DPRK (North Korea)
Expected Council Action
In August, the chair of the 1718 Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) Sanctions Committee, Ambassador Román Oyarzun (Spain), is due to brief Council members in consultations on the work of the Committee.
Key Recent Developments
The DPRK continues to try to develop its nuclear and ballistic missile programme in defiance of Council resolutions. On 8 May, the DPRK claimed it test-fired a newly developed ballistic missile from a submarine, which would represent a significant step toward developing its sea-based launch capabilities. On 20 May, the DPRK’s National Defense Commission claimed it had developed the ability to miniaturise nuclear weapons, which is necessary to fit a nuclear bomb on a ballistic missile. Analysts have expressed doubt over this latter claim.
Also in May, according to a Republic of Korea (ROK) intelligence report, DPRK leader Kim Jong-un had Defense Minister Hyon Yong Chol publicly executed with an anti-aircraft gun for insubordination. In June, an article by the DPRK state-run Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) named General Pak Yong Sik as Defense Minister, which has been viewed as a confirmation of Hyon’s purging. The ROK’s National Intelligence Service estimates that since Kim came to power in 2011 the DPRK has executed 70 officials.
At a press conference during a visit to the ROK on 18 May, US Secretary of State John Kerry recalled the Council’s consideration last December of the human rights situation in the DPRK. He noted the need for “the global community to continue to shed light on North Korea’s atrocities against its own people”. Kerry further stressed that the human rights violations in the country and Kim’s behaviour in particular were worthy of referral to the ICC.
On 21 July, a week after the agreement on an Iran nuclear deal, a spokesperson for the Foreign Ministry said that the DPRK was “not interested at all in the dialogue to discuss the issue of making it freeze or dismantle its nukes unilaterally,” according to KCNA. The spokesperson added that the two situations were “quite different” and that the DPRK’s “nuclear deterrence… is not a play-thing to be put on the negotiating table, as it is the essential means to protect its sovereignty and vital rights from the US nuclear threat and hostile policy”.
Sanctions-Related Developments
On 6 May, the 1718 DPRK Sanctions Committee sent a letter to Mexico in response to Mexico’s request for Committee guidance, clarifying its asset freeze obligations in the case of the Mu Du Bong, a ship that Mexico seized in July 2014 after it ran aground in the Gulf of Mexico. The Committee informed Mexico that since the Mu Du Bong belonged to Ocean Maritime Management Company (OMM), which is subject to the Council’s asset-freeze measures, Mexico was obligated to continue to hold the ship. (OMM was designated by the Sanctions Committee on 28 July 2014 for its involvement in the Chong Chon Gang case, in which Panama intercepted a ship in July 2013 on its way from Cuba to the DPRK with weapons concealed in a cargo of sugar.) The Committee’s letter may serve as a precedent in further considering the Panel’s recommendation to create an implementation assistance notice on the Chong Chon Gang incident that would, inter alia, clarify that vessels are included among the “assets” and “resources” of designated entities and individuals which states are required by resolutions 1718 and 1894 to freeze.
The Committee received from the DPRK Panel of Experts an addendum, dated 13 May, to the Panel’s incident report regarding launches of ballistic missiles by the DPRK. This confirmed that missile launches by DPRK on 2 March constituted a sanctions violation. Several member states sent letters to the Committee regarding the DPRK’s 8 May submarine missile test, which the Panel has proceeded to investigate.
The Committee has not met since Oyarzun last briefed the Council in consultations on 28 May. It has also not reached agreement on the Panel’s recommendations from its 23 February Final Report.
Human Rights-Related Developments
High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein conducted an official three-day visit to Seoul, Republic of Korea (ROK), where he attended the opening on 25 June of a new UN Human Rights Office to work on the human rights situation in the DPRK. The establishment of the office was recommended in the report of the Commission of Inquiry on the human rights situation in the DPRK (S/2014/276) and requested by the Human Rights Council in a resolution adopted on 27 March (A/HRC/RES/28/22). The office’s mandate includes strengthening the monitoring and documentation of the human rights situation in the DPRK towards establishing accountability; enhancing engagement and capacity-building with the governments of all states concerned, civil society and other stakeholders; and advocacy and outreach initiatives. During his visit to Seoul, the High Commissioner also met President Park Geun-hye, the Chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission and civil society organisations to discuss the human rights situation in the DPRK and the ROK.
Key Issues
A key issue for the Council is the DPRK’s continued flouting of all relevant resolutions and its apparent rejection of any dialogue aimed at denuclearisation.
An additional issue, following the December 2014 decision to add the situation in the DPRK to the Council’s agenda, is what kind of action the Council should consider on the human rights situation in the DPRK.
At the Sanctions Committee level, a key issue remains agreeing on the Panel of Experts’ recommendations.
Options
For the Committee, the main option is to implement the recommendations of the Panel of Experts’ report, which includes designating additional individuals and entities, updating the sanctions list to cover entities controlled by OMM and issuing additional guidance related to the Chong Chon Gang incident, possibly in the form of an implementation assistance notice to clarify implementation of the assets freeze.
On the human rights situation in the DPRK, an option is to organise a briefing by the High Commissioner for Human Rights on his recent visit to the ROK and to receive an update on the work of the newly established office. (The Council last discussed the human rights situation in DPRK in December 2014.)
Council Dynamics
The lack of Committee activity since the end of May has been attributed to the Council’s busy schedule and not due to an inability to agree on the recommendations of the Panel of Experts. Although China has made clear it will not support designating entities or individuals that are close to the government and has reservations about the number of entities (34) linked to the OMM that the Panel has proposed be added to the sanctions list, it has expressed willingness to continue discussions on implementation of the Panel’s recommendations.
On the human rights situation, there have been discussions among some members on how this issue can be advanced in the Council. It seems these members would like to see the Council return to the issue this fall or by the end of the year. Spain has the Council presidency in October, and while supportive of the Council’s considering the matter, it does not want to take the lead on the human rights aspect due to its chairmanship of the DPRK Sanctions Committee. The UK and the US have the presidencies in November and December, respectively, which are seen as other possible months for Council consideration of the agenda item. Based on Kerry’s strong remarks, the US would appear likely to seek the Council’s consideration of the subject during its presidency. Some members believe that since the issue is now on the Council’s agenda, it should be considered in either a public meeting or consultations, as opposed to an Arria-formula format. In such a case, as when a procedural vote was necessary for the Council to discuss the DPRK’s human rights situation last December due to China’s opposition, another consideration is ensuring that a minimum of nine Council members would support such a vote. The Council would likely be divided on any substantive action, such as an ICC referral, but its meeting on the issue is seen as an important way to bring attention to human rights conditions in the DPRK.
The US is the penholder on the DPRK while Spain chairs the 1718 Sanctions Committee.
| Security Council Letter | |
| 21 May 2015 S/2015/365 | This was a letter from the DPRK transmitting a National Defense Commission statement on the test fire of a ballistic missile from a submarine and a DPRK foreign ministry statement in response to US Secretary of State John Kerry’s 18 May comments. |
| Sanctions Committee Document | |
| 23 February 2015 S/2015/131 | This was the report of the Panel of Experts assisting the 1718 DPRK Sanctions Committee. |
