In addition to sanctions “prohibiting remittances from Japan to 15 entities,” Japan is banning North Korean ships from its ports, including the ferry Mangyongbong-92, all imports for at least six-months, and severely restricting entry of DPRK nationals:

Japan decided Wednesday on additional economic sanctions against North Korea for six months, including a total ban on all imports from the country, with the nation remaining on high alert over speculation that Pyongyang may conduct a second nuclear test.

The measures decided on in a meeting of the Security Council of Japan also call for banning North Korean ships from entering Japanese ports and basically barring North Korean nationals from entering Japan, Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuhisa Shiozaki said.

The ban on entry by North Koreans took effect immediately while the ban on imports and ships will become effective on Saturday, according to Shiozaki.

The limit on remittances will bite the elite, but it did not limit them completely, leaving a bit more leverage on the issue.

The Bush administration has of course called for more (unspecified) sanctions as well, adding that the U.S. has not intention of attacking North Korea but would, “reserves all options to defend our friends in the region.” North Korea responded with the usual sanctions are an “act of war” routine, as they have many times in the past, but also made vague threats about taking action and direct ones about another nuclear test:

“If the U.S. keeps pestering us and increases pressure, we will regard it as a declaration of war and will take a series of physical corresponding measures,” the statement, said without specifying what those measures could be.

[. . .]

“The issue of future nuclear tests is linked to U.S. policy toward our country,” Kim Yong Nam was quoted as saying when asked whether Pyongyang will conduct more tests.

The nuclear issue has only fanned the flames in Japan, where Abe likely will change the constitution, perhaps now with justification to do so to a greater degree:

But the big turning point came in 2002, when North Korea admitted to abducting citizens and returned five survivors. The image of agents snatching people from Japanese shores turned public opinion decisively against North Korea, analysts said, even more so than missiles or Monday’s reported nuclear test.

“The abduction issue is much bigger in Japan than the nuclear issue,” said Masao Okonogi, the dean of the law faculty and a specialist on Korean politics at Keio University in Tokyo. “It forms the basis of Japan’s current view of North Korea.”

The issue was also seized by Liberal Democrat hard-liners, led by Mr. Abe, who rose to political stardom by advocating a tough line on North Korea. They brandished the perceived North Korean threat to argue for long-cherished conservative goals, including revising the American-imposed peace Constitution and remaking Japan’s defense forces into a full-fledged military.

Japan has been looking at options for rearming and has now been provided with a justification that can be more clearly defined and presented to voters:

Japanese investment in anti-missile technology - needed to protect against a Korean (or Chinese) threat - has crowded some more conventional programs, such as some warship-building, out of the Japanese defense budget. At the same time, the Japanese are starting to discuss the possibility that the appropriate response to a North Korean nuclear threat would be a pre-emptive attack.

An editorial in yesterdays National Review urges just that, “Japan. . . needs to begin to rearm.”

The question is, from North Korea’s perspective, were these intended or unintended consequences?