Existing U.S. Sanctions on North Korea Prior to the Trump Presidency

Long before Donald Trump assumed the presidency in 2017, the United States had established an extensive framework of sanctions against North Korea that had evolved over several decades in response to a variety of provocations and security challenges posed by Pyongyang. Initial sanctions date back to the 1950s, with progressive intensification throughout the following decades due to North Korean military actions, support for terrorism, and, most notably, its nuclear ambitions. The 1980s saw further tightening after notorious incidents such as the Rangoon bombing and the Korean Air Flight 858 incident, which led to North Korea's designation as a state sponsor of terrorism in 1988.

With the escalation of nuclear and missile tests in the 2000s and 2010s, the Obama administration implemented further substantive measures, including Executive Orders 13551, 13687, and 13722, which targeted North Korean government assets, financial activities, and entities engaged in malign cyber activities or supporting weapons proliferation. Additional multilateral sanctions were enacted through United Nations Security Council resolutions, which sought to restrict North Korea’s arms trades, luxury imports, and financial ties, targeting the revenue streams and network of actors that enabled the regime’s weapons program expansion. These foundational measures formed a complex sanctions regime that targeted not just North Korea but also foreign entities facilitating its evasion of restrictions, especially in China and Russia.

Sanctions Imposed on North Korea by the Trump Administration

The Trump administration, inheriting this robust framework, dramatically escalated pressure by implementing the harshest and most comprehensive sanctions regime to date. The intensification began in earnest in 2017 as North Korea accelerated its nuclear and missile testing. Trump responded with what he termed a "maximum pressure" campaign, the core of which was Executive Order 13810, signed on September 20, 2017. This executive order marked a significant expansion by enabling sweeping secondary sanctions, meaning the United States could penalize not only North Korean entities but also any individual, business, or foreign financial institution worldwide that engaged in significant trade with North Korea or supported its prohibited activities, regardless of proximity or direct legal connection to the U.S. financial system.

Specifically, Executive Order 13810 authorized sanctions against:

Entities involved in significant import or export of any goods, services, or technology with North Korea, with broad latitude across various industries, including construction, energy, financial services, fishing, information technology, manufacturing, and transportation.

Foreign financial institutions facilitating transactions involving North Korea, threatening restriction or denial of access to U.S. correspondent accounts—effectively isolating them from the U.S. financial system.

Enhanced restrictions on aircraft and vessels that visited North Korea, barring them from entering the U.S. for 180 days after such visits or ship-to-ship transfers.

Blocking funds transiting through the U.S. financial system determined to be linked in any way to North Korean interests.

These unilateral U.S. measures were closely aligned with and built upon new UN Security Council resolutions that collectively sought to eliminate North Korea's key revenue sources—banning the export of coal, iron, seafood, textiles, and placing strict caps on imports of refined petroleum products and labor exports.

Triggers for the Intensified Trump-era Sanctions

The Trump administration’s escalation was directly prompted by a series of bold and destabilizing acts by North Korea. Notably:

In 2017, North Korea conducted its sixth and most powerful nuclear test, claiming it had detonated a hydrogen bomb and thus significantly advancing its nuclear weapons capabilities.

Concurrent testing of multiple ballistic missiles, including the successful launch of the Hwasong-14 and Hwasong-15 intercontinental ballistic missiles, demonstrated a range potentially encompassing the U.S. mainland.

These tests occurred in the context of increasingly aggressive rhetoric and threats exchanged between the Trump administration and Kim Jong-un, raising the specter of armed conflict and prompting urgent calls for an escalated sanctions strategy.

Each provocation—nuclear and missile testing, as well as defiance of international resolutions—resulted in international consensus for tightening restrictions, culminating in Security Council Resolutions 2371, 2375, and 2397, to which Trump’s new executive orders were an aggressive, complementary response.

New Dimensions of Sanctions: The Maximum Pressure Campaign

What distinguished the Trump approach from that of his predecessors was the systematic application and enforcement of secondary sanctions. Prior measures often focused on North Korean entities alone; Trump's strategy targeted any third party, particularly those in China and Russia, that continued to provide North Korea with access to the international financial system or participated in prohibited trade.

Secondary sanctions introduced a new level of risk for global banks and companies: any engagement with North Korea potentially resulted in exclusion from the far larger U.S. economy. This extraterritorial threat successfully deterred numerous international actors from even legal interaction with North Korea, dramatically intensifying Pyongyang’s isolation.

Further, the Trump administration expanded "blacklists" to include a broad array of entities and individuals, many not directly involved in weapons proliferation but rather in adjacent sectors crucial for North Korea’s export income, such as textiles and seafood.

Consequences for North Korean Society: Humanitarian Impact of Sanctions

While sanctions were designed to constrict the regime’s ability to fund weapons development without directly harming the population, in practice, the North Korean people bore severe collateral consequences.First, Trump-era measures led to a sharp drop in the country’s export revenues, with estimates suggesting that, following the expanded sanctions, North Korean income from coal exports plummeted from US$1.19 billion in 2016 to US$370 million in 2019.

Sanctions specifically crippled North Korea’s access to foreign currency, further undermining its import capacity for essential goods, particularly fuel, fertilizer, and machinery critical for agriculture and food production. This resulted in a marked deterioration in the country’s food security, with international organizations noting that imports of fertilizer and agricultural equipment became almost impossible, precipitating a food emergency for millions.

Restrictions also severely hampered North Korea’s ability to import spare parts for medical equipment, vital drugs, and basic healthcare supplies. As a consequence, an estimated 40 percent of the population lacks access to adequate nutrition, clean water, or basic medical care.

Additionally, the countries’ informal market-based survival networks (jangmadang), which had long provided a safety net outside the state rationing system, were deeply affected as broader trade restrictions reduced access to goods from China and, by extension, residents' ability to purchase food, medicine, and daily necessities.

Moreover, the economy as a whole contracted sharply, leading to fewer employment opportunities and declining incomes—particularly in labor-intensive sectors such as textiles, disproportionately impacting women. Humanitarian operations became more difficult as compliance-overcautious international banks and logistical providers hesitated to handle even exempted goods, thus compounding shortages.

Pre-existing Suffering in North Korean Society

North Korea’s population faced entrenched hardships long before the advent of Trump-era sanctions. The state’s isolationist policies, central planning, and system of control led to economic stagnation, chronic food insecurity, and periodic famine. The devastating famine of the 1990s killed an estimated up to one million people and left survivors severely malnourished. Even after the famine, malnutrition, inadequate healthcare, and harsh inequalities between the populace and the ruling elite were widespread. Human rights violations, such as political repression, arbitrary detention, torture, and forced labor, occurred systemically and contributed to a climate of fear and deprivation.

Furthermore, North Korea's agricultural sector had long struggled with inefficiency, lack of investment, and environmental constraints, while the healthcare system suffered chronic shortages due to state underfunding and the inability to import up-to-date medical technology and supplies. These structural flaws meant that even before international sanctions were intensified, the majority of ordinary North Koreans were highly vulnerable to any disruption in food or essential goods.

Aspects of Life Worsened by Trump-era Sanctions

Food Security

Trump-era sanctions, by blocking access to both the export earnings required to purchase imports and the direct import of agricultural inputs such as fertilizer, seeds, fuel, and spare parts, exacerbated North Korea’s food crisis. Reports indicate that food availability fell below the bare minimum for human needs, with levels not seen since the 1990s famine. International organizations observed that these restrictions delayed or obstructed the delivery of humanitarian and food aid, with thousands of preventable deaths attributed to bureaucratic delays in procuring sanctions exemptions for life-saving programs.

Healthcare and Access to Goods

Medical care deteriorated further under Trump's escalated sanctions, leading to disruptions in the acquisition and maintenance of medical equipment, as well as access to drugs and vaccines. Fuel shortages, partly brought on by sanctions, also constrained the functioning of hospitals and the delivery of health services. Critical infrastructure, such as water purification and healthcare facilities, was left without adequate supplies due to import bans.

Economy and Employment

With curtailed exports and investment, North Korea’s fragile economy suffered deeper contractions, leading to reduced employment and income opportunities, especially in sectors targeted by sanctions such as textiles and seafood, which are major employers of women. Diminished currency inflows further reduced the availability of goods in markets, and price volatility increased, further eroding livelihoods.

Social and Gender Dimensions

Economic hardship led to documented increases in domestic violence, sexual violence, and trafficking, as women lost employment and sources of income in sanctioned industries.

Humanitarian Relief

Sanctions complicated the work of NGOs and humanitarian agencies, who faced delays, blocked transactions, and logistical obstacles, undermining timely intervention in crises and the ability to deliver critical aid to vulnerable populations.

Conclusion

Donald Trump’s presidency marked the most stringent period of sanctions against North Korea, building upon and dramatically expanding decades of U.S. and international restrictions in response to the country's relentless pursuit of nuclear weapons. The triggers for this escalation were North Korea’s rapid advances in nuclear and ballistic missile technologies. While the principal aim of the "maximum pressure" campaign was to deter North Korean provocations and halt its weapons programs, the most profound and immediate effect has been the deepening of everyday hardships for ordinary North Koreans, who must endure worsening food insecurity, health crises, economic deprivation, and the breakdown of vital humanitarian relief, intensifying the suffering rooted in longstanding systemic vulnerabilities.

Thus, while the sanctions strategy increased diplomatic and economic pressure on the North Korean regime, it also inadvertently exacerbated the plight of an already vulnerable civilian population, adding further urgency to the ongoing international debate about the humanitarian cost and overall effectiveness of such measures.