• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.45 no.4
• /
• pp.83-93
• /
• 2020

Sanctions by the international community can increase their effectiveness with the participation of major countries with global economic influence, and can lead to efficient sanctions against the target countries when different sanctions procedures and methods can be operated in an integrated manner. To this end, it is being carried out with the aim of maximizing the performance of sanctions through collective economic solidarity by inducing international participation centered on the joint agenda, such as drawing up a resolution for sanctions. In this study, the definition and purpose of sanctions imposed by the international community and by major specific countries were explained and an empirical analysis was conducted on the economic impact of each sanctions, focusing on the United Nations Security Council and the United States, which directly implement them. Based on the selected research model, the effects of economic sanctions on the international community and countries subject to sanctions by certain countries were mutually compared and analyzed in the data. Finally, the conclusion obtained from this study was stated and the implications were derived and the possibility of further research expansion was described.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.34 no.1
• /
• pp.27-50
• /
• 2024

This paper examines issues concerning conflicts between arbitral awards and public interests, particularly with respect to economic sanctions. Sanctions have been widely used by political entities, such as States and organizations, as means to promote public interests and to resolve cross-border disputes. In particular, economic sanctions have been increasingly more visible in recent years due to the accelerating fragmentation of the international communities, and their magnitude and range of the impacts have grown accordingly. For example, the U.S. and the EU have imposed economic sanctions on Russia and related persons in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The U.S. recently re-introduced a comprehensive economic sanction on Iran. One of the notable impacts of the sanctions, particularly economic sanctions, is that on international arbitration. Sanctions are essentially built on the notion of the protection of public interests, and public interests are some of the few grounds upon which recognition and enforceability or arbitral awards may be rejected. However, jurisprudence on such conflict between sanctions and arbitral awards have not been sufficiently addressed in Korea because court case and administrative decision records on this conflict have not been sufficiently accumulated. In this regard, this paper begins with offering a survey of the concept of public interests, economic and trade sanctions, arbitral awards and their enforceability, and the relationships between them. It then examines the mechanism upon which public interests, trade and economic sanctions may lead certain arbitral awards unenforceable. Next, the paper suggests judiciaries' balanced approach toward the public interests protected by trade and economic sanctions and the predictability and fairness in the enforcement of arbitral awards. Finally, this paper concludes with the methods of the implementation of such balanced approach.

• KDI Journal of Economic Policy
• /
• v.42 no.4
• /
• pp.1-25
• /
• 2020

The international community's sanctions against North Korea, triggered by North Korea's nuclear tests and by missile development in the country, are considered the strongest sanctions in history, banning exports of North Korea's major items and limiting imports of machinery and oil products. Accordingly, North Korea's trade volume decreased to the level of collapse after the sanctions, meaning that the sanctions against North Korea were considered to be effective. However, according to this paper, which analyzed the price fluctuations of refined petroleum products in North Korea through the methodology of an event study, the market prices of oil products were only temporarily affected by the sanctions and remained stable over the long run despite the restrictions on the volumes of refined petroleum products introduced. This can be explained by evidence that North Korea has introduced refined oil supplies that are not much different from those before the sanctions through its use of illegal transshipments even after the sanctions. With regard to strategic materials such as refined oil, the North Korean authorities are believed to be desperately avoiding sanctions by, for instance, finding loopholes in the sanctions to meet the minimum level of demand.

• Journal of International Area Studies (JIAS)
• /
• v.22 no.1
• /
• pp.135-160
• /
• 2018

This study aims to predict the likely effect of economic sanctions on North Korea by examining case studies of Iran and Iraq. While UN sanctions against Iraq had immediate negative consequences for society, such as causing famine and reinforcing the authoritarian regime, sanctions against Iran had some productive consequences after they were reinforced by the U.S. and EU in significantly reduced oil exports and government expenditure, which in turn led to regime change and willingness to negotiate nuclear programs for economic recovery. Apart from these distinct differences, sanctions in both countries caused high inflation, shortage of necessary supplies, and increased unemployment. Case studies of Iran and Iraq also reveal that the sanctions disproportionately affected women and children, which implies that the recently reinforced economic sanctions of the U.S. and China against North Korea will cause more suffering of similarly socially marginalized groups in North Korea.

• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.50 no.4
• /
• pp.11-28
• /
• 2019

In this study, the Inter-Korea Fisheries Cooperation Project was divided into four categories: North Korea's Fisheries Infrastructure Development Project, Fisheries Cooperation Project, Human Exchange Project, and North Korea Fisheries Investment Project. First, North Korea's fisheries infrastructure development projects include North Korea's fisheries resource research project, it's fisheries resource development project, and joint enforcement on illegal operation of Chinese ships. Second, fisheries cooperation projects include the operation of the North-South common fish area in the West Sea, the fishing project in North Korea's East sea, and the import of North Korean seafood. Third, human exchange projects include training of aquaculture technicians in North Korea, technology transfer and training of fishing vessels, and boarding of North Korea's fisherman in Korean fishing vessels. Fourth, North Korea's fisheries investment projects include aquaculture facilities and aquaculture feed support, aquatic product processing facilities and technology transfer, and fishery equipment support. However, as international sanctions are maintained in the international community to North Korea, Inter-Korea Fisheries cooperation, however, should be promoted according to the level of easing of international sanctions as international sanctions are maintained in the international community to North Korea. First, North Korea's fisheries resource research project, North Korea's fisheries resource creation project, joint enforcement on illegal operation of Chinese ships, and operation of the common fish area in the West Sea can be promoted if international sanctions are maintained at present, promote North Korea's fisheries resource research project. Second, boarding of North Korean's fisherman in Korean fishing vessels, conducting the fishing project in North Korea's East sea, and importing North Korean seafood can be aided if commercial transactions are possible with North Korea. Third, South Korea will support aquaculture facilities and aquatic feed, fisheries processing facilities and technology transfer, fishery equipment support, training of fisheries and aquaculture technicians, fishery fishing technology transfer, and training of fisherman when a comprehensive economic cooperation project is possible with North Korea.

• Journal of Korea Trade
• /
• v.26 no.5
• /
• pp.88-105
• /
• 2022

Purpose - This paper studies whether economic sanctions can be used as grounds for a party to an international sales contract to get an exemption if he fails to meet his contractual obligation. Because the answer can differ depending on the governing law of the contract, this study focuses on CISG, the most widely recognized international uniform legal instrument as the governing law of the international sale of goods. Design/methodology - This paper focuses on analyzing the conditions to meet before getting an exemption under CISG. For such analysis, this paper examined various scholarly writings, cases, and hypothetical examples reflecting a wide variety of economic sanction measures. Findings - The findings of this paper are as follows. The main provision for exemption under CISG is Article 79(1), which provides for an exemption for a party that failed to perform if such failure was caused by an impediment that was uncontrollable, unforeseeable, and unavoidable; either a seller or a buyer may rely on the Article for his non-performance, delay, or defective performance. The Article is applicable not only where the economic sanction caused impossibility of performance but also where it caused hardship. The economic sanction will likely be found to be an uncontrollable impediment; however, it will be relatively more difficult to prove it to be unforeseeable or unavoidable. Originality/value - The subject of this paper is whether a party can be exempted from liability under CISG when he fails to perform his contractual obligations due to economic sanctions. Given that this issue is now actually faced by many involved in international trade, it is expected to provide practical help to practitioners and companies alike.

• International Area Studies Review
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.23-44
• /
• 2016

This study attempts to scrutinize the effectiveness of the international economic sanction on North Korea by analyzing the determinants of the North Korea-China trade with Chinese Customs House data classified under general, border, processing, bonded warehouse. The result shows that after international economic sanctions, North Korea-China trade was increased across types of trade. In particular, sanction-sensitive items were increased after sanctions and China also weakened the effectiveness of sanctions. To put it concretely, North Korea's food and fuel imports from china increased in processing and border trade. In the case of luxury good, it was increased in general trade. Strategy goods (weaponry) increased only in bonded warehouse trade. For China's import from North Korea, food and fuel were increased in total, border and bonded warehouse trade. Considering the features of each type of trade, these increase are presumed to have been playing a decisive role in weakening the effect of international sanction on North Korea.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.33 no.3
• /
• pp.107-128
• /
• 2023

International arbitration is a widely preferred alternative dispute resolution mechanism for many desirable characteristics, such as, party autonomy, procedural flexibility, ability of parties to select their arbitrators, as well as, finality of arbitral awards, among others. However, because arbitral tribunals derive their authority and jurisdiction from the parties' agreement(s) to arbitrate their dispute(s), arbitral tribunals lack coercive powers that national courts have. At times, arbitral tribunals have to deal with circumstances of non-production and/or spoliation of evidence, and due to the lack of coercive authority, it may be challenging to compel such recalcitrant parties to produce the relevant evidence and/or witnesses. Therefore, adverse inferences drawn against the recalcitrant parties may be the most effective sanctions. This article explores the sources of authority for arbitral tribunals to make such adverse inferences and argues for a precise set of rules or standard to be consistently applied by the arbitral tribunals in order to increase predictability in arbitral proceedings. Additionally, some of the critical issues when considering adverse inferences as sanctions are discussed.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.44
• /
• pp.254-290
• /
• 2018

Why did Kim Jong Un turn his foreign policy upside down in a sudden? US naval blockade became one of candidates for the reason since it had been threatened by Trump administration for the first time in December 2017. Has the blockades worked well like that in the international politic history? This paper reveals the effectiveness of naval blockade on sanctioning in the peacetime. This research analyzes three hypothetical arguments about the naval blockade based on the result of empirical tests with TIES Dataset. First, sanctions by blockading are more effective in gaining political benefits than the other economic sanctions. It was ranked the 4th effective way of sanction out of 9. And 56.3% of pacific naval blockades without packaged economic sanctions were succeeded, whereas the possibility of success increase up to 61.2% when blockade has been imposed in accordance with the other type of economic sanctions. Second, blockades deter military collisions, even war. When it comes to military provocation issue, blockading sanctions gain political interest far more than the other type of economic sanctions. The possibility of the success reaches up to 74%. Also, there wasn't any historical cases of war incurred by blockading sanctions within 5 years after the blockade end. Third, policy makers just need 1.2 years on average to see the end of sanctions when they choose the naval blockade as the method of imposing sanction on the adversary. It is impressively short span of time in achieving political goal compared to the other types of sanctions which are need 9 years on average. North East Asia sea could be the next stage for a naval blockade sooner or later. Because China and Japan not only possess capabilities of blockade but also have will to impose blockades to the others if conditions are set. And even the North Korea with lots of submerging forces could be a blockading threat in the specific area. So, the Republic of Korea has to pay more attention and be prepared for naval blockading sanction.

• Analyses & Alternatives
• /
• v.6 no.2
• /
• pp.117-154
• /
• 2022

The purpose of this study is to verify the practical validity of financial sanctions, which has recently emerged as the most powerful form of economic sanctions preferred by U.S. foreign policy tool. Based on the theoretical discussion, analyse this study the trend of de-dollarization appearing in connection with financial sanctions and argue that the effectiveness of financial sanctions erode the dollar financial hegemony, which is the source of its power can be degraded, so that its effectiveness could not be so great as most people likely think about. After World War II, there has been an increasing tendency in the international community to favor economic sanctions over the use of military force as an effective means of foreign policy. Among these economic sanctions, a distinct feature that has recently appeared is the remarkable increase in the frequency of use of financial sanctions. The country that favors financial sanctions most is the United States. The reason is that they believe that the power of their own dollar financial hegemony can exert deadly pressure on other countries. Financial sanctions favored by the United States are said to have increased the effectiveness of sanctions by upgrading the pressure of sanctions to the next level. Nevertheless, financial sanctions have a side that underestimates the cost. This problem is found in the signs that the backlash from not only countries subject to financial sanctions but also many countries with interests in these countries is leading to a tendency to de-dollarization. This study will try to see how likely this de-dollarization trend is to offset the effectiveness of financial sanctions.