In late October there was speculation that China had suspended oil shipments to North Korea for the month of September due to displeasure over the July missiles tests and to send a warning concerning a nuclear test. In mid-November, Chinese officials told visiting American scholars that China had not cut-off oil (or food aid) to North Korea and did not intend to.

The latest reports indicate that no oil was shipped to North Korea in September, per data from China’s General Administration of Customs, and notes a 67.7 percent increase for the month of October over imports from the previous year.

An international security expert from Peking University offers this explanation:

“China sensed that the North Koreans were going to conduct a nuclear test and tried to prevent it but in vain,” said Zhu Feng, an expert at Peking University’s International Security Program. The decline “must be directly related to the nuclear test,” he said. Having failed to prevent the test, Beijing resumed shipments, he believes.

So, Chinese “officials” claimed there was not suspension, although Chinese customs data shows no oil shipped. This could mean that no oil was shipped for purely logistical reasons, and that there was no policy of halting oil as punishment. On the other hand, Feng from Peking University – who I would guess is a government employee – believes that the lack of oil shipped in September was in fact being used as leverage.

At this point it’s not certain what, if any, message is to be understood from the lack of oil shipped from China to North Korea in September; either business as usual or a failed Chinese attempt to influence Kim Jong-il. What remains clear is the stunning lack of consequences for the 9 October nuclear test.