[News Analysis] New resolution on North Korea results from US, China compromise

Posted on : 2017-12-23 16:03 KST Modified on : 2019-10-19 20:29 KST
The main point of contention centered around how much to reduce the supply of crude oil
The United Nations Security Council meets at the UN headquarters in New York on Dec. 19 to discuss new sanctions against North Korea. Member nations agreed to hold a vote on Dec. 22 on new measures that would restrict North Korea’s supply of crude oil from two million to 500
The United Nations Security Council meets at the UN headquarters in New York on Dec. 19 to discuss new sanctions against North Korea. Member nations agreed to hold a vote on Dec. 22 on new measures that would restrict North Korea’s supply of crude oil from two million to 500

It took more than three weeks after North Korea test launched the Hwasong-15 intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) for the UN Security Council to devise more sanctions against the North, which are focused on greatly reducing its total supply of refined oil. This took significantly longer than UN Security Council Resolution No. 2375, which was adopted less than 10 days after North Korea carried out its sixth nuclear weapon test on Sept. 3.

This delay resulted from the considerable maneuvering and wrangling that was required for the US and China to end their standoff and reach the compromise of sharply reducing the supply of refined oil products instead of completely shutting down the supply of crude oil to the North.

During an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council on Nov. 29, the day after North Korea launched its Hwasong-15, US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley urged China to cut off all trade with the North Korean regime, including imports and exports. She even hinted that the US might pursue independent sanctions against Chinese oil refineries if China did not take steps to cut off the supply of crude oil to the North. The rift between the US and China at that meeting was so great that the UN Security Council was unable to even release a press statement or a statement from the president.

After this, the US ratcheted up pressure on China by demanding that it completely shut down its supply of petroleum to North Korea, expel all North Korean workers and take part in maritime interdiction of North Korean vessels. The US reportedly warned that, if China did not agree to this, the US would impose sanctions on Sinopec (the China Petroleum and Chemical Corporation) and major Chinese banks.

When the dispute over the scope of sanctions against North Korea and US-China trade issues intensified, China hurriedly dispatched Vice Foreign Minister Zheng Zeguang to Washington on Dec. 6-8 to determine the US’s true intentions. China also seems to have been worried by US Undersecretary of the Treasury for International Affairs David Malpass’ unilateral declaration during an interview with the Financial Times on Nov. 30 that the US was not planning to revive the Comprehensive Economic Dialogue with China, since China had received no prior notification or even a hint of this harsh move.

Even during Zheng’s visit to Washington, the two sides were reportedly unable to reach a compromise. “The US indicated that it was willing to push forward with independent sanctions against China, and China warned that it would be forced to retaliate against independent sanctions,” said one diplomatic source in Washington, D.C. who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Last week, the standoff between the two sides apparently began to shift toward an effort to find a compromise. In behind-the-scene talks, the US informed China that it would give up its demand for the suspension of the supply of crude oil to North Korea and refrain from imposing independent sanctions against large Chinese companies and banks if China agreed to actively cooperate with the new UN sanctions resolution, multiple sources said.

As a result, the US’s demand for the crude oil supply to be cut off was reportedly scaled back to a major reduction of the supply of refined oil to North Korea, from two million barrels to 500,000 barrels a year, while the deportation of North Korean overseas workers would be gradually implemented over the course of 12 months.

The demand for Chinese participation in the interdiction of North Korean vessels in international waters was also reportedly downgraded from an “obligation” to “discretion of member states,” leaving it the same as the current sanctions. The US appears to feel that the threat of independent sanctions on China was effective, while the Chinese seem to be congratulating themselves on having managed to keep crude oil flowing to North Korea by sternly threatening to retaliate if the US pushed through its own sanctions.

One South Korean government official predicted that the passage of a resolution greatly reducing the supply of refined oil “will probably cause real damage to the North Korean economy.” Another official emphasized that the resolution explicitly limits the yearly supply of crude oil to North Korea to four million barrels.

“If the goal was to pressure North Korea to come to the table for talks, it was very inappropriate to use the ambiguous expression of ‘maintaining the status quo’ on crude oil in Resolution No. 2375. It’s significant that a proper cap has been set in this resolution,” the official said.

By Yi Yong-in, Washington correspondent and Kim Ji-eun, staff reporter

Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]

button that move to original korean article (클릭시 원문으로 이동하는 버튼)

Related stories