North Korea Says US Missile Shield Plans Risk ‘Nuclear War' in Space
Trump announced new details and initial funding for the missile shield system last week, calling it "very important for the success and even survival of our country".
The initiative faces significant technical and political challenges, according to analysts, and could come at a hefty price tag.
In a statement shared by the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA), Pyongyang's foreign ministry slammed the "very dangerous 'threatening initiative' aimed at threatening the strategic security of the nuclear weapons states".
The United States is "hell-bent on the moves to militarize outer space," the foreign ministry said.
"The US plan for building a new missile defense system is the root cause of sparking off global nuclear and space arms race by stimulating the security concerns of nuclear weapons states and turning... outer space into a potential nuclear war field," it added.
Washington -- Seoul's key security ally -- has in recent years ramped up joint military exercises and increased the presence of strategic US assets, such as an aircraft carrier and a nuclear-powered submarine, in the region to deter the North.
Pyongyang has repeatedly declared itself an "irreversible" nuclear weapons state and routinely denounces joint US-South Korea drills as rehearsals for invasion.
Hong Min, a senior analyst at the Korea Institute for National Unification, told AFP that Pyongyang saw Trump's "Golden Dome" as a threat.
"The North's strong reaction suggests it views the Golden Dome as capable of significantly weakening the effectiveness of its nuclear arsenal, including its ICBMs," he said.
"If the US completes its new missile defense program, the North will be forced to develop alternative means to counter or penetrate it," he added.
- China, Russia modernizing weapons -
China has also expressed strong concerns about Washington's Golden Dome plan, accusing the United States of undermining global stability.
Beijing is closing the gap with Washington when it comes to ballistic and hypersonic missile technology, while Moscow is modernizing its intercontinental-range missile systems and developing advanced precision strike missiles, according to a 2022 Pentagon review.
The Kremlin has said Trump's initiative would require consultations with Russia but was otherwise a "sovereign matter" for the United States, softening its tone after also previously slamming the idea as destabilizing.
The plan's Golden Dome name stems from Israel's Iron Dome air defense system, which has intercepted thousands of short-range rockets and other projectiles since it went into operation in 2011.
The United States faces various missile threats from adversaries, but they differ significantly from the short-range weapons that Israel's Iron Dome is designed to counter.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Saudi Gazette
4 hours ago
- Saudi Gazette
Trump's election paved way for Israeli attacks on Iran, intelligence sources say
BRUSSELS — Israel had been planning a full-scale invasion of Iran for many years, but the re-election of Donald Trump coincided with a series of critical events paving the way to the direct attack in June this year, four current and former Israeli intelligence sources told Euronews in separate interviews. Israeli intelligence sources, speaking on condition of anonymity due to security concerns, told Euronews that Mossad agents had identified key strategic factors and political conditions enabling them to prepare for and initiate the attack on Iran. Among these, they cited the intensification of the proxy war, the election of US President Donald Trump, and the momentum of nuclear negotiations with Western powers. On 13 June, Israel launched multiple land and air strikes on Iran, killing senior Iranian military leaders, nuclear scientists and politicians, and damaging or destroying Iranian air defences and nuclear military facilities. Iran retaliated with missile and drone strikes on Israeli cities and military sites, aided by Iran-allied Houthis in Yemen. The US defended Israel from these attacks and, on the ninth day, bombed three Iranian nuclear sites. Iran then struck a US base in Qatar. On 24 June, under US pressure, Israel and Iran agreed to a ceasefire. Both sides claimed victory following the ceasefire. Israel and the US asserted that they significantly degraded Iran's missile and nuclear programs, while Iranian authorities denied these claims. Independent assessments are currently limited due to the secrecy surrounding Iran's nuclear and the US said that the attack had been in the planning for many years, in parallel with diplomatic engagement with Iran.'Israel has never hidden the fact that it wants to destroy the Iranian nuclear program, and it has never hidden the fact it was also willing to allow it to be resolved diplomatically, as long as the diplomatic solution prevents Iran not only from enriching uranium, but from ever getting the capacity to pose an existential threat to the state of Israel,' a first Israeli intelligence source told engagements were not bringing any tangible results, the sources said, while tensions between the US and Iran grew following Donald Trump's first presidency in the US from 2018, Trump withdrew the US from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA), which had limited Iran's nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief. Following the US re-imposition of sanctions, Iran began ignoring the deal's nuclear restrictions in the meantime, the proxy war between Israel and Iran was progressively escalating.'I think the pivotal moment was in April 2024, when Iran launched missiles directly from its own territory at Israel. Until then, Iran had primarily relied on proxies to attack Israel, while Israel carried out covert operations inside Iran with plausible deniability, aiming to prevent escalation into full-scale war,' the first intelligence source April 2024, Iran launched missiles at Israel in retaliation for an Israeli strike on its consulate in Syria that killed Brigadier General Mohammad Reza Zahedi. He was the highest-ranking Iranian military official killed since the Iranian General Qassem Suleimani's assassination in 2020 by the US Trump administration. Suleimani was the 'architect' of Iran's proxy war in the Middle East.'I think Israel had to wait from April 2024. It needed time to gather all the intelligence and planning it needed in order to feel confident that, already in the first two or three days of the war, we would be in a position where we had complete control over the situation, minimal casualties at home, and complete control of Iranian airspace, with the ability to attack whenever and wherever we want to,' the source Trump's second election as US president was another key pivotal moment and was welcomed by all the four sources.'The original plan was to attack in October 2024. That was after the second direct missile attack by Iran on Israel following Israel's assassination of Hezbollah's leader Hassan Nasrallah in Lebanon in September,' the first intelligence sources said, but the attack was delayed to wait for the US elections in November.'I think it was very important for Israel that Trump should win those elections. Once Trump was elected, he put the main emphasis on reaching a hostage deal,' said the second source, referring to the Hamas-Israel conflict.'Once the hostage deal was signed around March 2025, Israel was again in a position to attack Iran. But the US and Iran entered into negotiations, to try bringing a peaceful solution to the issue of Iran's enrichment and nuclear program,' the first source March, the US and Iran began indirect negotiations on the Iranian nuclear program. The negotiations did not bring an agreement, although counterparts described them as 'constructive'.'Trump gave 60 days to those negotiations. The day after, Israel attacked Iran. I think that obviously was coordinated with the US administration,' all the current and former Israeli intelligence sources told has never publicly stated that Israel's first attack on Iran was coordinated. However, following the US strike on Iranian nuclear facilities, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said at a press conference on June 23 that the operation had been planned for many years.'When we attacked, we were at the end of the 60-day period of negotiations. I think it was very clear to Trump at this stage that the Iranians were not willing to forego enrichment on Iranian soil, even though the negotiations did bring up some interesting solutions to that. For example, some sort of international enrichment agency that would allocate enriched uranium at civilian levels to all countries in the region interested in it,' the first intelligence source said.'Trump realised Iran was engaging in negotiations merely to buy time, with no real intent to reach a resolution. The talks served as a decoy, giving Iran the impression it wouldn't be attacked, especially amid widespread press reports that Israel was on the verge of striking,' the first source Iran claimed victory and celebrated its resilience towards Israel's invasion, Israeli intelligence sources said that Tehran's regime has been left weakened following the attack.'Israel has emerged from several conflicts in a stronger strategic position in the region, but in a more difficult political position with its Western partners, except perhaps Washington. We're at a very delicate moment in which both Israel and Iran have little to gain by pushing further right now,' Ian Lesser, fellow and adviser to the German Marshall Fund's president, told Euronews.'Iran has fewer options now. One option is to return to negotiations. Another is to turn to its traditional methods of responding, which rely on proxies and non-traditional actions, including terrorism. There is also the possibility that, if Iran maintains some ability to develop nuclear weapons, it may see this as another path. But I don't think anyone will let them do that. There may be disagreements about Israeli strategy and policy, but overall, Israel and its Western partners are not willing to tolerate a nuclearised Iran,' the expert the war had gone further, Israel would have probably attacked gas and oil installations, a fourth former Israeli intelligence source told Euronews. However, after the ceasefire, negotiations have resumed at diplomatic 25 July, diplomats from Iran met counterparts from Germany, the UK, and France in Istanbul for talks, the first since Israel's mid-June attack on Iran, amid warnings that these European countries might trigger a 'snapback' of UN sanctions on second intelligence source said that following the conflict, Israel would maintain control over Iranian airspace, in order to 'destroy anything that even suggests that the Iranians are preparing to rebuild any of the capabilities that we have destroyed'. — Euronews
Saudi Gazette
4 hours ago
- Saudi Gazette
Europe frozen out as US and Russia prepare for Alaska talks
BRUSSELS — Europe's sidelining from the Alaska meeting of US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin means the continent's been frozen out of a meeting critical to its security, according to EU law professor Alberto Alemanno. The proposed Alaska meeting will be the first in-person meeting between the US and Russian presidents since the start of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine by Russia. But there are no plans for European leaders to attend, raising questions about the heft of EU diplomacy on the world stage. For Alemanno, EU law professor at HEC in Paris, this is a clear sign that Europe is being left on the sidelines. "The Alaska meeting may offer yet another moment of truth for Europe because the European Union finds itself on the sidelines in what could be the most consequential peace effort since the war began, with Trump and Putin set to meet without any European leader officially invited to the table," Alemanno said. The professor added that Europe is now concentrating efforts on obtaining a place at the negotiation table for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. But recent US threats to pull financing from Ukraine's defence efforts make Europe cautious and conciliatory, the professor said. "The EU seems to lack leverage in actually inviting the US to be invited or to be heard, simply because we heard from Vice President Vance that the US is ready to give up its support for Ukraine unless the European Union steps in. In a way, the European leaders are caught between a rock and a hard place. If they show too much commitment towards Ukraine, they might end up being alone, but if they let it go, Ukraine is going to get a very bad deal," he said. The professor added that Europe accepts subjugation with a view to obtaining security guarantees from Trump. "This is extremely tricky and frustrating to see for millions of Europeans who would like to see their European leaders speak with a louder voice instead of accepting, yet again, more impositions, more intimidations, more subjugation to this US administration in a moment in which this negotiation could fundamentally reshape European security without meaningful European input." Jacob Kirkegaard, an expert at the Bruegel think tank, agrees that Europe is paying the price for its relative weakness on defence. "We are paying the price of our inability to defend ourselves and our inability to adequately support Ukraine. And that means that when you don't have actual power, you will not be invited to this meeting," Kirkegaard said. He added that even if Trump and Putin come to terms, these cannot be implemented against the will of Ukraine and Europe. Kirkegaard also said any deal that might harm the security interests of Europe would damage NATO. Kierkegaard said that if the US - as the principal security power of NATO - signs a deal advantageous to NATO's direct military antagonist Russia, "then NATO is dead, finished... it's buried and it's over". "Our problem is that we are not capable... to deter Russia on our own," he added. Ahead of the talks, Donald Trump said that a ceasefire deal might involve the exchange of territories between Ukraine and Russia, a suggestion roundly rejected by Zelenskyy and strongly resisted by European leaders in a statement issued on Sunday. The EU's top diplomat Kaja Kallas, convened a snap, informal virtual meeting of EU foreign ministers on Monday to discuss the situation. — Euronews
Al Arabiya
5 hours ago
- Al Arabiya
Trump's National Guard move, Trump–Putin meeting speculation & Adidas cultural controversy
On W News Extra tonight, Trump's National Guard move, the latest developments on Putin and Trump's meeting in Alaska this week, plus the controversy surrounding Adidas' latest shoe design.
