Excerpts of Remarks by Secretary of State Clinton, July 23, 2009Footnote 1
Secretary Hillary Clinton delivered these remarks in Phuket, Thailand
Secretary Clinton. Good afternoon. Let me start by saying we've had a series of very productive sessions here in Phuket, and I've had the opportunity for the first time to engage with the nations of ASEAN and our regional partners on issues of common concern, to sign the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation, and to lay the groundwork for even stronger partnerships as we move forward.
I've also had the opportunity to meet one on one with a number of my counterparts. Earlier, I met with Foreign Minister Qureshi of Pakistan, and we talked about the encouraging signs in Pakistan's fight against violent extremists, including the return of significant numbers of refugees to Buner and Swat. There are still great challenges ahead facing Pakistan, including the ongoing threat of violent extremism and continuing economic difficulty. But I assured the foreign minister that the United States stands ready to help the Pakistani Government and people. And I also advised him that I support the steps Pakistan and India have taken to find a more productive way forward.
I want to take this opportunity to discuss the situation in North Korea and our efforts here in the ASEAN Regional Forum to promote security in Northeast Asia. Yesterday, I held consultations with our allies and partners in the Six-Party process, and this morning, there was a very good discussion with the ASEAN nations and regional partners. I was gratified by how many countries from throughout the region spoke up and expressed directly to the North Korean delegation their concerns over the provocative behavior we have seen these past few months.
Unfortunately, the North Korean delegation offered only an insistent refusal to recognize that North Korea has been on the wrong course. In their presentation today, they evinced no willingness to pursue the path of denuclearization. And that was troubling not only to the United States, but to the region and the international community. So the question is, where do we go from here?
I think it's important to stress that the international community's response to North Korea's actions has been unequivocal and nearly unanimous, leading to a new consensus around a common set of principles. The United States and its allies and partners cannot accept a North Korea that tries to maintain nuclear weapons to launch ballistic missiles or to proliferate nuclear materials. And we are committed to the verifiable denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula in a peaceful manner. Now this convergence of views reflected, as you will see later today in statements by ASEAN, and as you saw just a few weeks ago with the G-8 statement and others, produced two important Security Council actions—a presidential statement and a unanimous binding resolution.
Now these are more than expressions of condemnation. Resolution 1874, combined with the designations authorized by the UN Sanctions Committee, provides a powerful tool to curb North Korea's unacceptable activities, and to put pressure on individuals and entities connected to the regime's nuclear, ballistic missile, and other WMD-related programs. We believe that this resolution can be effective because it is unprecedented in scope, substance, and approach.
First, it differs from past efforts in that it is based on a global consensus, bringing to bear the combined weight of the international community, not just one nation or a small handful of nations. Second, it targets a spectrum of individuals, organizations, and institutions, not just one or two. Third, it fits into the broader framework of our approach to North Korea. It is accompanied by a message, as I reiterated this morning, that we are prepared to work with the North Koreans if they are willing to act on their previous commitments.
In short, our approach isolates North Korea, imposes meaningful pressure to force changes in its behavior, and provides an alterative path that would serve everyone's interests. Our joint efforts to take Resolution 1874 from paper to practice are now underway. I asked Ambassador Philip Goldberg to lead an interagency team charged with implementing the sanctions, and he's already traveled to the region to consolidate and coordinate our efforts. Russian and Chinese representatives have visited Washington to work together on these issues.
And in addition to this week's meetings, I've spoken repeatedly with my counterparts in China, Russia, Japan, and South Korea about our common way forward. I intend to send Ambassador Goldberg back to the region in the near future to continue our common efforts to enforce the sanctions. And next Monday and Tuesday, as part of our strategic and economic dialogue with China, I will be holding intensive discussions with State Councilor Dai Bingguo on North Korea and the broader questions of peace and security in Asia.
In implementing 1874, we are asking our partners to help dissuade all nations from facilitating, directly or indirectly, North Korea's attempts to enhance and proliferate its nuclear and missile technologies. We were gratified by Burma's statement and those of many other countries announcing an intention to implement the resolution. Burma's statement is significant because in the past, North Korea has provided Burma with materials now barred by Resolution 1874.
The bottom line is this: If North Korea intends to engage in international commerce, its vessels must conform to the terms of 1874 or find no port. Our goal in enforcing these sanctions and others imposed earlier is not to create suffering or to destabilize North Korea. Our quarrel is not with the North Korean people. In fact, it was the North Korean leadership that rejected humanitarian aid from the United States and forced us to suspend our food aid program.
So let me be clear: As we work to end the regime's nuclear program, we remain committed to the well-being, dignity, and human rights of the people of North Korea. We will continue to work closely with other governments, international organizations, and NGOs to address human rights violations and abuses perpetuated by the regime. We will maintain our support of NGOs working to improve human rights in North Korea. And we will keep funding Korean language radio broadcasting for the same purposes, and we will soon announce a special envoy for North Korean human rights.
As we enforce sanctions, we are open to talks with North Korea, but we are not interested in half measures. We do not intend to reward the North just for returning to the table. We will not give them anything new for actions they have already agreed to take. And we have no appetite for pursuing protracted negotiations that will only lead us right back to where we have already been.
We and our partners have a more ambitious agenda for any future talks. Such talks must lead to irreversible steps by North Korea to denuclearize. This, in turn, would lead us and our partners to reciprocate in a comprehensive and coordinated manner. Full normalization of relationships, a permanent peace regime, and significant energy and economic assistance are all possible in the context of full and verifiable denuclearization.
In the meantime, we will undertake the necessary defensive measures to protect our interests and our allies. North Korea's ongoing threatening behavior does not inspire trust, nor does it permit us to sit idly by. Our partners in the region understand that a nuclear North Korea has far-reaching consequences for the security future of Northeast Asia. North Korea's continued pursuit of its nuclear ambitions is sure to elevate tensions on the Korean Peninsula and could provoke an arms race in the region. This would serve no nation's interests—not ours, not Japan's, South Korea's, China, nor Russia's and nor, might I add, North Korea's.
Our success in putting this resolution into action will also have implications beyond North Korea. It will demonstrate to other countries with nuclear ambitions, such as Iran's, that we can and will impose costly penalties for those who violate international agreements and undermine global security. And it will give us a blueprint for how to manage any similar challenges that might arise in the future.
So our policy is clear. North Korea knows what it has to do: return to denuclearization talks and fulfill its commitments under the 2005 joint statement to abandon all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs and return at an early date to the nonproliferation treaty and to IAEA safeguards. The path is open, and it is up to North Korea to take it.
Thank you very much.
Q. Thanks. Madame Secretary, the North Korean representatives today spoke just behind us over there and said that the Six-Party Talks were dead; there is no way they're coming back, and that whatever we have to offer them in terms of incentives is nothing new to them, and they won't accept it.
The foreign ministry at the same time issued a statement with actual attacks and insults personally aimed at you. I wonder whether you think that perhaps the time has come to replace the Six-Party framework with perhaps a broader framework. You just suggested that there's a broad consensus today here about what to do with North Korea. And since China has been reluctant to put it—amend the resolution so far, what would you want them to do when you meet with them on Monday and Tuesday in Washington?
Oh, and one more: Aren't you exhausted?
Secretary Clinton. Aren't you?
Q. I am. That's why I'm asking.
Secretary Clinton. Well, first, let me say that China has been very vigorous in working with us in support of full implementation of 1874. Just as we have, they created an interagency task force which is working with our own people. There has already been a meeting in Beijing, and I said, there will be a follow-on meeting in Washington.
The Chinese have been very supportive in our efforts to deliver a strong message to North Korea and to other nations that they expect, as we do, that the international community will enforce 1874. They played a very helpful role in the matter of the North Korean ship that was on its way to Burma.
In addition, today, the Six-Party members who were present, with the exception of North Korea, reiterated their commitment to this process and made it very clear that there is no place to go for North Korea. They have no friends left that will protect them from the international community's efforts to move toward denuclearization. So I think it's fair to say that not only were Russia, China, Japan, and South Korea very strong in making the points which they did this morning, but those points were echoed by so many of the ASEAN members and other regional partners.
So the message is coming out loudly and clearly to North Korea. And I don't think we've seen at all the way this will eventually develop. I think we're just still at the beginning of determining how they're going to respond.
Q. What framework (inaudible)?
Secretary Clinton. The framework is the Six-Party Talks.
Q. Madame Secretary, what evidence do you have of Burma's cooperation in enforcing the UN Security Council resolution? How did your talks with Burmese officials go last night? And most importantly, how do you reconcile your appreciation and gratitude that they are promising to enforce that with your two days of public, strong comments about concerns of military and even nuclear cooperation between Burma and North Korea?
Secretary Clinton. Well, we've expressed that very clearly and forcefully, but I do think there is a positive direction that we've seen with Burma, both in the already existing cooperation they showed with respect to the North Korean ship, in their statements to us and others that they intend to do their part to enforce 1874. Now, obviously, we have to see that unfold, but that's never happened before, and we're very encouraged by that. At the same time, we know that there has been cooperation between North Korea and Burma in the past, and we are going to be vigilant to make sure that it doesn't occur in the future.
I was not part of any talks. Others in our Administration were, and we made it very clear, both privately and publicly, that there are expectations on our part that Aung Sun Suu Kyi be released unconditionally, that there begin a process of release of political prisoners, that the election scheduled for next year be open and fair and transparent and credible. And that view was echoed by many people in the room. It was not just a U.S. view. It was very widely and, I must say, heart—it was really expressed from the heart by so many people.
So we hope that there is going to be recognition on the part of the Burmese leadership that they have more to gain by joining the international community and by effectively taking care of their people and putting Burma on the path to democracy. We don't expect to see a change overnight, but we're—it's better to have those positive statements than the negative ones. So we think that gives us at least something to work with.
Q. (Inaudible) from (inaudible) in Asia. I just wanted to clarify, when you said U.S. will take any defensive measurements, what exactly that mean? Is it going to be like U.S. ready to start a war with North Korea at any time? And how ASEAN, especially in Myanmar, is going to pick on that?
Secretary Clinton. No. But I wanted to make very clear that the United States does not seek any kind of offensive action against North Korea. We have said that over and over again. The North Koreans said in a meeting today that they've been subjected to nuclear weapons on the Korean Peninsula aimed at them. That hasn't happened for decades. So I think they are living in a historical time period that doesn't reflect today's realities.
We are very open to a positive relation with North Korea on the condition that they denuclearize. But if they refuse to do so, as they have in the last months, and refuse to follow the obligations they themselves signed up to in 2005 and -06, then our allies in South Korea and Japan and other countries in the region begin to worry about what North Korea's intentions are. And we want to make clear that the United States will continue to work for the defense of allies like Japan and South Korea. And that's unfortunately our obligation, one that we will be serious in fulfilling. But it's not directed in any offensive manner against North Korea.
We also wish to avoid an arms race in Northeast Asia. If the North Koreans are going to continue to test nuclear weapons and their missiles, then other countries are going to start saying, well, we don't know what they're going to do, we'd better start taking care of ourselves and doing that and to have that capacity.
We think that would be a terrible mistake. So we're trying to make clear that we will protect and defend our allies, but we still hope that there is an opportunity to work with North Korea toward denuclearization.
Mr. Kelly. Okay, thank you.
Secretary Clinton. Thank you.
Excerpts of Remarks by Secretary of State Clinton, July 26, 2009Footnote 2
Secretary Hillary Clinton was interviewed by CBS in Washington, DC
Q. [H]ere she is, the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Welcome back to Meet the Press.
Secretary Clinton. Thank you, David. It's great to be here with you.
Q. Absolutely. So let's get right to it and talk about some of the hotspots around the globe that you're dealing with. First up is North Korea, and it got tense this week. Here was the big headline: Clinton and North Korea engage in tense exchange. It actually began on Monday during an interview that you gave to ABC. Let's watch a portion of that:
“Well, what we've seen is this constant demand for attention. And maybe it's the mother in me or the experience that I've had with small children and unruly teenagers and people who are demanding attention. Don't give it to them. They don't deserve it. They are acting out in a way to send a message that is not a message we're interested in receiving.”
Now, the North Korean reaction was rather personal, and The Washington Post wrote about it on Friday. We'll put that up on the screen:
“The war of words between North Korea and the United States escalated with North Korea's foreign ministry lashing out at Secretary of State Clinton in unusually personal terms for ‘vulgar remarks’ that is said demonstrated, ‘She is by no means intelligent. We cannot but regard Mrs. Clinton as a funny lady. Sometimes she looks like a primary schoolgirl.’”
What were they thinking?
Secretary Clinton. Well, David, I think what's important here is the clear message that we're sending to North Korea, and it's one that is now unanimous. The Security Council Resolution 1874 made official that North Korea must change their behavior, and we have to get back to moving toward verifiable denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula in a peaceful manner.
Now, as you know and as you've reported, they've engaged in a lot of provocative actions in the last months. But what we, China, Russia, South Korea, Japan, and literally the unanimous international community have said is it's not going to work this time. We're imposing the most stringent sanctions we ever have. We have great cooperation from the world community. China and we are working closely together to enforce these sanctions. We still want North Korea to come back to the negotiating table, to be part of an international effort that will lead to denuclearization. But we're not going to reward them for doing what they said they would do in 2005 and '6. We're not going to reward them for half measures. They now know what we and the world community expect.
Q. But it's interesting. If the posture of this Administration was more engagement, even negotiations with our adversaries, it struck me this week that this was a ratcheting up of the rhetoric against North Korea.
Secretary Clinton. Well, we want to make clear to North Korea that their behavior is not going to be rewarded. In the past, they believed that they have acted out, done things which really went against the norms of the international community, and somehow then were rewarded. Those days are over. We believe that the Six-Party Talk framework, which had everybody included, is the appropriate way to engage with North Korea.
Q. They say—if I can just stop you, they say we're not playing in that group anymore.
Secretary Clinton. Well, that's what they say. And I think they are very isolated. Now, I saw that when I was at the ASEAN meeting, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. I was in the same room with a representative from North Korea, who launched a broadside attack on the United States, blaming us for literally everything that has ever gone wrong in North Korea, going back decades. I listened. Everyone else just didn't even look at him. I was struck by the body language. They don't have any friends left, and what we've seen even Burma saying that they're going to enforce the resolution of sanctions.
And when the North Korean representative finished, I just very calmly said North Korea knows what it must do and what we are expecting from it. I talked with my counterparts from Russia, China, Japan, South Korea, at length during the time I was in Thailand. We are all on the same page and we are all committed to the same goal.
Q. Can we say at this point, since it's so difficult to deal with North Korea going back to President Clinton, who said that he would stop them from getting a nuclear bomb, after these missile tests, after the belief that they have seven or eight nuclear bombs, that an effort to keep them from going nuclear has failed?
Secretary Clinton. No, I don't think so, because their program is still at the beginning stages, and there are several important factors here that has led to the unanimity of the international community. It's not only that North Korea has, against the international norms, IAEA and other requirements, proceeded with this effort, but they also are a proliferator. We know that for a fact. So it's not only the threat they pose to their neighbors and eventually beyond, but the fact that they're trying to arm others.
And then there is the reaction in the region. I mean, if you're sitting in South Korea and Japan, who are two of our strongest allies, with whom we have very clear defense responsibilities, and you see North Korea proceeding, then you're going to be thinking, well, what do I need to do to protect myself? So it is destabilizing for Northeast Asia, which is why I think you'll see a continuing pressure, which we think will eventually result in some changes in their behavior.
Q. Is North Korea a threat to the United States?
Secretary Clinton. Well, at this time, our military experts and others say that in real terms, what they could do to us, that's unlikely. We have missile defenses that we can deploy. But they are a threat to our friends and allies, particularly Japan and South Korea, so therefore they trigger a response from us to protect our allies and to make clear to the North Koreans that they cannot behave in this way.
And I want to just underscore that China has been extremely positive and productive in respect to North Korea. The big issue in previous times was, well, how do we get China to really be working to change North Korean behavior? I will be starting, along with Secretary Geithner, an intensive two days with Chinese highlevel representatives tomorrow and Tuesday. But on North Korea, we have been extremely gratified by their forward-leaning commitment to sanctions and the private messages that they have conveyed to the North Koreans.
Q. Finally on this, two U.S. captives, Laura Ling and Euna Lee, two journalists in captivity now, is there a feeling that some of the tough talk that you had with the North Koreans this week, this sort of exchange of insults, does it make their situation more dangerous?
Secretary Clinton. We believe that this is on a separate track. This is an issue that should be resolved by the North Koreans granting amnesty and allowing these two young women to come home as quickly as possible.
Q. Are you making progress?
Secretary Clinton. Well, we are certainly pursuing every lead we have. The messages that we've received from the young women, both through our protecting power, the Swedish ambassador, and through the messages and phone calls they've had with their families, are that they're being treated well, that they have been given the supplies that they need. But obviously, they want to resolve this, as we do, and we work on it literally every day.
Q. Let's take a step back and look at the larger vision for the President's foreign policy. This is what the President said during his inaugural address, which was something of a mission statement. Let's watch:
“To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history, but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.”
And yet, isn't the problem, six months, in that there may be a willingness to change the tone, there may be more engagement, but nobody is unclenching their fist yet?
Secretary Clinton. Oh, David, that's not the way I read it at all. I think six months in, look at what we've done. We have begun to fulfill our obligation to withdraw from Iraq so that now when I meet with Prime Minister Maliki and ten members of his government and about 12 of ours, we're talking about educational exchanges, we're talking about agriculture. We have a very clear policy on non-proliferation which the President has stated, and we're back in the business of trying to move the world in a very careful but consistent way toward lowering the threat of nuclear weapons. We've already talked about bringing the world together, which we have, around a joint response to North Korea and increasingly to Iran. We are sending a message to governments and peoples alike, as the President did in his very important Cairo speech, as he just did in Ghana, that we want government, and particularly democracies, that deliver for people. I mean, I could go on and on.
Secretary Clinton. And that was my message when I went to Asia: The United States is back and we're ready to lead.
Q. What did you mean by that?
Secretary Clinton. Well, what I meant was that in many parts of the world, the priorities that were pursued the last eight years did not seem to include them. So just going, for example, to Asia, as I did on my first trip, as I just did, was viewed as a very positive statement of participation. We're building on some of the good work that's been done in a bipartisan way with India, starting with my husband, and in fact, in this case, continuing with President Bush with India. So that we have now announced the most comprehensive engagement we've ever had with that country.
Remarks by President Obama, August 5, 2009Footnote 3
President Barack Obama delivered these remarks in Washington, DC
President Obama. Good morning, everybody. I want to just make a brief comment about the fact that the two young journalists, Euna Lee and Laura Ling, are safely back with their families. We are obviously extraordinarily relieved. I had an opportunity to speak with the families yesterday once we knew that they were on the plane.
The reunion that we've all seen on television I think is a source of happiness not only for the families but for the entire country.
I want to thank President Bill Clinton— I had a chance to talk to him—for the extraordinary humanitarian effort that resulted in the release of the two journalists. I want to thank Vice President Al Gore who worked tirelessly in order to achieve a positive outcome.
I think that not only is this White House obviously extraordinarily happy, but all Americans should be grateful to both former President Clinton and Vice President Gore for their extraordinary work. And my hope is, is that the families that have been reunited can enjoy the next several days and weeks, understanding that because of the efforts of President Clinton and Gore, they are able to be with each other once again.
So we are very pleased with the outcome, and I'm hopeful that the families are going to be able to get some good time together in the next few days.
Thank you very much.
Excerpts of Remarks by Secretary of State Clinton, August 5, 2009Footnote 4
Secretary Hillary Clinton was interviewed by NBC in Nairobi, Kenya
Q. Madame Secretary. You are here in Nairobi and we are talking about Pyongyang. And this is because of the dramatic rescue mission that your husband managed to complete successfully. I know you haven't had time to talk to him about all of the details. As we sit here, he's still flying back. But you did talk to him briefly. What was the feeling, the emotion?
Secretary Clinton. Andrea, he was so relieved and so happy to be bringing these young women home. I think it's in a way even more personal since we have a daughter of approximately the same age. And he told me it was a very moving experience. He can't wait to get them reunited with their families. So on the basis of the humanitarian mission, we feel very good.
But I want to be sure people don't confuse what Bill did, which was a private humanitarian mission to bring these young women home, with our policy, which continues to be one that gives choices to North Korea. They can continue on the path they are on, or perhaps they will now be willing to start talking to us within the context of the Six-party talks about the international desire to see them denuclearized.
Q. Do you think this could be a breakthrough? Your husband spent more than three hours with Kim Jong-il. He's the highest ranking person to visit North Korea in more than a decade. Is that maybe a possible breakthrough?
Secretary Clinton. Well, we won't know. I mean, that wasn't the purpose of it, and it certainly is not anything we're counting on because the Obama Administration has to deal with North Korea going forward. But I hope that North Korea makes the right choice. I hope they realize that we're sincere in our offer to have a different relationship with them if they are willing to move toward full and verifiable denuclearization. And I think the entire world would welcome that change on their part.
Q. It is very clear from all of the reporting, from briefings we've had from other senior officials, that there was an understanding that if President Clinton went, these women would likely be released. So there were talks between the United States and North Korea. That's a step.
Secretary Clinton. Well, we do have some channels to talk with North Korea. And as the background briefing you received from high Administration officials made clear overnight, when the message came to us from the young women themselves to their families, to former Vice President Gore, and then to the Administration, that sending my husband would be the best way to ensure their release, of course, we took that very seriously and discussed it. The White House reached out, as they said, to my husband to ask him if he would be willing to do that. There were briefings about it.
But in order to manage the logistics of it, it did require communication with channels representing the North Korean Government. That's not the first time, nor will it be the last, that something like that happened. But we would like to see our conversations back in a broader context where we can be exploring ways to end North Korea's isolation by denuclearizing the peninsula and providing assistance, and then steps toward normalization.
Q. Clearly, you and Bill Clinton, your husband, had conversations. You have been very successful in the first six months keeping your role very separate from his despite all of the suggestions beforehand that there would be mixed messages and signals. What about the fact that he was taking on this role? Did you have any doubts there'd be a downside, that it would either confuse the Secretary of State and the former President, or send too important a signal of respect to North Korea at a time when they have been behaving very badly?
Secretary Clinton. Ever since the two young women were arrested and especially since their trial—which ended in sentences of 12 years in labor camps—I, President Obama, our entire team, have been committed to doing what we could to try to get them home. And when the word came that this would get that done, I was very much in favor of it because I wanted to see Euna and Laura returned.
Again, I'm sure that I was thinking about it in part as the mother of a daughter, an adventurous daughter who goes around the world and goes places I never went at her age. And I think the fact that my husband was willing to do it and made it very clear it was a private humanitarian mission shouldn't confuse anyone. Our policy remains the same. We've made it clear as to what the options are to North Korea, and it's up to them, after their consideration, what they intend to do.
Q. You speak of yourself as a mother. You referred not too long ago to the mother in you that reminds you of small children and unruly teenagers demanding attention—this in reference to the way North Korea has been behaving. They in response said, “We cannot but regard Mrs. Clinton as a funny lady, as she likes to utter such rhetoric, unaware of the elementary etiquette in the international community. Sometimes she looks like a primary schoolgirl and sometimes a pensioner going shopping.”
Secretary Clinton. Those are mixed metaphors.
Q. That's a big change from Bill Clinton being greeted by a schoolchild with flowers at Pyongyang airport and having a long dinner with Kim Jong-il.
Secretary Clinton. But I think it illustrates that our position in the Obama Administration is very clear. We obviously are concerned by these provocative actions that North Korea engaged in. We were very pleased that we obtained unanimous support for the toughest consequences and sanctions to be imposed on North Korea.
So our diplomacy, our engagement with our partners in the Six-Party Talks and with the UN are where we are putting our energy. At the same time, we were deeply concerned about the future of these two young women, and I'm very pleased that we finally can see them coming home safely. But our policy is in no way affected by this humanitarian mission.
Press Release from the Treasury Department, August 11, 2009Footnote 5
The U.S. Department of the Treasury today designated the Korea Kwangson Banking Corp. (KKBC) under Executive Order (E.O.) 13382 for providing financial services in support of both Tanchon Commercial Bank (Tanchon) and Korea Hyoksin Trading Corporation (Hyoksin), a subordinate of the Korea Ryonbong General Corporation (Ryonbong). KKBC is based in North Korea and has operated at least one overseas branch in Dandong, China.
Tanchon and Ryonbong, were identified by the President as weapons of mass destruction (WMD) proliferators and listed in the Annex to E.O. 13382 in June 2005, and Hyoksin was designated by Treasury in July 2009 for being owned or controlled by Ryonbong. All three entities have been designated by the UN pursuant to UN Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1718 for their roles in North Korea's WMD and missile programs. E.O. 13382 freezes the assets of proliferators of WMD and their supporters and prohibits U.S. persons from engaging in transactions with them, thereby isolating them from the U.S. financial and commercial systems. “North Korea's use of a little-known bank, KKBC, to mask the international financial business of sanctioned proliferators demonstrates the lengths to which the regime will go to continue its proliferation activities and the high risk that any business with North Korea may well be illicit,” said Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Stuart Levey.
Since 2008, Tanchon has been utilizing KKBC to facilitate funds transfers likely amounting to millions of dollars, including transfers involving Korea Mining Development Trading Corporation (KOMID)-related funds from Burma to China in 2009. KOMID, which has been identified by the President in the Annex to E.O.13382 and designated by the UN pursuant to UNSCR 1718, is North Korea's premier arms dealer and main exporter of goods and equipment related to ballistic missiles and conventional weapons. Tanchon, the financial arm of KOMID, plays a key role in financing KOMID's sales of ballistic missiles. Additionally, Hyoksin, which the UN described as being involved in the development of weapons of mass destruction, sought to use KKBC in connection with a purchase of dual-use equipment in 2008.
Due to KKBC's relationship to Tanchon, Hyoksin, and Ryonbong, today's action is consistent with UNSCR 1718's requirement to freeze the funds of and deny financial services to UN-designated entities. It is also consistent with UNSCR 1874's call to prevent the provision of financial services or any financial assets that could contribute to North Korea's nuclear, ballistic missile, or other WMD-related programs.