Why Sanctions Don't Work Against North Korea

Audio editing by Eric Schneider
Motion graphics by Vincent de Langen
Thumbnail by Simon Buckmaster
Writing & Direction by Evan

This includes a paid sponsorship which had no part in the writing, editing, or production of the rest of the video.

Video supplied by Getty Images
Select footage from the AP Archive

[nafrost]

I just wanted to say that the fact that you include your sources is extremely appreciated. Even if I don't read them, it's still important that you do that because for me it still increases your credibility, and it gives the more curious viewer extra material.

[charlieorjanca]

The timing of this video is rather interesting given the Sri Lankan Minister of Finance admit just this week to having purchased weapons from NK using black market dollars

[SkyWKing]

The North Korea problem is meant to be not resolved. It keeps a legitimate reason for U.S. to keep a strong military presence at China/Russia's doorsteps. And China wants the buffer to exist indefinitely. Unification of the Korean peninsula will inevitably disrupt the current power equilibrium and destabilize the region. When all six parties of the nuclear talks benefit from maintaining the status quo, there is no incentive to make any meaningful progress.

[Ironwolf-pmzs]

"You can't wreck the economy when there is no economy."

[bangscutter]

Great video but you only mentioned one very important player in this geopolitical game briefly; China. China is the biggest reason for North Korea's continued existence today. North Korea trades mostly with China, and this is why western sanctions don't work because China will simply refuse to comply and keep trading with North Korea. China wants North Korea to exist as a buffer against South Korea, a US ally. Finally, any peace negotiation must also include China, because the Korean War armistice signed also includes them. Since relations between China and the US is getting colder now, it's even more unlikely for any peace deal with North Korea to be reached.

[neeneko]

Depends on what you mean by 'works'. While sanctions are billed as being about regime change, really that is not their point. Sanctions are all about scoring domestic political points and demonstrating your power to allies to impact their industries. They do not 'work' for the same reason foreign aid does not 'work'... the publicly framed goals and the actual policy objectives are not the same, thus they DO work for doing what the are supposed to do.

[cx]

Having nuclear weapons is the only way to make sure no one dares to attack your country or yourself as a leader. Furthermore, it is hard to explain why certain countries are allowed to have nuclear weapons and others are not. I don’t like the idea, but we will have to accept that North Korea and Iran are Nuclear Powers.

[fabianomenezes]

Holy shit man, I have a presentation on deterrence policies and authoritarian states next week and I had zero inspiration on where to start, this video is the best thing that happened to me today hahaha Thank you!!

[petersmythe]

I mean, sanctions "work" in the sense that they prevent it from becoming economically and militarily competitive as quickly as it would with free trade between it's state entities and the private and state entities of other countries. That is, the sanctions are effective militarily even if not so much diplomatically. Which is probably the real reason that the US continues to push for them so hard. DPRK with a per Capita GDP similar to the RoK would be quite a bit scarier for the US and it's allies.

[raccoonious]

As a Korean, who've had to go through loads of people asking questions about North Korea, I cannot describe how accurate this video is, and how much I appreciate PolyMatter for covering this.

1. North Korea isn't acting irrationally - in fact, it's acting perfectly rationally. People who don't understand context ask me why North Korea is crazy / weird / so barbaric etc. They never want to understand North Korea as is, and neither do I have the knowledge as well prepared as PolyMatter to present.
2. I personally consider North Korea to be highly strategic. No other country in my opinion has got away with keeping a successful authoritarian government with that much mistreatment and poverty impacting directly its citizens.
3. The fact that good part of the responsibility lies in America's inability to gain trust. Not a lot of people know about the agreements made in Clinton era, how Bush 180'ed on this. At the time, South Korea had its first democratic president (Kim Dae Jung) and who fought for democracy for the past 30 years (some even say he's Korea's Nelson Mandela) and his pledge was to repair relations with North Korea, and they were making progress. We were talking about reunification 10 years after (I remember this because I was in primary school at the time) but it all broke down.

To be clear, I don't blame the US for this (it's not like it was intentional) but if you think North Korea's seemingly crazy behaviour is self-made, and rest of the world had nothing to do with it, that's simply not true. They are rational (and in fact too rational and strategic) solutions to the problem they were given.

Also, this doesn't in any way excuse N.K.'s treatment of its citizens or their behaviour. I'm simply explaining that we are up against an enemy who knows what they are doing. Rather like an ingenious chess engine AI that makes a weird queen sacrifice move to win the game (look that up! by GothamChess) just because we can't understand the move or the context does not mean the move itself was irrational.

[reillycurran]

I mean there's also the wartime advantage sanctions provide, which unfortunately is for the exact same reason you provided, they primarily hit the populace, who are decreasingly able to act as a tax base to field an effective millitary

It's why the US is considering "the mother of all sanctions" as an initial salvo against Russian invasion of Ukraine, and why the supposed war plan against China is to effectively create the economic effects of a sanction by just cutting them off from oceanic trade. The US, wartime doctrine has developed into something along the lines of "can't use that big strong millitary of yours if they all starve before we're even in range for you to shoot at!"

[HibHab]

It's like ticketing a homeless guy. What's he gonna do, scrounge up the couple hundred to pay you? No! He literally is too poor to be impacted by that shit.

[Jack-]

Thanks for the upload! And, also, please don’t give up on your second channel, a hill to die on! It’s great and shows a different side of you, and I know a lot of others felt the same way.

[Keraau]

Sanctions do elevate the sense of patriotism among the sanctioned nation's populace, and hate towards the sanctionees' govmnt. "Patriotic feelings" of this nature among the sanctioned people tend to linger, even across generations. It's just a good way to plant seeds of hate for future generations to deal with and score some short term domestic political goals.

[QuentinWatt]

In other countries, sanctions may inspire the population to rise up against their leaders for making such bad choices. North Koreans have been in isolation so long they don't even know what they missing out on. If they knew, what was was going on south of their border, and knew they could gift that future generations they would stand up to their oppressors.

[johnxina]

I highly respect you for making these videos despite the cost. People like you are the reason there is still faith in humanity. I wish I could become a member of the channel, however at the moment I am not in the financial situation to do so. I hope knowing that you have my support as well as many others will help you find motivation to continue making this great content!

[Visiomax]

I never saw the issue like this before. thank you so much for this amazing and enlightening video!

[petersmythe]

"complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization"
DPRK: "u first."

[blanchjoe]

Dear PolyMatter, Thank you for another well researched and developed video. The larger issue has never been whether sanctions will work, or not work. When the American pubic ( which is the driving force of this On Again / Off Again Negotiations ) becomes concerned about the DPRK, whatever President in office must appear, well "Presidential" in the sense that it is important to create policy towards the DPRK.

The Reality has a larger picture, and that is that neither the US, nor China, Japan, and especially South Korea have any real intention to alter the status quo. China for the very reasons you named, they do not wish to have a pro US state on their border ( and with time a powerful one ), Japan does not wish to destabilize the region, and South Korea has no desire to absorb tens of millions of refugees, an issue that China fears almost as much as a Pro US State, they have no desire to create another large minority population that can unsettle the politics of that region.

The ruling elite of the DPRK have no doubts about who would win in a conflict between the West and the DPRK, their goal is to make the image of such a conflict so horrible that they will be left alone and in control. The greatest threat to the DPRK is not sanctions, or war with the West, but is revolt of their own people, and they are slowly losing this battle.

[itakpeemmanuel]

In as much as I like polymatter's content, there should have been a disclaimer at the start that an important section is only available on nebula. Feels like a clickbait on getting to the end.
Awesome content either way