wednesday Chinese shipments of gasoline dropped 97 percent from
a year ago to just 120 tonnes of the fuel - worth little more
than $100,000. The number was down from 8,262 tonnes in June.
    Monthly fluctuations in the data are not unusual, but this
was the fourth-lowest volume on Reuters' records of customs data
going back to January 2010.
    Customs data also showed China's trade with North Korea fell
last month as a ban on coal purchases from its isolated
neighbour slowed imports amid growing pressure from the United
States to rein in Pyongyang's missile programme.
    A prolonged supply cut would threaten critical supplies of
fuel and could force North Korea to find alternatives to its
main supplier amid international pressure on Pyongyang to curb
its nuclear and missile programmes. 
    At the end of June, Reuters reported China National
Petroleum Corp (CNPC) suspended sales of gasoline and fuel to
North Korea over concerns CNPC would not get paid for its goods.
Fuel prices in the country surged following the cut and the
measure is still in place, people familiar with the matter say.
 
    "This confirms that CNPC has truly stopped supplies," said
one Beijing-based trading source familiar with China's oil
transactions with North Korea. "The amount is so small, it's
what would typically be lost during transportation."    
    Gasoline typically accounts for the bulk of fuel exports to
North Korea, but July data showed the biofuel, ethanol, took the
top spot with shipments of 4,137 cubic metres, worth $1.9
million.
    Meanwhile China's iron ore imports from North Korea fell
sharply in July, the month before the United Nations passed a
vote to impose tougher sanctions on Pyongyang. The United
Nations Security Council unanimously imposed new sanctions on
North Korea targeting its exports of coal, iron ore, lead, lead
ore and seafood in sanctions to take effect in early September.
    Arrivals of iron ore fell 24.5 percent in July from the same
month a year earlier to 175,980 tonnes. That's down 21 percent
from June and the lowest since February, according to customs'
records.
    Beijing had pressed traders to stop buying from the country
even before the United Nations Security Council vote on further
sanctions to rein in Pyongyang's missile and nuclear programme,
a sign of China tightening the screws on Pyongyang.
    In July, China bought no coal from North Korea, the fifth
month after Beijing halted coal shipments in February. 
    The table below gives a breakdown of imports and exports of
major commodities between the two nations:
        
                July      June 2017  yr-on-yr  Jan-July   % change
                2017                 % change  2017       
 Imports                                                  
 Coal           0         0          -         2,678,131  -78.6
 Iron ore       175,980   224,059    -24.5     1,510,761  41.7
 lead ore &     13,090    13,218     29.1      77,407     45.15
 concentrates                                             
 Exports                                                  
 Ethanol        4,137     4,126      509       19,734     319.7
 Gasoline       120       8,262      -96.5     45,889     -8.8
 Diesel         1,162     367        11,515    10,847     -64
 Jet fuel       153       140        278.6     1,103      47.4
 Other fuel     596       298        -97.2     19,250     -65.26
 oil                                                      
 Fuel No. 5-7   275       844        -41.4     3,953      -8.9
 LPG            79        107        302.8     553        75.4
 In tonnes except for ethanol in cubic metres

Full article:

China July gasoline exports to North Korea almost wiped out -customs
Josephine Mason
Reuters
2017-08-23

A few thoughts on this:

First, overall trade is up between the countries from the same month one year ago, by ten percent. The North Korean economy may be under pressure from China at the moment, but it is not isolated. Moreover, Chinese imports are down by one third but one has to wonder why China would let North Korea run a trade deficit if it weren’t expecting compensation in the future by more imports.

Second, gasoline exports to North Korea are down by 97. This number strikes me as almost conspicuously high and reminiscent of Saddam Hussein’s electoral victory figures (in North Korea, the united front controlled by the Worker’s Party always gets a full 100% of the votes). China has a strong interest at the moment in making it seem like it is being tough on North Korea and a figure like 97 percent certainly makes for good optics. Diesel and petrol prices have remained relatively consistent in Pyongyang through the spring and summer, not changing in July, but it is only now that Chinese customs are reporting a 97 percent drop.

Third and relatedly, we don’t know what (if anything) has happened with the crude oil deliveries, which to my knowledge is largely a form of donation from China to North Korea of some 520,000 tonnes per year. This is roughly twice the quantity of the diesel exports from China to North Korea per year, though these amounts are difficult to compare. It is easy to imagine a scenario where these increase to offset the losses from the lowered gasoline exports.  And of course there’s the smuggling. Meanwhile, diesel exports actually rose over the past month.

Fourth, to really get a grasp of trading figures, I would argue it is necessary to look at full years. Surely there are ways to, for example, date contracts in order to make it look like deliveries and receptions of goods reach certain levels at certain times, or by simply postponing some exports and imports to a later date. Perhaps we will see trading figures later on after the bluster has really settled that compensate for shortfalls at this moment.

Share

The August 5th UNSC sanctions on North Korea: new scope, but same old tools. Will this time be any different?

Sunday, August 6th, 2017

By Benjamin Katzeff Silberstein

On Saturday August 5th, the UN Security Council passed yet another resolution, 2371, following North Korea’s missile tests. Like resolution 2270 that was passed in March 2016, 2371 also takes aim at North Korea’s mineral exports. The new resolution also bans imports of seafood products from North Korea, and bans member states from hiring new North Korean laborers, but they do not need to fire ones already hired, so it is questionable whether this source of income will decrease and/or disappear, or merely stop increasing.

Unlike 2270 last year, it does not appear to contain a humanitarian exemption or any other loophole for mineral imports. In sum, the new resolution appears much more holistic than its predecessors in fully cutting off North Korea’s most central export revenues.

But while the content of the resolution is different, the tools remain the same. Its efficacy still hinges upon implementation by UN member states, and of course, above all, by China, and it is difficult to see why such implementation would be more likely this time. Both President Trump and the US ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, have made a big number of China’s and Russia’s vote in favor of the resolution. WSJ reports:

U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley praised the councils solidarity, saying more days like this one were needed at the United Nations. She also personally thanked China for helping move the resolution from talk to action. The U.S., which had drafted and put forward the resolution, negotiated for more than a month with China over the text and final measures targeting Pyongyang.

This resolution is the single largest economic sanctions package ever leveled against the North Korean regime, said Ms. Haley, adding the council had put the country and its leadership on notice and what happens next is up to North Korea.

President Donald Trumpsaid on Twitter, The United Nations Security Council just voted 15-0 to sanction North Korea. China and Russia voted with us. Very big financial impact!

However,both China and Russia voted in favor of UNSC 2270 as well, and there are still abundantly clear signs that China did little to implement the ban on imports of North Korean minerals. Had UNSC 2270 been implemented in full, North Korea’s export revenues would already have been badly hit.

Meanwhile, South Korea’s Bank of Korea announced a few weeks ago its estimate that the North Korean economy grew by close to four percent last year. One should read those numbers with a very,veryhefty dose of skepticism, given the difficulty in estimating anything relating to the North Korean economy, but at the very least, we can safely conclude that the North Korean economy is not in dire straits. Its foreign trade increased by close to five percent last year, according to KOTRA. Though there have been several reports suggesting difficulties for companies involved in cross-border trade between China and North Korea over the past year, there are no indications that China has implemented the near-blanket-ban in minerals trade that the UNSC resolution from March last year mandates.

So why would this time be any different? My guess is that it won’t be. It is very difficult to imagine that China would have voted in favor of a resolution that would hit North Korea’s economy so badly if it would really have believed that such a resolution would be fully implemented. The basic political dynamics remain: China does not want North Korea to crumble, and China craves geopolitical stability above everything else.

As always, only time will tell. But those who applaud this resolution as a new and radical turn on the global stage in the North Korea issue may want to look back at historical precedent, and moderate their expectations.

Share

UN security council adopts sanctions banning imports of wide range of North Korean goods

Saturday, August 5th, 2017

Benjamin Katzeff Silberstein:

On Saturday August 5th, the United Nations Security Council approved a resolution banning member states from importing North Korean export goods such as minerals and seafood products, and from hiring North Korean laborers. Wall Street Journal:

U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley praised the councils solidarity, saying more days like this one were needed at the United Nations. She also personally thanked China for helping move the resolution from talk to action. The U.S., which had drafted and put forward the resolution, negotiated for more than a month with China over the text and final measures targeting Pyongyang.

This resolution is the single largest economic sanctions package ever leveled against the North Korean regime, said Ms. Haley, adding the council had put the country and its leadership on notice and what happens next is up to North Korea.

President Donald Trumpsaid on Twitter, The United Nations Security Council just voted 15-0 to sanction North Korea. China and Russia voted with us. Very big financial impact!

Both China and Russia urged a return to talks with North Korea and told the Security Council that the U.S. must abandonits military exercises with South Koreaand dismantlethe missile-defense system in South Korea known as Thaadbecause North Korea perceived that as a threat and it undermined the security of the region.

We stress that additional restrictions cannot be an end to themselves, they need to be a tool to engage in dialogue, said Russias new ambassador to the U.N., Vassily Nebenzia.

The nine-page resolution steps up trade restrictions with Pyongyang by aiming to cut off a third of its $3 billion annual export revenue. It bans North Korea from trading coal, iron, lead, iron and lead ore, and seafood.

The resolution also prohibits countries from hiring North Korean laborers and bans countries from entering or investing into new joint ventures with Pyongyang.

Diplomats and sanctions experts have long warned that export revenues, even remittances from foreign workers, are cycled back to North Koreas military and nuclear programs.

A Security Council diplomat offered this estimate on North Koreas foreign revenue earnings in 2017: $295 million from seafood; $251 million from iron and iron ore, and $400 million from coal trade.

North Koreans work in China, Russia and the Arab countries in the Persian Gulf in a variety of businesses ranging from factories to restaurants and nightclubs and are estimated to send home several billion dollars in revenue, a large portion of which the government claims, according to U.N. sanctions experts.

The new resolution restricts North Koreas technology trade and tightens enforcement of sanctions on North Korean vessels by banning violators from entering ports around the world.

Under the resolution, North Koreas Foreign Trade Bank, which handles foreign exchange, will be added the U.N.s sanctions list that freezes the assets of targeted entities.

It remains to be seen whether the new sanctions will deter North Koreas pursuit of advanced ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons or bring its leader Kim Jong Un to the negotiating table.

North Koreas economy has managed to stay afloat largely because China, its main trade partner, and Russia and some African nations havent fully enforced existing U.N. sanctions. The U.S. Treasury in June sanctioned Chinese entitiesprimarily banks and shipping companiesand individuals for violating sanctions and conducting trade that contributed to North Koreas military and nuclear program.

Chinas Ambassador Liu Jieyi said his country denounced unilateral sanctions by the U.S. and said action against North Korea must be through the U.N. mechanism. Mr. Liu told the council he welcomed the U.S. position that it wasntseeking regime change in North Korea.

China has always been firmly opposed to chaos and conflict in the [Korean] peninsula, Mr. Liu said.

Although China and Russia have pushed for a resumption of the six-party talks with North Korea, disagreement remains on how to bring Washington and Pyongyang to the table. China and Russia have called for a freeze-for-freeze plan under which North Korea would halt any more military or nuclear action and the U.S. would end its military exercises with South Korea.

Full article here:
North Korea Hit by $1 Billion Sanctions After Missile
Farnaz Fassihi
Wall Street Journal
2017-08-5

 

The UN summary of the resolution reads as follows:

The Security Council today further strengthened its sanctions regime against the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, condemning in the strongest terms that countrys ballistic missile launches and reaffirming its decision that Pyongyang shall abandon all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programmes in a complete, verifiable and irreversible manner.

Unanimously adopting resolution2371(2017) under Article41, ChapterVII of the United Nations Charter, the 15-nation Council decided that the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea shall not supply, sell or transfer coal, iron, iron ore, seafood, lead and lead ore to other countries.

Expressing concern that Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea nationals working abroad were generating foreign export earnings to support the countrys nuclear and ballistic missile programmes, it also decided that all Member States shall not increase the total number of work authorizations for such persons in their jurisdictions, unless approved by the Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution1718(2006).

Through the text, the Council decided that States shall prohibit the opening of new joint ventures or cooperative entities with the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea entities and individuals, or expand existing joint ventures through additional investments. In addition, it decided that Pyongyang shall not deploy or use chemical weapons and urgently called for it to accede to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and Their Destruction.

Also through the resolution, the Council named nine individuals and four entities to be subject to a travel ban and asset freeze already in place, as well as to request that the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL) issue special notices with respect to designated individuals.

In addition, it reaffirmed that its provisions were not intended to have adverse humanitarian consequences for the civilian population of the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, and that the Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution1718 (2006), on a case-by-case basis, exempt from sanctions those activities that would facilitate the work of international and non?governmental organizations engaged in assistance and relief activities for civilian benefit.

Furthermore, through the text, the Council called for the resumption of the Six-Party Talks between China, Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, Japan, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation and the United States towards the goal of a verifiable and peaceful denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

Speaking after the resolutions adoption, the representative of the United States said the Council had put the Democratic Peoples Republic of Koreas dictator on notice by increasing the penalty of its ballistic missile activity to a whole new level. All Member States must do more to put more pressure on that country, she said, adding that the United States would take defensive measures to protect itself and its allies, including through joint military exercises.

Chinas representative said that, while todays resolution had imposed further sanctions, it did not intend to negatively impact such non-military goods as food and humanitarian aid. Calling on all parties to implement the resolutions provisions fully and earnestly, he recalled that China and the Russian Federation on 4July had put forward a road map to resolve the issue through two parallel tracks denuclearization and the establishment of a peace mechanism. Recalling that the United States had recently indicated that it was not pushing for regime change or for the Korean Peninsulas reunification, he said an escalation of military activities would be detrimental to all countries of the region.

Japans delegate said the sheer number and frequency of the Democratic Peoples Republic of Koreas nuclear and ballistic missile tests show how unprecedented and unacceptable these provocations are. Not only was the quantity outrageous, but the qualitative advancements were alarming. Noting that todays resolution would reduce the Democratic Peoples Republic of Koreas revenue by approximately $1billion, he said all Member States must demonstrate renewed commitment to implement the Councils decisions.

The Russian Federations representative, while calling on the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea to end its banned programmes, said progress would be difficult so long as it perceived a direct threat to its security. Emphasizing that military misadventures risked creating a disaster, he said sanctions must be a tool for engaging Pyongyang in constructive talks rather than to seek the countrys economic asphyxiation.

The Republic of Koreas delegate said that Pyongyangs missile provocations on 4and 28July, together with its nuclear programme, posed a grave threat to international peace and security. Indeed, such reckless acts of defiance should be met with stronger measures, he said, adding that additional sanctions contained in resolution2371(2017) would significantly cut off the inflow of hard currency that would otherwise have been diverted to illicit weapons programmes.

Full article:
Security Council Toughens Sanctions Against Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea,Unanimously Adopting Resolution 2371 (2017)
United Nations Meetings Coverage
2017-08-05

Share

North Korea’s economy grew by almost 4 percent in 2017, says BOK

Friday, July 21st, 2017

Benjamin Katzeff Silberstein

Yonhap reports:

The estimated expansion of the gross domestic product (GDP) represents a sharp turnaround from 2015 when the economy of one of the world’s most isolated countries shrank 1.1 percent due mainly to a drought.

Last year’s growth is the highest since 1999 when North Korea’s economy expanded 6.1 percent, according to the Bank of Korea (BOK).

North Korea’s economy expanded 1.2 percent on average between 2012 and 2016, a sign that its economy is mired in low growth.

There are no indications that the North’s economy has suddenly improved since late 2011 when North Korean leader Kim Jong-un took power on the sudden death of his father and long-time leader Kim Jong-il, an official said.

“North Korea’s economic structure is very fragile and is not really set up for high growth,” the official spoke on the condition of anonymity.

The BOK estimated North Korea’s gross national income (GNI) stood at 36.4 trillion won (US$32.4 billion) in 2016. South Korea’s per-capita GNI stood at 31.98 million won, which is 22.1 times larger than the North’s 1.46 million won.

Related to last year’s growth, the central bank said North Korea’s mining industry grew 8.4 percent, the highest since 1999 when it expanded 14.2 percent.

North Korea’s trade volume came to $6.55 in 2016, up 4.6 percent from a year earlier, the BOK said. The increase came despite tightened U.N. sanctions imposed on North Korea over its repeated nuclear tests and its long-range rocket launches.

The sanctions call for, among other things, a ban on the country’s exports of coal and other mineral resources to cut off North Korea’s access to hard currency.

Still, the provision will not apply if transactions are determined to be exclusively for livelihood purposes and unrelated to generating revenue for North Korea’s nuclear or ballistic missile programs or other activities prohibited by previous U.N. resolutions.

China accounts for nearly 90 percent of North Korea’s foreign trade, and mineral resources are a key part of their bilateral trade.

Full article:

N. Korea’s economy grew 3.9 pct in 2016: BOK

Yonhap News

2017-07-21

Share

FAO warns of worst North Korean drought since 2001

Thursday, July 20th, 2017

Benjamin Katzeff Silberstein

FAO sounds the alarm bells yet again this year about drought in North Korea:

20 July 2017, Rome- DPR Korea’scrop production for 2017, including staple rice, maize, potatoes and soybean, has been severely damaged by prolonged dry weather conditions, threatening food security for a large part of its population, according to anew FAO updateprepared in collaboration with the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre.

Rainfall from April to June in key crop producing areas in Democratic People’s Republic of Koreawere well below the long-term average, severely disrupting planting activities and damaging the 2017 main season crops.

“So far, seasonal rainfall in main cereal producing areas have been below the level of 2001, when cereal production dropped to the unprecedented level of only two million tonnes, causing a sharp deterioration in food security conditions of a large part of the population,” said Vincent Martin, FAO Representative in China and DPR Korea.

Food shortages during ongoing lean season

The severe dry spell also affected the 2016/17 early season crops which were harvested in June and include wheat, barley and potatoes. According to FAO’s latest estimates, production of 2017 early season crops has plunged by over 30 percent, from the previous year’s level of 450 000 tonnes to 310 000 tonnes.

Despite the fact that the early season harvest accounts for only 10 percent of the total annual cereal production, these crops are an important source of food during the lean season from May to September.

Concerns over the 2017 main season crops

Although rains in the first half of July provided some relief, they were generally too late to allow normal planting and development of the 2017 main season crops, to be harvested in October-November.

The lack of rain is expected to have a serious impact on main season crops in the major cereal producing areas, including the provinces of South and North Pyongan, South and North Hwanghae and Nampo City, which normally account for close to two-thirds of overall main season cereal production.

With forecasts of reduced production of the 2017 main season crop, the food security situation is expected to further deteriorate during the 2017/18 marketing year and cereal import requirements are likely to increase.

Immediate interventions

“Immediate interventions are needed to support affected farmers and prevent undesirable coping strategies for the most vulnerable, such as reducing daily food intakes,” said Martin. “It is critical now that farmers receive appropriate and timely agricultural assistance, including irrigation equipment and machinery.”

According to the report, it is also essential to immediately start rehabilitating and upgrading irrigation schemes to reduce water losses and increase water availability.

Increased food imports, commercial or through food aid, would be required during the next three months at the peak of the lean season, ensuring adequate food supply for the most vulnerable, including children and elders.

Full article:
DPR Koreas food production hit by the worst drought since 2001
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
2017-07-20

It is worth noting that many question marks exist on the FAO’s overall methodology. I’ve written about some of these issues before, here and here. Surely, market prices appear to be pointing up in North Korea this summer, but not toward any unprecedented levels. I see no reason to doubt what FAO says about weather conditions, but the consequences for North Korea’s food supply are less clearly outlined, especially since WFP and FAO, for political reasons, often are not able to fully take the market sector into account in their assessments.

Share

China-North Korea trade up in the first half of 2017

Friday, July 14th, 2017

Benjamin Katzeff Silberstein

‘Tis the season yet again for Chinese customs data. Imports are down, but exports are up even more. Reuters:

China’s trade with isolated North Korea rose more than 10 percent in the January-June period from a year earlier, a Chinese official said on Thursday, amid pressure from the United States for Beijing to pressurize its troublesome neighbor.

Last week U.S. President Donald Trump denounced China’s trade with North Korea, saying it had grown almost 40 percent in the first quarter, and cast doubt on whether Beijing was helping to counter the threat from North Korea.

China has repeatedly said it is fully enforcing United Nations sanctions on nuclear-armed North Korea and there is nothing wrong with what it terms “normal” trade with Pyongyang, referring to areas not covered by sanctions.

Chinese customs spokesman Huang Songping told a briefing on China’s overall trade figures that total trade with North Korea expanded by 10.5 percent to $2.55 billion in the first six months of the year.

While China’s imports from North Korea dropped 13.2 percent to $880 million in the period from January to June, exports to North Korea rose 29.1 percent to $1.67 billion, he said.

The exports were largely driven by textile products and other traditional labor-intensive goods not included on the United Nations embargo list, Huang added.

“As neighbors, China and North Korea maintain normal business and trade exchanges,” he said, adding that goods for ordinary people and those used for humanitarian reasons are not subject to sanctions.

Overall trade growth with North Korea slowed in June, compared with previous second-quarter months.

Trade in dollar terms with North Korea rose about 12 percent in June from a month earlier to $499 million, according to Reuters calculations based on previously released data.

The calculations do not reflect revisions to earlier figures that may not have been announced.

In May, trade with North Korea gained 14.5 percent from April to $443.5 million, previously released customs data show.

Numbers showing an increase are not evidence that China is failing to enforce U.N. resolutions, with imports from North Korea falling every month since March, Huang added.

China suspended imports of North Korean coal in February, while imports of iron ore accord with relevant U.N. resolutions, he said.

“China customs have all along fully, accurately, conscientiously and strictly enforced relevant Security Council resolutions.”

Full article:
China trade with sanctions-struck North Korea up 10.5 percent in first half
Fang Cheng and Ben Blanchard
Reuters
2017-07-13

As Washington Post reports (citing Kent Boydston’s data), this makes for one massive trade deficit for North Korea. Something seems to be odd with the data, which itself isn’t that odd in this context. A Chinese spokesperson explained the trend as follows:

Monthly figures were more representative of the trend, he said, and Chinas imports from North Korea had been falling sharply for four consecutive months since March, including by 36percent in March and 42percent in April.

The trade growth between China and North Korea in the first half of the year was mainly driven by exports, Huang said, adding that the exports were mainly labor-intensive products such as textiles, which are not banned under U.N. resolutions.

Letting North Korea run a trade deficit of this magnitude sure would be awfully selfless of China, unless North Korea is somehow borrowing to make up for it, which seems highly unlikely.

Wall Street Journalalso reported the trade data:

The rise in trade was driven by a 29.1% increase in exports from a year earlier, while imports fell 13.2%, said Huang Songping, spokesman for the General Administration of Customs, at a briefing Thursday. He said China was abiding by U.N. sanctions comprehensively, carefully, accurately and seriously and that the first-half data doesnt reflect Beijings current stance on its neighbor.

He said imports from North Korea have fallen for the past four months and all coal imports were made in the first two months of the year, beforeChina suspended coal purchases from Pyongyang. He said coal imports were down 74.5% for the full first half from a year earlier.

Goods exported to North Korea were largely items such as textile products not covered by sanctions, Mr. Huang said.

China is by far North Koreas biggest trading partner, accounting for more than 80% of the hermit states external trade for the past five years. AfterNorth Koreas successful launch of an intercontinental ballistic missileon July 4, U.S. President Donald Trump in a tweet cited a rise in Chinas trade with Pyongyang in the first quarter,questioning Beijings willingness to ratchet up pressure on its neighbor.

The U.S. has since stepped up its rhetoric, moving toward unilaterally tightening sanctions, targetingChinese companiesandbanksthe U.S. says are funneling cash into Pyongyangs weapons program.

Beijing has resisted suggestions it isnt doing enough to pressure North Korea, countering that Washington must directly engage Pyongyang to dissuade its nuclear ambitions. China backed tougher U.N. sanctions last year on North Koreas coal exports, while ensuring an exemption for humanitarian needs. Chinese officials say the Februarysuspension of imports of North Korean coalfor the rest of this year was part of efforts to enforce those sanctions.

Chinas Foreign Ministry says Beijing has played an indispensable role in trying to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula. On Thursday, a ministry spokesman said Chinese imports of iron ore in the first half were allowed under the U.N. sanctions as they are for civilian use and generate no income for North Koreas nuclear-weapons program.

The data on the customs agencys website didnt break out iron-ore imports from North Korea in the first half.

Chinas imports of the steelmaking material from all countries jumped 16% from a year earlier in June and rose 9.4% for the first half, customs data showed, as a lasting property boom has spurred demand from the construction sector.

The Foreign Ministry spokesman, Geng Shuang, also reaffirmed Beijings commitment to the U.N. sanctions. China is implementing the [North Korea]-related resolutions in a full and strict manner, he said.

In the first quarter, total trade between China and North Korea grew 29.2% from a year earlier, according to Chinese customs data. Both the first-quarter and first-half increases were in dollar terms.

Full article:
China Defends Its Growing Trade With Sanctioned North Korea
Liyan Qi and Chun Han Wong
Wall Street Journal
2017-07-13

Share

US government seizes millions from big banks though to have dealt with North Korea

Thursday, July 6th, 2017

Benjamin Katzeff Silberstein

Reuters reports:

U.S. authorities have tried to seize millions of dollars associated with several companies that deal with North Korea, including the country’s military, from eight large international banks, according to court filings made public on Thursday.

The effort was revealed two days after North Korea tested a long-range missile capable of reaching Alaska, ratcheting up tensions with the United States and adding to worries about North Korea leader Kim Jong-un’s nuclear weapons plans.

Thursday’s filings show that Chief Judge Beryl Howell of the federal court in Washington, D.C. on May 22 granted U.S. prosecutors’ applications for “damming” seizure warrants against Bank of America Corp (BAC.N), Bank of New York Mellon Corp (BK.N), Citigroup Inc (C.N), Deutsche Bank AG (DBKGn.DE), HSBC Holdings Plc (HSBA.L), JPMorgan Chase & Co (JPM.N), Standard Chartered Plc (STAN.L) and Wells Fargo & Co (WFC.N).

Prosecutors believe the banks have processed more than $700 million of “prohibited” transactions on behalf of entities tied to North Korea since 2009, including the period after Donald Trump was elected U.S. president, the filings show.

Some of the transactions were processed for Dandong Zhicheng Metallic Material Co and four affiliated “front” companies that prosecutors said tried to evade sanctions through transactions that would benefit North Korean entities, “including the North Korea military and North Korea weapons programs,” according to the filings.

The filings did not say any of the banks knowingly violated sanctions against North Korea.

In her decision, Howell authorized warrants requiring the eight banks to accept incoming transactions but not allow outgoing transactions involving the five companies for 14 days, and thereafter to seize what they collected.

Full article:
U.S. seeks funds tied to North Korea from eight big banks
Jonathan Stempel
Reuters
2017-07-06

Share

An affiliate of 38 North