Follow us on social

google cta
2008-02-25t120000z_47712723_gm1e42p1nmj01_rtrmadp_3_korea-north-concert-scaled

Extending the North Korea travel ban is a missed opportunity

President Biden let the Trump-era rule continue, which blocks people-to-people contact and humanitarian assistance.

Analysis | Asia-Pacific
google cta
google cta

Restrictions imposed on American passport holders over travel to North Korea were extended by the Biden administration after being set to expire on September 1. Extending these restrictions is a missed opportunity to remove an obstacle to principled engagement and humanitarian exchange with North Korea. 

These restrictions, introduced by the Trump administration in 2017 and renewed annually, made U.S. passports no longer valid for travel to, in, or through North Korea. Since then, individuals seeking to legally travel to North Korea on a U.S. passport have been required to apply for a special validation passport through the U.S. State Department. These one-time-use passports are “issued on an extremely limited basis” when the State Department deems the “trip is in the national interest.” 

As a presidential candidate, Joe Biden pledged to work “to reunite Korean Americans separated from loved ones in North Korea for decades.” Prior to the travel restrictions, some Korean Americans were able to travel to North Korea to visit their family members still living there. However, with the travel restrictions in place and lack of an agreement between the American and North Korean governments on family reunions, the options for Korean American divided families to reunite in person will be extremely limited.  

One impetus for these restrictions was the tragic death of Otto Warmbier, an American student arrested for allegedly stealing a propaganda poster while visiting North Korea as a tourist. Warmbier was held from January 2016 to June 2017 and died in the United States days after being released from North Korea in a coma.  

Warmbier was neither the first nor the last American detained in the country. At least one American was held in North Korea after the travel restrictions took effect, though he has since been released and deported after allegations that he entered North Korea illegally. Robert King, the former Special Envoy for North Korea Human Rights Issues notes that “[o]ver the last decade or so, some twenty Americans have been detained by the DPRK, in most cases for reasons that are consistent with North Korean laws, but not with those of democratic societies like the United States.” 

The travel restrictions have also limited the ability of some non-governmental organizations to provide medical, developmental, and other humanitarian assistance. Advocates for removing the travel restrictions note that the process is too often arbitrary and lacks transparency detailing why applications are denied. Even those individuals who have their applications for special validation passports approved by the State Department may face bureaucratic and financial burdens. 

Cultural exchanges, educational engagement, and other people-to-people exchanges are also valuable, especially given the general lack of direct contact between U.S. and North Korean citizens. This people-to-people engagement has been diverse, ranging from former American political leaders visiting North Korea to promote dialogue and understanding to the New York Philharmonic performing a concert in Pyongyang. 

Had the Biden administration chosen not to renew these travel restrictions, the initial effect would have been largely be symbolic due to North Korea’s strict self-imposed border controls arising from the COVID-19 pandemic. But easing the restrictions would have enabled direct people-to-people contact or humanitarian assistance in significant areas in the future. 

U.S. Special Representative for the DPRK Sung Kim recently wrote that “we are open to exploring meaningful confidence-building initiatives.” Unfortunately, this was a missed opportunity for the administration to demonstrate its commitment to that pledge by removing a significant barrier that could hinder the success of those very confidence-building initiatives.  


Members of the New York Philharmonic pose for a group photograph after arriving in the North Korean capital of Pyongyang February 25, 2008, for a stay of about 48 hours which will culminate in a concert on Tuesday. The New York Philharmonic arrived in Pyongyang on Monday to play the symphony "From the New World" in an overture to thaw still frozen ties from the Cold War era between the United States and North Korea. REUTERS/David Gray (NORTH KOREA)
google cta
Analysis | Asia-Pacific
Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?
Top image credit: President Donald J. Trump holds a joint news conference at the White House with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Feb. 4, 2025. (Shutterstock/ Joshua Sukoff)

Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?

QiOSK

In the months that led up to the Iraq War, the Bush administration went to extraordinary lengths to convince the world of the need to oust Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. Leading officials laid out their case in public, sharing what they claimed was evidence that Iraq was moving rapidly toward the deployment of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. When U.S. tanks rolled across the border, everyone knew the justification: the U.S. was determined to thwart Iraq’s development of weapons of mass destruction, however fictitious that threat would later prove to be.

In the months that led up to the Iran War, the Trump administration took a different tack. President Trump spoke only occasionally of Iran, offering a smattering of justifications for growing U.S. tensions with the country. He claimed without evidence that Iran was rebuilding its nuclear program after the U.S.-Israeli attack last June and even developing missiles that could strike the United States. But he insisted that Tehran could make a deal with seven magic words: “we will never have a nuclear weapon.”

keep readingShow less
Iran says ‘no ship is allowed to pass’ Strait of Hormuz: Reports
Top image credit: A large oil tanker transits the Strait of Hormuz. (Shutterstock/ Clare Louise Jackson)

Iran says ‘no ship is allowed to pass’ Strait of Hormuz: Reports

QiOSK

Hours after the U.S. and Israel launched a campaign of airstrikes across Iran, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps is warning vessels in the Persian Gulf via radio that “no ship is allowed to pass the Strait of Hormuz,” according to a report from Reuters.

The news suggests that Iran is ready to pull out all the stops in its response to the U.S.-Israeli barrage, which President Donald Trump says is aimed at toppling the Iranian regime. A full shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz would cause an international crisis given that 20% of the world’s oil passes through the narrow channel. Financial analysts estimate that even one day of a full blockade could cause global oil prices to double from $66 per barrel to more than $120.

keep readingShow less
trump strikes iran
Top photo credit: Truth Social

Trump: we've begun combat strikes, regime change operations in Iran

Middle East

President Donald Trump released a video on Truth Social at 2:30 a.m. ET this morning announcing that major U.S. combat operations in Iran were underway. At the end he demanded disarmament by Tehran: "lay down your arms and you will be treated fairly with total immunity or you will face certain death." He also said to "the people of Iran" that "when we are finished the government is yours to take. Your hour of freedom is at hand."

This operation would clearly go beyond the 2025 "Operation Midnight Hammer" in which Trump claimed this morning that the U.S. had "obliterated" Iran's nuclear program. This time he said the U.S. would to "raze their missile industry to the ground” and “annihilate their navy.”

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.