North Korea Slams Hostile US Sanctions and Pressure

Region: ,
In-depth Report:

Washington negotiates in bad faith, consistently making unacceptable demands, offering nothing in return but empty promises to be broken.

A key sticking point in US/Pyongyang talks is the Trump regime’s refusal to ease sanctions – nor offer any good faith guarantees, failing to yield anything on issues mattering most to the DPRK.

Last week, Russia’s UN and other international organizations in Vienna representative Mikhail Ulyanov noted that Pyongyang took “a number of important steps towards denuclearization,” expressing support for its actions.

He called on the Trump regime to respond “by similar steps toward easing sanctions pressure (and providing) security guarantees…in line with” Security Council Resolution 2375, provision 32, adding:

“Reliable international security mechanisms are necessary in the region to prevent recurrence of the situation which has developed around the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action on the Iranian nuclear program.”

Resolution 2375, supported by Russia and China, imposed unacceptable sanctions on the DPRK after its sixth nuclear test – its program pursued solely for self-defense because of the threat of US aggression on the country.

Provision 32 calls for “keep(ing) the DPRK’s actions under continuous review…prepar(ing) to strengthen, modify, suspend or lift the measures as may be needed in light of the DPRK’s compliance, and, in this regard, expresses its determination to take further significant measures in the event of a further DPRK nuclear test or launch.”

No “international security mechanisms” and guarantees are good enough in dealing with the US, consistently breaching international treaties, conventions, and bilateral agreements unaccountably.

Since Trump and North Korea’s Kim Jong-un met in Singapore last June, his regime failed to observe mutually agreed on principles.

Hardliners Pompeo and Bolton in charge of Trumps geopolitical agenda have treated the DPRK disdainfully, the way they conduct themselves in relations with all sovereign independent states.

Things began unravelling straightaway after June summit talks. Washington continues to maintain maximum pressure for full denuclearization and compliance with other US demands before agreeing to ease unjustifiable restrictions on Pyongyang.

North Korea’s Foreign Ministry slammed the Trump regime earlier, saying its government is still waiting for Washington to begin instituting what was agreed on during Kim Jong-un/Trump June 12 summit talks.

“(T)he US responded to our expectation by inciting international sanctions and pressure against the DPRK,” it stressed, “attempting to invent a pretext for increased sanctions against the DPRK.”

“As long as the US denies even the basic decorum for its dialogue partner and clings to the outdated acting script which the previous administrations have all tried and failed, one cannot expect any progress in the implementation of the DPRK-US joint statement, including the denuclearization.”

The DPRK showed good faith by ceasing its nuclear and ballistic missile tests, along with dismantling its nuclear test site.

In return, the Trump regime offered nothing but unacceptable hardline demands – proving it has no intention of observing summit principles agreed on, further proof it can never be trusted.

On Sunday, North Korea’s Foreign Ministry accused the Trump regime of “bringing the DPRK-US relations back to the status of last year, which was marked by exchanges of fire,” adding:

If Trump officials “believed that heightened sanctions and pressure would force Pyongyang to abandon its nuclear weapons, it would count as (its) greatest miscalculation, and it will block the path to denuclearization on the Korean peninsula forever – a result desired by no one.”

Trump hardliners imposed “sanctions (on various) companies, individuals and ships of not only the DPRK but also Russia, China and other third countries…”

The Trump regime is repeating the unacceptable way its predecessors dealt with Pyongyang, maintaining hostile relations instead of taking steps to restore peace and stability on the peninsula, an objective it opposes, clear from its actions.

They show hardliners in charge of Trump’s geopolitical agena reject normalization with Pyongyang, choosing brinksmanship instead.

The Korean peninsula remains a hugely dangerous tinderbox because of their unacceptable actions. They risk a return to “fire and fury” rhetoric in the new year turning hot.


Note to readers: please click the share buttons above. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Award-winning author Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected]. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

Visit his blog site at

Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

Articles by: Stephen Lendman

About the author:

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected] His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III." Visit his blog site at Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network. It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected] contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]