Archive for the ‘Trade Statistics’ Category

DPRK-PRC trade up 18.1% from January to May 2010

Tuesday, July 13th, 2010

Institute for Far Eastern Studies (IFES)
NK Brief No.10-07-08-2
7-8-2010

As inter-Korean commerce has all but dried up in the wake of the Cheonan incident, trade between North Korea and China appears to have continued to grow. According to Chinese customs statistics released on July 6, trade with North Korea from January to May amounted to 983.63 million USD; 18.1 percent more than the 833.07 million USD reported for the same period last year.

North Korea imported 727.192 million USD-worth of Chinese goods (29 percent increase over the same period last year), but exports dropped by 4.9 percent, amounting to only 256.438 million USD. This indicates a 60 percent increase in North Korea’s trade deficit with China, which was 470.757 million USD in the first part of 2009. With South Korean sanctions against the North halting all inter-Korean trade outside of the Kaesong Industrial Complex following the sinking of the Cheonan, it is expected that Pyongyang will become even more economically dependent on Beijing.

During this period, crude oil accounted for most of North Korea’s imports from China, as Pyongyang bought 254,000 tons (slightly more than the 247,000 tons in early 2009). However, due to rising international fuel prices, this oil cost the North 157.097 million USD, a 76 percent increase over what Pyongyang spent during this period last year.

In addition, rice (24,400 tons), corn (31,400 tons), beans (20,500 tons), flour (34,000 tons) and other necessary food imports totaling 11,300 tons reflected a 41 percent increase over the same period in 2009. The cost of fertilizer imports also jumped sharply, amounting to 81,943 tons, or 115.6 percent more than the 38,004 tons imported from January to May 2009. Increasing imports of food and fertilizer are a result of the growing agricultural difficulties being faced in the North. Based on current prices, aviation fuel imports also grew by 46.8 percent, freight trucks by 98.7 percent, automobile fuel by 47.4 percent, and bituminous coal by 137 percent.

The top ten official imports of Chinese goods by North Korea were as follows: crude oil (21.6 percent); aviation fuel (3.1 percent); freight trucks (2.9 percent); automobile fuel (2 percent); bituminous coal (1.9 percent); fertilizer (1.8 percent); beans (1.6 percent); flour (1.6 percent); rice (1.5 percent); and corn (1.1 percent).

North Korea’s exports to China were mainly underground natural resources. The top ten exported goods were: iron ore (17.1 percent); anthracite (16 percent); pig iron (9.6 percent); zinc (5 percent); Magnesite (3.6 percent); lead (2.4 percent); silicon (2.3 percent); men’s clothing (2.2 percent); frozen squid (2.1 percent); and aluminum (1.9 percent).

Share

Nomura: More ‘Bad Behavior’ from N. Korea Possible before G20 Summit

Thursday, July 8th, 2010

According to Yonhap:

North Korea could take more provocative acts before the November summit of the Group of 20 nations in South Korea if history is any indication, a Japanese investment bank said on June 4.

Nomura International warned that North Korea may display more “bad behavior” similar to the March sinking of South Korea’s 1,200-ton corvette Cheonan, of which North Korea stands accused.

“Experts are wondering whether North Korea’s bad behavior… may be no coincidence,” said Alastair Newton and Kwon Young-sun, two Nomura economists, explaining that North Korea has done similar acts when South Korea hosted global events.

North Korean agents bombed a Korean Air jet in mid-air 10 months before the 1988 Seoul Olympics, killing all 115 passengers and crew members on board, while naval ships of the two Koreas clashed in the Yellow Sea in 2002, the year South Korea co-hosted the World Cup event with Japan.

“Especially given the domestic stresses and strains from which North Korea appears to be suffering at present, we should be braced for the possibility of more of the same — and, possibly, worse — for some time to come,” the economists said in a 40-page report titled “North Korea: Through a Glass Darkly.”

The economists expected that tensions on the Korean Peninsula will ease somewhat shortly, but were skeptical whether there will be practical progress in the global efforts to denuclearize the secretive regime.

“If the six-party talks resume — and we believe they may as China in particular looks to keep Pyongyang in check without risking regime collapse — we are doubtful that North Korea will be prepared to make or deliver on meaningful concessions in response to the demands of the international community,” the report said.

Nomura said it sees a low probability of North Korea’s imminent collapse, especially in the run-up to Kim Jong-il’s succession and the 100th anniversary of the birth of Kim Il-sung, the leader’s father and the founder of the regime, in 2012.

At the same time, the bank doubted the political status quo in Pyongyang is sustainable for more than a short period.

While placing a relatively low probability on the reunification of the two Koreas in the foreseeable future, the Nomura report said the cost of the reunification will be heavy and burdensome.

In order to reduce the possible costs, the Nomura economists suggested of adopting “less ambitious and more realistic” methods — such as the “one country, two systems” model used by China and Hong Kong.

You can download the Nomura report here (PDF).

Additional reports and statistics on the DPRK economy can be found here.

Congressional Research Service (CRS) reports can be found here.

Other unrelated studies can be found on this post as well.

Share

KDI sees continuing economic contraction in DPRK

Tuesday, July 6th, 2010

According to the AFP:

North Korea’s economy is expected to continue shrinking this year after South Korea cut off most trade in protest at the sinking of a warship, a report said Tuesday.

“The North is very likely to see its economy shrink this year,” said the report from South Korea’s state-run Korea Development Institute (KDI), without estimating a figure.

“Our outlook is based on a forecast that its external trade will likely post a setback.”

The communist state’s economy contracted 0.9 percent in 2009, according to an earlier report from the South’s central bank.

The South in May announced a ban on most trade after a multinational investigation concluded that a North Korean torpedo sank the warship in March with the loss of 46 lives.

The KDI said at the time the ban would cost the impoverished North hundreds of millions of dollars a year, noting that Pyongyang posted a 333 million dollar trade surplus with its neighbour last year.

The South’s central bank says the North’s economy shrank 1.1 percent in 2006 and contracted by 2.3 percent in 2007, but grew 3.1 percent in 2008 until contracting again last year.

A further shrinkage this year could spark an economic crisis, Tuesday’s report said.

“North Korea’s economy could be hurled into a very precarious situation,” it said.

“As experienced by the nation in the mid-1990s, a crisis could more likely be prompted by consecutive contractions for a relatively long period of time, rather than a one-off steep economic downturn.”

The North’s economy fell deep into trouble in the 1990s after the break-up of the Soviet Union and the loss of its crucial aid.

The country suffered famine in the 1990s which killed hundreds of thousands and it still grapples with severe food shortages.

Since 2005 the regime has been reasserting its grip on the economy, with controls or outright bans on private markets.

A currency revaluation last November, designed to flush out entrepreneurs’ savings, backfired disastrously. It fuelled food shortages as market trading dried up and sparked rare outbreaks of unrest.

The North was forced to suspend its campaign against free markets.

The United Nations in June last year tightened sanctions following the North’s missile launches and nuclear test earlier in the year.

Read the full story here:
N.Korea economy to shrink on trade cutoff: report
AFP
7/5/2010

Share

China-DPRK trade rises

Tuesday, July 6th, 2010

According to Yonhap:

Trade between North Korea and China in the January-May period increased 18 percent compared to last year, a sign that Pyongyang continues to expand economic ties with Beijing amid soured relations with Seoul, figures showed Tuesday.

North Korea imported US$727.2 million worth of goods from China and exported $256.4 million in the five-month period this year, according to figures recently released by Chinese customs authorities and obtained by Yonhap News Agency.

Read the full story here:
Trade between N. Korea, China rises, signaling closer economic ties
Yonhap
Sam Kim
7/6/2010

Share

OECD on Korean unification costs

Thursday, June 17th, 2010

According to Yonhap:

The widening inter-Korean economic and social gaps could eventually increase the cost of unification, a report showed Friday, highlighting the importance of the private sector’s role in “limiting the gap.”

According to the report compiled by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, South Korea’s economy is about 38 times larger than the North’s and 18 times larger on a per-capita basis as of the end of 2008.

North Korea’s total trade volume remains just 0.4 percent of South Korea’s, while production of electricity and steel stands at a mere 6 percent and 2.4 percent, respectively, the report showed.

The report also noted that the North Korean economy grew 3.7 percent in 2008 following two years of contraction but its currency reform in late 2009 triggered “serious economic problems,” pointing to a tough road for the reclusive country’s future growth.

The North is also showing a marked gap with the South not just in the economic field but also in social and welfare areas such as high infant mortality rates and relatively short life expectancy, according to the report.

“The large gap in income and health will boost the eventual cost of economic integration,” said the report.

“The expansion of trade driven by private sector firms in the South, in line with the government’s strategy of limiting cooperation to projects that are economically viable and that do not overburden taxpayers in the South, provides the best hope for limiting the gap,” it added.

The report comes as inter-Korean trade and investment except for an industrial park in the border town of Kaesong was suspended after a multinational investigation recently proved that the North torpedoed one of South Korea’s patrol ships in March, killing 46 sailors.

The two Koreas are still technically at war as no peace treaty was signed at the end of the 1950-53 Korean War.

Of course, Yonhap does not bother to tell us the name of the study or provide a link!

I think I found it however. I am 99% confident that Yonhap is citing the OECD Economic Surveys: Korea 2010.

The reason I was able to locate the report was because one of the quotes Yonhap provided above was used word-for-word in the OECD Economic Surveys: Korea 2008. Check out the last sentence of paragraph 2 on page 54.

Share

North Korean foreign trade down 10.5% in 2009

Monday, June 7th, 2010

Institute for Far Eastern Studies (IFES)
NK Brief No. 10-06-07-1
6/7/2010

In 2009, North Korea’s foreign trade (not including inter-Korean trade) amounted to 3.41 billion dollars, 10.5 percent less than 2008, which saw the largest amount of DPRK overseas commerce since 1991. Exports were down 5.97 percent (1.06 billion USD), while imports were down 12.45 percent (2.35 billion USD), recording a 1.29 billion USD trade deficit.

These figures come from a KOTRA analysis of the Korea Business Center (KBC)’s statistics of trade with North Korea by foreign countries. Because North Korea does not reveal trade statistics, this ‘mirror analysis’ method of analyzing the statistics of its trading partners is the only method available.

Looking at each country’s trade figures individually reveals that China is the North’s largest trade partner. DPRK-PRC trade amounted to 2.68 billion USD last year, 78.5 percent of all the North’s foreign trade. The North exported 790 million USD worth of goods to China, while its imports from China amounted to 1.89 billion USD. As North Korea’s trade with China continues to grow relative to that with other countries, so too, does its economic dependence on Beijing. In 2003, DPRK-PRC trade amounted to 42.8 percent of its overall foreign trade. This grew to 48.5 percent in 2004, accounted for more than half (52.6 percent) in2005, hit 56.7 percent in 2006, 67.1 percent in 2007, and 73 percent in 2008.

North Korea’s main imports from China were crude oil and petroleum (330 million USD, down 44.2 percent from 2008), boiler and machinery parts (160 million USD, up 10 percent), and electrical components (130 million USD, up 31 percent). Top exports to China included coal (260 million USD, up 26 percent), minerals (140 million USD, down 34.1 percent), and textiles (90 million USD, up 20.7 percent).

Germany, Russia, India, and Singapore were the North’s 2nd thru 5th largest trade partners. Trade with Germany was up 33.7 percent, amounting to 70 million USD, while trade with Russia, India, and Singapore dropped off. After these countries, Hong Kong, Brazil, Thailand, Bangladesh, and the Netherlands made up the rest of the top 10 trade partners, which account for 92 percent of all the North’s overseas trade.

In addition, with continuing sanctions against the North by the United States and Japan, there were no exports to these countries, and imports from these countries amounted to a mere 2.7 million USD and 900,000 USD, respectively.

Inter-Korean trade for 2009 amounted to 1.68 billion USD. This was down 7.8 percent from the previous year. North Korean imports from the South were down 16.1 percent, recording 740 million USD. This was largely impacted by the closing of the Keumgang Mountain tourism project.

Combined, North Korea’s total foreign trade was down 9.7 percent, to 5.09 billion USD. 53 percent of this was with China, while 33 percent was with South Korea.

Continued international sanctions against the North and the possibility of additional unilateral sanctions from several countries means DPRK foreign trade will likely shrink more in 2010. It is also expected that the North’s economic dependency on China will continue to grow.

Share

Brazil, North Korea: Brothers in trade

Wednesday, June 2nd, 2010

Bertil Lintner wrties in the Asia Times:

For more than a decade, the world around North Korea has been shrinking. In the wake of its missile and nuclear tests and recent accusations that it torpedoed a South Korean naval vessel, the list of internationally imposed sanctions and trade restrictions aimed at isolating the reclusive state has grown ever longer.

But the North Koreans, who have been in a state of war for more than half a century, have often found ingenious ways around those restrictions and added pressures from the United States, Japan and other countries, most visibly seen in the string of front companies and bank accounts it maintains across Asia.

Recent indications are that Pyongyang has sought willing trade partners outside of Asia and its new closest commercial ally appears to be Brazil. Relations between the two countries have warmed considerably since leftist Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva became president in January 2003.

The official Chinese news agency Xinhua reported in October 2004 that North Korea planned to open an embassy in Brasilia, its fourth in the Latin and South American region after Havana, Cuba, Lima, Peru and Mexico City. On May 23, 2006, the official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) and the Brazilian media reported that the two countries had signed a trade agreement.

More recently, the KCNA reported last December that a “protocol on the amendment to the trade agreement” had been signed in the capital Pyongyang. “Present at the signing ceremony from the DPRK [Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, or North Korea] side were Ri Ryong Nam, minister of foreign trade, and officials concerned and from the Brazilian side Arnaldo Carrilho, Brazilian ambassador to the DPRK, and embassy officials,” according to the news report.

China’s role in facilitating trade between Brazil and North Korea remains a matter of conjecture, but it is significant that the state mouthpiece Xinhua has eagerly reported on the warming of relations between the two countries. China remains Pyongyang’s most important base for all kinds of foreign trade – legitimate as well as more convoluted business transactions through front companies in Beijing and elsewhere.

But North Korea also needs more discreet trading partners, as China is often criticized in international forums for its close relations with the North Korean regime and is undoubtedly closely watched by Western intelligence agencies. And it is hardly surprising that Brazil, which is known to harbor its own nuclear ambitions, albeit for stated peaceful purposes, has emerged as such a friendly nation to Pyongyang.

Significantly, Brazil has established what appears to be an understanding with another aspiring nuclear power: Iran. “Also like Iran, Brazil has cloaked key aspects of its nuclear technology in secrecy while insisting the program is for peaceful purposes, claims nuclear weapons experts have debunked,” according to an April 20, 2006 Associated Press report.

While Brazil is more cooperative than Iran on international inspections, some worry its new enrichment capability – which eventually will create more fuel than is needed for its two nuclear plants [1] – suggests that South America’s biggest nation may be rethinking its commitment to nuclear non-proliferation.

”Brazil is following a path very similar to Iran, but Iran is getting all the attention,” said Marshall Eakin, a Brazil expert at Vanderbilt University in the United States. ”In effect, Brazil is benefiting from Iran’s problems.”

In September 2009, Lula declared before the United Nations General Assembly: “Iran is entitled to the same rights as any other country in its use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.” He added to reporters outside the UN General Assembly, “I defend for Iran the same rights with respect to nuclear energy that I do for Brazil.” He added: “If anyone is ashamed of having relations with Iran, it’s not Brazil.”

But it is Lula’s budding cooperation with North Korea that is especially worrying to some Western observers. According to one longtime observer of the North Korean scene, “Both nations have long-standing ambitions to develop a nuclear capability as well as missiles and space-launched vehicles. Both have been the subject of intense US political pressure at times, Brazil on-and-off, North Korea all the time. And Brazil has access to technology that North Korea can only dream about.”

Because Brazil is not on any international sanctions list, it is easier for it to obtain dual-use materials. It remains to be proven, however, that Brazil has served as a conduit for such goods ultimately destined for North Korea.

According to official trade statistics, available at www.stat-trade.com, North Korea’s largest trading partner in 2009 was China, with two-way commerce totaling US$2.67 billion. That was followed by South-North Korean trade worth $1.68 billion. A surprising third on the list was Brazil with US$221 million in two-way trade, well ahead of Singapore, Hong Kong and North Korea’s other traditional Asian trading partners.

The nominal figure may not be impressive in an international context, but it is substantial for North Korea, a country with an estimated total gross domestic product of about $22 billion. North Korea’s trade with Brazil has recently increased almost at the pace it has decreased with Thailand, from where it previously sourced dual-use chemicals, raw materials and machinery. Thailand no longer figures prominently in recent trade statistics, which is noteworthy given that their two-way trade reached a record US$331 million in 2004.

Those deals were done under the government of Thaksin Shinawatra, who at one point even proposed signing a full-blown free-trade agreement with North Korea. In August 2005, the former Thai premier was formally invited by North Korean leader Kim Jong-il to visit Pyongyang. The visit never materialized, however, and when Thaksin was ousted in a September 2006 military coup, Thai-North Korean relations began to deteriorate. By 2008, bilateral trade between Thailand and North Korea fell to $76 million and in 2009 dipped further to $47.1 million.

Among North Korea’s more remarkable export items before the September 2006 coup in Thailand were 1.3 tons of gold and 10 tons of silver. Another pre-arranged shipment of 12 tons of silver arrived in Bangkok in October of that year. However, business is now reportedly sluggish at the two main trading companies that North Korea is known to maintain in Bangkok, Star Bravo and Kosun Export Import.

Successive Thai governments that have ruled the country since Thaksin’s overthrow are believed to have complied more strictly with international pressure to restrict dealings with North Korea. In Brazil, however, North Korea has a long history of involvement with various leftist groups, the distant offshoots of which are now in power in Brasilia.

North Korea expert Joseph S Bermudez wrote in his 1990 study “Terrorism: The North Korean Connection”:

From 1968 to 1971 the DPRK provided financial and military assistance to several leftist organizations in Brazil, most notably to Carlos Marighella’s National Liberating Action (Acao Libertadora Nacional – ALN) and the Revolutionary Popular Vanguard (Vanguarda Popular Revolucionaria – VPR). By November 1970, the DPRK established a training base in the Porto Alegre area, where a small number of guerrillas were given guerrilla warfare, small arms, and ideological training. A small number of ALN and VPR personnel is believed to have also received training within the DPRK.

Marighella – a Marxist, writer and founder of the ALN – was the leader of a militant movement that fought against Brazil’s US-supported, authoritarian right-wing governments in the 1960s. In September 1969, the guerrillas even managed to kidnap US ambassador Charles Burke Elbrick for 78 hours. After his release in exchange for 15 imprisoned leftists, Elbrick remarked, “Being an ambassador is not always a bed or roses.” Two months later, Marighella was killed in an encounter with Brazil’s police. But on November 4, 2009, the 40th anniversary of the death of Marighella, Lula declared him a “national hero”.

Although ideology may be less important than profits in today’s capitalist world, there are old emotional bonds between North Korea and Brazil under Lula that should not be entirely discounted. Brazil may be among the countries which have condemned North Korea’s nuclear program, as was shown when, in May 2009, the Brazilian government called on North Korea “to sign the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and to strictly observe the moratorium on nuclear tests”.

But bilateral trade between the two sides is nevertheless – in relative terms – now booming. In May last year, North Korea’s Foreign Affairs Minister Pak Ui-chun arrived in Brazil to meet with his Brazilian counterpart, Celso Amorim. Pak expressed Pyongyang’s interest in receiving assistance in its deep-water oil prospecting efforts from PETROBRAS (Brazilian Petroleum Corporation), while Amorim said his country was reportedly interested in exporting what he referred to as “farm” machinery.

So far no military hardware, or material that could have military applications, is known to have changed hands between North Korea and Brazil. But Pyongyang has found at least one new trading partner which could potentially replace some of its former business allies in Asia. It’s a budding relationship that will be closely monitored by North Korea watchers in Japan and the West.

Read the full story here:
Brazil, North Korea: Brothers in trade
Asia Times
Bertil Lintner
Asia Times
6/3/2010

Share

Japan tightens controls on DPRK cash flows

Monday, May 31st, 2010

According to Bloomberg:

Japan tightened controls on sending money to North Korea and authorized the Coast Guard to search the communist regime’s ships in response to the deadly attack on a South Korean naval vessel.

The cap on undeclared cash transfers will be lowered to 3 million yen ($32,800) from 10 million yen, Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirofumi Hirano said today in Tokyo. Parliament passed a bill allowing the boarding of ships in international waters suspected of carrying North Korean nuclear or missile technology.

The toughened sanctions come a week after an international report concluded that a North Korean torpedo sank the 1,200-ton Cheonan in March, killing 46 sailors. Japan banned almost all trade with Kim Jong Il’s regime last year in response to a second nuclear weapon test and several missile launches.

“The cabinet has decided to take these new measures prompted by the unforgivable torpedo attack,” Hirano said. Japan also reduced the amount of money an individual can legally take into North Korea to 100,000 yen from 300,000 yen, he said.

Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama will hold a two-day summit with South Korean President Lee Myung Bak and Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao starting tomorrow on South Korea’s Jeju Island. Japan and the U.S. are pushing Wen to acknowledge and condemn North Korea’s role in sinking the ship.

Koreans in Japan

Japan is home to about 589,000 Korean nationals, based on 2008 data, most of them the descendents of forced laborers brought back from the peninsula during Japan’s 1910-1945 occupation. South Koreans number almost 400,000 and North Koreans about 40,000, according to the Korean Residents Union, a pro-South group in Tokyo. Chosensoren, a Japan-based group that supports North Korea, doesn’t disclose its membership numbers.

North Korean residents in Japan have sent billions of yen in money and goods back home to relatives since the 1953 end of the Korean War, much of it derived from their operation of pachinko gambling parlors. Sanctions imposed last year and in 2006 have reduce the amount.

“Japan has imposed so many sanctions in the past that the new measures won’t have much impact,” said Pyon Jin Il, author of the “The Truth of Kim Jong Il” and chief editor of the Tokyo-based monthly Korea Report. “This is more symbolic, to show the world that Japan is doing something.”

In the 11 months through February, 55 million yen was wired or brought to North Korea from Japan, down from 280 million yen in the April to March 2006 fiscal year, according to Ministry of Finance data.

Trade between Japan and North Korea fell 97 percent to 793 million yen in 2008 — all in Japanese exports — from 21.4 billion yen in 2005. Last year’s sanctions added to a previous ban on exports of luxury goods imposed in 2006 following the communist nation’s first nuclear test.

Read full story here:
Japan Tightens Control on Sending Cash to North Korea
Bloomberg
Takashi Hirokawa and Sachiko Sakamaki
5/28/2010

Share

Impact of the ROK’s May 24 economic sanctions against the DPRK

Monday, May 31st, 2010

Institute for Far Eastern Studies (IFES)
NK Brief No. 10-05-27-1
5/27/2010

On May 24, the South Korean government announced, in response to the Cheonan incident, the cessation of inter-Korean exchanges and other sanctions against Pyongyang. These measures will directly impact the North, costing it 250~300 million USD. According to the Ministry of Unification, North Korea earned 245.19 million USD from inter-Korean cooperative schemes not related to the Kaesong Industrial Complex. This does not include additions monies for customs fees, transportation costs, mediation fees and other incidentals.

About 254 million USD worth of goods were produced on commission in the North after raw materials or partially manufactured products were sent from the South. 10~15 percent of this (25-38 million USD) covers labor and other costs. Therefore, by halting all exchanges and cooperative schemes other than the Kaesong Industrial Complex, North Korea stands to lose at least 200 million USD.

In particular, as the South has banned the import of North Korean sand and marine products, both known to be money-earners for the North’s military, it appears these sanctions have the potential to really pressure Pyongyang. In addition, preventing North Korean ships from using South Korean waters could cost an additional nine million USD. An additional 6 billion won-worth of government-related projects for the North has also been suspended. Ultimately, the cessation of inter-Korean exchange will cost North Korea 250~300 million USD.

The Korea Defense Institute estimates that through inter-Korean projects, tourism, and the Kaesong Industrial Complex, North Korea earned 180 million USD in 2004, but that jumped to 233 million USD in 2005, 341 million in 2006, and 534 million USD in 2007, before falling to 490 million in 2008, and 347 million USD last year.

It appears that the reduction in foreign currency earned by the North has somewhat impacted its economy. Now, the cessation of inter-Korean contacts means further reduction in the North’s access to foreign currency, possibly causing severe shortages of daily necessities because of a lack of trade and insufficient production capacity. If inter-Korean trade ceases, the North can no longer earn foreign capital from Seoul, and this could cause DPRK-PRC trade to drop off, if the North is unable to cover its bills.

It will also cause a loss of jobs for all those North Koreans involved in consignment production, fishing, farming, and other areas of the economy hit by the freeze in trade with the South. As the processing-on-consignment business has reached 30~35 million USD per year, labor involved in the industry nears that of the Kaesong Industrial Complex, and could mean the loss of as many as 40,000 jobs.

While the government has decided to maintain the Kaesong Industrial Complex, it plans to downsize the ROK manpower by 40-50 percent. The reason given is to be able to ensure the safety of the workers, but if the number of workers is cut by 50 percent, this cannot help but have a huge impact on production, raising concerns with North and South Korean employees alike.

Share

Some recent sanctions statistics

Tuesday, May 25th, 2010

According to Reuters:

The state-run Korea Trade-Investment Promotion Agency (KOTRA) said North Korea’s trade, including commerce with South Korea, fell 9.7 percent to $5.09 billion last year from 2008.

Excluding trade with the South, foreign commerce feel 10.5 percent to $3.41 billion last year, KOTRA said in a statement.

It said trade with China, the North’s sole supporter, amounted to about $2.7 billion.

The prospect of further sanctions as a result of the sinking of a South Korean naval vessel by a suspected North Korean torpedo in March would slow trade even more, KOTRA said.

“North Korea’s trade this year is seen shrinking further and depending more on China due to the U.N.’s continuous sanctions against the North and possibilities of further measures,” KOTRA said.

North Korea does not announce its own trade data and KOTRA said it compiled the data from the agency’s overseas offices.

Last week, Seoul released the findings of a report which concluded that a North Korean submarine had fired a torpedo that sank the Cheonan corvette, killing 46 sailors.

South Korea has repeatedly said it would not strike back at the North, aware that would frighten away investors already jittery about the escalating tension on the divided peninsula.

Washington has called for an international response, which could range from fresh U.N. Security Council sanctions on North Korea, although those might be opposed by China, to a statement of condemnation by the world body.

A range of international sanctions have been levied against North Korea in recent years for its missile and nuclear tests.

And according to Leon Sigal in 38 North:

… North Korean trade increased in the two years following the 2006 UN sanctions. Inter-Korean trade totaled $1.8 billion in 2007—about a 33 percent jump from 2006—then rose again to $1.9 billion in 2008. China trade also grew to roughly the same level in 2007, then shot up to $2.78 billion in 2008. North Korea’s total trade increased by more in 2008 than in any other year over the past decade and its economy grew by 3.7 percent according to the Bank of Korea.  

The most recent UN sanctions enacted in 2009 have had similar results. In response to the threat of sanctions, Pyongyang went ahead with a test-launch of a long-range rocket and a second, more successful, nuclear test. The UN Security Council, in response, enacted Resolution 1874 imposing sanctions on the DPRK. The prime target of the new sanctions was the bank accounts of North Korean entities involved in nuclear and missile trafficking. Given the many ways to circumvent the banking system, however, and the reluctance of governments to interpret Resolution 1874 as liberally as the United States did, it is still unclear how much of an impediment this will prove to be. As the Congressional Research Service concluded, “[F]inancial sanctions aimed solely at the DPRK’s prohibited activities are not likely to have a large monetary effect.”

Luxury goods were also a focus of the most recent U.N. sanctions—in the dubious belief that consumerism is as rampant among privileged North Koreans as it is in Georgetown or that Kim Jong Il’s hold on the elite can be loosened by denying them Rolexes or Mercedes imported from China. A Congressional Research Service analysis of Chinese trade statistics for 2008 indicates that Beijing’s exports of luxury consumer goods to North Korea was between $100 million and $160 million, mostly financed by Chinese credit. That trade is not likely to have dropped enough to make any appreciable difference on the loyalty of elites long accustomed to tight belts and even tighter social controls.

Again, the overall economic impact of the sanctions appears to have been limited. Overall, according to U.S. estimates, North Korea’s economy again grew at a 3.7 percent rate in 2009,[7] probably because of a more bountiful harvest. While North Korean exports to China are difficult to estimate because of the introduction of the new currency, imports from China in 2009 dropped sharply to below the 2007 level. Some of the drop was due to the global recession and price deflation.[8] Trade with South Korea fell 8.5 percent in 2009 but still totaled $1.7 billion—five times what it was a decade ago. Trade with Japan was cut to a pittance, though it is difficult to ascertain the extent to which cash remittances from Koreans in Japan still manage to circumvent sanctions. For instance, Tokyo discovered that the DPRK was exporting sanctioned food items such as mushrooms to China and they were then sold to Japan at higher prices. The only losers may have been Japanese consumers.

As for international cooperation to curb the North’s arms sales, the net effect is probably overstated. In 2005, even before sanctions were imposed, the global market for missiles—the big-ticket item—had dried up, as buyers like Iran and Pakistan opened their own production lines, although technological assistance still generated revenue for Pyongyang. Since the UN arms embargo, at least four shipments of arms have been interdicted. Their total value, never mind net profit, fell far short of the estimated $500 million a year North Korean arms sales are supposed to generate. How many of its exports evaded capture is not known.

Read the full stories here:
Sanctions hit North Korea’s crumbling economy: report
Reuters
Cheon Jong-woo
5/23/2010

Looking for Leverage in All the Wrong Places
38 North
Leon V. Sigal

Share