China Bans North Korea Coal Imports for the Rest of the Year

[lpetrich]

China Suspends All Coal Imports From North Korea - The New York Times

This was in response to North Korea's leaders continuing to develop nuclear bombs and long-range missiles in defiance of the United Nations. Coal has been some 34 - 40% of all of NK's exports in recent years, and nearly all of it is exported to China. Losing coal income is expected to be a big setback for NK.

China is NK's main supporter, and China's leaders may not have wanted to risk destabilizing that nation, but their patience may be running out.

Also helping is the murder of NK leader Kim Jong Un's half-brother Kim Jong Nam in an airport in Malaysia. He had been living in Macau, China, hanging around the casinos there, and he was a possible pro-Chinese alternative to NK's current leader.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Saying is one thing. Doing is another. I seriously doubt it will happen as it sounds. I welcome the news, however.

 

[fast]

So, this is like a boycott saying, I'm not gonna buy from you [for 10 months]. This is not an example of harming North Korea, yet there are negative ramifications. Who wants to argue that North Korea is being harmed by China's decision?

 

[LordKiran]

So, this is like a boycott saying, I'm not gonna buy from you [for 10 months]. This is not an example of harming North Korea, yet there are negative ramifications. Who wants to argue that North Korea is being harmed by China's decision?

The people who rely on that coal for heating during the cold months maybe. How reliant is NK on imported coal for its industry?

 

[fast]

So, this is like a boycott saying, I'm not gonna buy from you [for 10 months]. This is not an example of harming North Korea, yet there are negative ramifications. Who wants to argue that North Korea is being harmed by China's decision?

The people who rely on that coal for heating during the cold months maybe. How reliant is NK on imported coal for its industry?

Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but if China isn't going to import (take in by buying) what North Korea is exporting (put out by selling), then china would be like a customer who normally purchases from someone who is choosing to no longer do business for awhile, like a boycott.

Of course, with decisions come ramifications. (For both sides)

There can be both positives and negatives (for both sides, theoretically).

In your example, there can be a negative ramification for the people of China. To recap, you might argue that China is making a decision that despite other ramifications, people in China might suffer ... being hindered in their efforts to create heat during cold months. I'd be inclined to agree.

Where my objection comes in is when someone takes chinas decision one step further and characterizes it as harmful because of the negative impact. To me, there is a serious disconnect.

Not to serve as an analogy but rather to communicate an idea, it would be like you not giving me money to buy a house and then me accusing you of destroying my house. See, just because the net effect is the same, the accusation of harm isn't present in both situations. If I had a house and you destroyed it, then a) I have no house and b) you've harmed me, but if you don't give me money to buy a house, then the net effect is the same, as in a) I have no house, but b is different: you haven't harmed me.

Yes, there can be negative effects that results from our actions, but my stance is that negative effects doesn't necessarily equate to harm. If I owe you monthly and give you what I owe monthly, then all of a sudden stop paying what I owe, then not only will there be a negative effect, I will agree with you when you characterize my actions as harmful; however, when I don't owe you a dime and have been generously helping by gifting you every month, then yes, the effect will be the same when I stop, and yes that's a negative impact on the heels of my decision, but the buck stops there when it comes to characterizing my actions as harmful, as to my way of thinking, the net effect isn't what matters; instead, it's the presence of obligation. That's when the distinctions I make matter: when not giving and taking are not one and the same.

 

[Keith&Co.]

The people who rely on that coal for heating during the cold months maybe.

I can't find all of this year's numbers.
I can find that 2016, China imported 255.2 million tons of coal.
In 2010, Korea exported about 4 million tons to China.
So China may really be tightening their belt at the drop of maybe 2 percent of their coal imports...