Foreign & Public Diplomacy

For years, the U.S.-led international campaign to isolate North Korea depended on a united front between the United States, China, and Russia. From the Obama administration’s targeted sanctions to the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign, U.S. policymakers have long assumed that comprehensive isolation could raise the costs of nuclear development enough to change Pyongyang’s strategic calculus.

But that consensus has collapsed. Instead of facing a coordinated international front, North Korea has been gifted perhaps its greatest strategic asset: a fractured world in which great-power rivalry has steadily eroded the political foundations that once made these sanctions effective. Not only has North Korea found an economic lifeline to keep the regime running, but it has also gained a diplomatic free pass to expand its nuclear and missile programs without consequence. This reality forces a tough reckoning for Washington and its allies. Sanctions aren’t entirely dead—they still make it difficult for the regime to operate—but relying on economic isolation alone to compel North Korea’s denuclearization is no longer a viable strategy in an era of intense geopolitical rivalry.

For years, the U.S.-led international campaign to isolate North Korea depended on a united front between the United States, China, and Russia. From the Obama administration’s targeted sanctions to the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign, U.S. policymakers have long assumed that comprehensive isolation could raise the costs of nuclear development enough to change Pyongyang’s strategic calculus.

But that consensus has collapsed. Instead of facing a coordinated international front, North Korea has been gifted perhaps its greatest strategic asset: a fractured world in which great-power rivalry has steadily eroded the political foundations that once made these sanctions effective. Not only has North Korea found an economic lifeline to keep the regime running, but it has also gained a diplomatic free pass to expand its nuclear and missile programs without consequence. This reality forces a tough reckoning for Washington and its allies. Sanctions aren’t entirely dead—they still make it difficult for the regime to operate—but relying on economic isolation alone to compel North Korea’s denuclearization is no longer a viable strategy in an era of intense geopolitical rivalry.

Few countries have faced a sanctions regime as extensive and multilayered as North Korea’s. Over the past decade—following North Korea’s first nuclear test in 2006—the United Nations Security Council has expanded punitive measures on Pyongyang. Beijing and Moscow cooperated with Washington based on shared concerns over regional stability and nuclear proliferation by restricting the regime’s access to hard currency, coal and textile exports, overseas labor, and refined petroleum imports.

For a time, this pressure campaign produced tangible results—and by 2017, the Security Council had constructed one of the world’s most comprehensive sanctions regimes. China’s enforcement of restrictions on coal imports and cross-border trade significantly reduced Pyongyang’s export earnings, and pandemic-era border closures compounded the strain. The North Korean economy experienced one of its sharpest contractions in decades, demonstrating that sanctions could impose substantial costs when major powers maintained a unified front.

Yet nearly a decade later, the........

© Foreign Policy