North Korea salvages capsized destroyer after Kim slams failed launch
North Korea has salvaged a capsized destroyer and moored it at the northeastern port of Chongjin, state media confirmed Friday, as repair efforts continue on what Kim Jong-un has labelled a 'significant asset' for the country's nuclear-armed military.
The state-run Korean Central News Agency said naval experts will examine the vessel's hull before moving it to a dry dock in the nearby port of Rajin, where restoration work is expected to take between seven and 10 days.
The development aligns with assessments from South Korea's military and satellite imagery taken Thursday by Planet Labs, which showed the warship upright and afloat after days of listing following its failed launch in late May.
While the extent of the damage remains unclear, analysts say the vessel appears stable enough for inspection and transport.
Jo Chun-ryong, a senior ruling party official, said North Korea would ensure 'the perfect restoration of the destroyer will be completed without fail' before the scheduled Workers' Party congress in late June — a deadline set by Kim.
The 4,500-metric tonne destroyer was reportedly damaged during a launching ceremony, which Kim denounced as 'a criminal act caused by absolute carelessness, irresponsibility and unscientific empiricism.'
At least four officials, including the deputy director of the Workers' Party's munitions industry, have been arrested. State media vowed those responsible would be 'held accountable for their unpardonable criminal act.'
South Korean military spokesperson Lee Sung-joon said the North likely righted the warship earlier this week and was currently draining water and assessing internal damage.
'The nature and duration of the repair process will vary, depending on internal repairs, additional work or whether the incident affected the keel' he added, noting this might impact future deployment.
The destroyer is North Korea's second of its class and part of Kim's broader push to modernise naval capabilities.
The vessel is reportedly similar to one launched in April from Nampo, described by experts as the regime's most sophisticated warship to date, capable of deploying anti-air, anti-ship and nuclear-capable ballistic and cruise missiles.
Though Pyongyang's naval forces lag behind regional rivals, analysts argue a modern destroyer would still enhance both offensive reach and defence.
South Korean officials suspect Russian technical support played a role in the vessel's construction — a product of deepening military cooperation between Moscow and Pyongyang.
Kim hosted Russian Security Council Secretary Sergei Shoigu in Pyongyang this week in another display of strengthening bilateral ties.
Western officials have voiced concern that North Korea's supply of missiles, artillery and even troops to support Russia's war in Ukraine may be rewarded with advanced military technologies in return.
Kim maintains that his military build-up is necessary to counter what he sees as hostile actions by the US and South Korea, who have stepped up joint exercises in response to North Korea's weapons development.
The North Korean leader has stated that acquiring a nuclear-powered submarine is his next goal for bolstering naval strength.
At least 10 Palestinians were killed in Israeli strikes in Gaza's southern city of Khan Younis overnight into Thursday, according to Nasser Hospital, which received the bodies. It was not immediately clear if the strikes were related to the recovery mission overnight of the bodies of two hostages.
In Gaza City, three journalists were among five Palestinians who were killed in Israeli strikes on the courtyard of the al-Ahli Hospital in the north of the enclave. A half dozen others were injured in the attack, according to the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry.
The Israeli military said it was looking into reports on the strike at al-Ahli and suggested that its officials may launch an investigation into the allegations. The army says it only targets militants and blames civilian deaths on Hamas because it is embedded in populated areas.
Over 180 journalists and media workers have been killed since the start of Israel's military campaign, the vast majority of them in Gaza, according to the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists.
Israel has said many of those killed in its strikes were militants 'posing as reporters'. The Palestinian Journalists Syndicate condemned what it described as Israel's continued systematic and deliberate targeting of journalists.
In a statement, the union said that the ongoing Israeli aggression has so far claimed the lives of 225 journalists and media workers, including 30 female journalists. They've also identified the late journalists as Ismail Bdaih, Suleiman Hajjaj, and Samir Al-Rifai.
The group has accused Israel of continuing a policy of 'enforced disappearance' against Palestinian journalists, citing the ongoing lack of information regarding the fate of two missing reporters — Nidal Al-Wahidi and Haitham Abdul-Wahed — whose cases the union described as 'clear instances of enforced disappearance in violation of international law.'
Israel has come under fire recently for its targeting of journalists and conduct of war. Various global media houses and well known broadcasters have slammed Netanyahu's government for not allowing independent international media into Gaza to report and investigate.
Israel says the decision to not allow journalists access into the enclave was for safety reasons, adding that they cannot ensure the safety of journalists once they've entered.
Those claims were however dismissed, as various international media outlets have pledged to organise their own security protocol and arrangements.
Various groups, including Reporters Without Borders, have accused Israel of attempting to control the narrative and silence the facts by not allowing free press inside Gaza to conduct their own research and show the conditions on the ground.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
2 hours ago
- Euronews
NATO allies have agreed to significant increases in defence spending
The US administration has appointed Lt. Gen. Alexus G. Grynkewich as both the next top US general in Europe as well as the SACEUR. The appointment by Trump will be especially welcomed following media reports in recent months that the US was considering relinquishing the role of SACUER which has always been appointed by a US president to NATO. "It's a very important decision and there is relief from NATO's point of view as it's a positive sign of American engagement and staffing," a US-based source familiar with the issue told Euronews. US Army General Dwight D. Eisenhower was NATO's first SACEUR in 1951, and the role has remained with the US ever since. 'Upon completion of national confirmation processes, Grynkewich will take up his appointment as the successor to General Christopher G. Cavoli, United States Army, at a change of command ceremony at the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe in Mons, Belgium, expected in the summer of 2025,' a statement from NATO read. Meanwhile, NATO defence ministers agreed to a significant surge in defence capability targets for each country, as well as moving to spending 5% of GDP on defence. They've agreed that 3.5% of GDP would be used for 'core defence spending' - such as heavy weapons, tanks, air defence. Meanwhile 1.5% of GDP per year will be spent on defence- and security-related areas such as infrastructure, surveillance, and cyber. However, the full list of flexibility has not yet been negotiated. 'These targets describe exactly what capabilities Allies need to invest in over the coming years,' NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte told journalists. The US has been pushing NATO allies to dramatically increase spending, and expects to see 'credible progress' immediately, according to US Ambassador to NATO Mathew Whitaker. 'The threats facing NATO are growing and our adversaries are certainly not waiting for us to re-arm or be ready for them to make the first move," 'We would prefer our Allies move out urgently on reaching the 5%,' he told journalists in a briefing on the margins of the meetings. Ambassador Whitaker also said the US is 'counting on Europe' to the lead in providing Ukraine with the 'resources necessary to reach a durable peace' on the continent. Mark Rutte reiterated NATO's recent warnings that Russia could strike NATO territory within the next couple of years. 'If we don't act now, the next three years, we are fine, but we have to start now, because otherwise, from three, four or five years from now, we are really under threat," he said, adding: "I really mean this. Then you have to get your Russian language course out, or go to New Zealand.' 'It's good to have continuity about the US in NATO, but with Ukraine it's a different story. I just don't think Trump really cares about Ukraine," the US-based source told Euronews. 'Trump just doesn't care about Europe – it doesn't make him richer or help him politically,' the source said. Referring to the forthcoming NATO summit taking place next month in The Hague, the source said the presence of Ukraine at the summit "will likely be scaled back", since the US will say, "they're not members' so they don't need to be there".
LeMonde
2 hours ago
- LeMonde
Russia steps up use of new military technologies against Ukraine, including AI
Bursts of automatic gunfire rang out some hundred meters away. The soldiers chatting on the side of the road connecting Sloviansk and Dobropillia in eastern Ukraine at first paid no attention. But, when a buzzing sound filled the air, someone shouted: "Drone!" A confused voice asked, "Ours or the enemy's?" Soldiers at the nearby Ukrainian military checkpoint had already answered the question with their weapons. The troops ran to take cover under the trees and bushes below. The loitering munition continued its course in the sky, then vanished from sight. No one was sure what exactly had just flown over them. The nearest Russian positions were 20 kilometers away, a distance considered relatively safe and out of reach for most enemy attack drones. "The situation is deteriorating rapidly," said Maxime, an officer with the 14 th assault brigade, Tchervona Kalyna ("Red Viburnum"), who was not authorized to give his last name. "That drone had wings. It was either a Molniya or a Matka." The officer explained that the latter is a "mother drone," which carries four small loitering munitions, or kamikaze drones. This mother drone doubles the range of Russian attack drones. It is also used for aerial reconnaissance and for guiding its "children" to their targets. "We saw the first Matka 10 months ago. Since then, it's been improved and has spread everywhere. The road to Dobropillia is heavily targeted now. There are destroyed vehicles everywhere, including civilian ones. If the 'children' don't find a high-value target [armored vehicles or artillery], they start to strike anything that's alive."
Euronews
4 hours ago
- Euronews
Ukraine war: Kharkiv targeted by massive Russian attack
A large Russian attack with drones and missiles has hit Ukraine's eastern city of Kharkiv on Saturday, killing at least three people and injuring 21, local officials said. The barrage — the latest in near daily widescale attacks — included aerial glide bombs that have become part of a fierce Russian onslaught in the three-year-war . The intensity of the Russian attacks on Ukraine over the past weeks has further dampened hopes that the warring sides could reach a peace deal anytime soon days — especially after Kyiv recently embarrassed the Kremlin with a surprise drone attack on military air bases deep inside Russia. According to Ukraine's Air Force, Russia struck with 215 missiles and drones overnight, and Ukrainian air defenses shot down and neutralized 87 drones and seven missiles. Several other areas in Ukraine were also hit, including the regions of Donetsk, Dnipropetrovsk, Odesa, and the city of Ternopil, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha said in a post on X. 'To put an end to Russia's killing and destruction, more pressure on Moscow is required, as are more steps to strengthen Ukraine,' he said. Kharkiv's mayor Ihor Terekhov said the attack also damaged 18 apartment buildings and 13 private homes. Terekhov said it was 'the most powerful attack' on the city since the full-scale invasion in 2022. Kharkiv's regional governor Oleh Syniehubov said two districts in the city were struck with three missiles, five aerial glide bombs and 48 drones. Among the injured were two children, a month and a half year old baby boy and a 14-year old girl, he added. The attack on Kharkiv comes one day after Russia launched one of the fiercest missile and drone barrages on Ukraine, striking six Ukrainian territories and killing at least killing at least six people and injuring about 80. Among the dead were three emergency responders in Kyiv, one person in Lutsk and two people in Chernihiv. Meanwhile, the Ukrainian Air Force said it shot down a Russian Su-35 fighter jet on the Kursk front inside Russia, the Ukrainian daily Ukrainskaia Pravda reported. No more details were given immediately. U.S. President Donald Trump said this week that his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, told him Moscow would respond to Ukraine's attack on Russian military airfields last Sunday with "Operation Spiderweb" In a new statement bound to cause offense in Kyiv and amongst its allies, Trump told journalists on board Air Force One on Friday evening local time when asked about "Operation Spiderweb": "They gave Putin a reason to go in and bomb the hell out of them last night. That's the thing I didn't like about it. When I saw it I said 'Here we go, now it's going to be a strike'." The European Union is readying a new round of sanctions against Russia to pile extra pressure on the Kremlin and pressure it to agree to a 30-day unconditional ceasefire in Ukraine, a step that Western allies consider indispensable for serious peace negotiations. Ursula von der Leyen has already provided an outline of what that package, the 18th since February 2022, is supposed to target: Russia's financial sector, the "shadow fleet" and the Nord Stream pipelines, which are currently non-operational. On top of that, the president of the European Commission has pitched a downward revision of the price cap on Russian oil to further squeeze profits from worldwide sales, a crucial cash flow to sustain the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. "We need a real ceasefire, we need Russia at the negotiating table, and we need to end this war. Pressure works, as the Kremlin understands nothing else," von der Leyen said earlier this week after meeting with US Senator Lindsey Graham. But there's a catch: unlike other sanctions the bloc has imposed on Russia, such as the multiple export and import bans, the price cap has a political and practical dimension that exceeds the institutional sphere of Brussels and stretches across the ocean. More specifically, to Washington, DC. The price cap on Russian oil was introduced in December 2022 by the Group of Seven (G7) under the initiative of the Joe Biden administration. It was hailed as an ingenious, ground-breaking mechanism to mobilise the collective power of Western allies and cripple Russia's high-intensity war machine. As part of the plan, the G7, together with Australia, passed laws prohibiting their domestic companies from providing services, such as insurance, financing and flagging, to Russian tankers that sold seaborne crude oil above a predetermined price. The secret lay in market power: for decades, Western firms, particularly British ones, have dominated the sector of Protection and Indemnity (P&I), a type of insurance that gives shipowners broad protection and allows them to cover potentially huge costs from any accidental harm caused to the crew, their property or the environment. Due to the inherent risks of moving oil in high waters, P&I is today considered the norm in maritime trade and a must-have to be accepted in a foreign port. By leveraging their leading firms, the G7 intended to create an extraterritorial effect that would cap the price of Russian oil not only within their jurisdictions but all around the world. Following intense behind-the-scenes talks, the cap was set at $60 per barrel, a compromise between hard-line and cautious member states. The strategy only worked up to a point however. Although the price of Russian Urals oil gradually decreased, it consistently remained above the $60 mark, often exceeding the $70 threshold. The blatant circumvention was attributed to the "shadow fleet" that Russia deployed at high sea. These tankers are so old and poorly kept that they fall outside P&I standards and rely on alternative, obscure insurance systems that escape G7 surveillance. By the time the cap entered into force, Moscow "had spent months building a 'shadow fleet' of tankers, finding new buyers like India and China, and creating new payment systems, to the point that its oil does not need to be greatly discounted to sell," Luis Caricano, a professor at the London School of Economics, wrote in a recent analysis. "What should have been a blow became a manageable problem," Caricano said. With few sectors in the Russian economy left to sanction, Brussels has turned its sight to the cap as a means to tighten the screws on the Kremlin and secure a ceasefire in Ukraine. The Commission has reportedly pitched a revision between $50 and $45 per barrel, which the UK and Canada are believed to support. However, the US has so far refrained from endorsing a lower price cap, raising the stakes ahead of crunch talks at the G7 summit in Alberta, scheduled for mid-June. Now, a tough question emerges: Can the EU dare, and afford, to go it alone? In the strictest legalistic sense, the EU could, indeed, establish a lower price cap on its own. After all, the G7, as an organisation, lacks regulatory powers: each ally amends its laws individually to fulfil a collective mission. In this case, the EU introduced new legislation to prohibit EU companies – rather than, say, American or British companies – from servicing Russian tankers that bypassed the $60-per-barrel cap. Similarly, the bloc could now change the text to adjust that prohibition to a tighter price without waiting for other allies to reciprocate. Here appears the first roadblock: any change to sanctions must be approved by a unanimous vote among member states. It is highly unlikely that all 27 countries would choose to move forward with a lower cap without having an explicit guarantee that Washington will follow suit. Hungary, in particular, has fully aligned itself with the Trump administration and could veto any proposal opposed by the White House. Even if the bloc managed to overcome internal differences and agreed to a lower cap on its own, more formidable obstacles could impede its success. The bloc's revised cap would have to co-exist with America's existing cap. This means that one side of the Atlantic Ocean would apply a $50-per-barrel limit while the other side would apply a $60-per-barrel limit, creating a cacophony for all actors involved. "Different price caps across G7 countries could confuse maritime service providers and weaken overall enforcement," Petras Katinas, an energy analyst at the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA), told Euronews. "A solo move by the EU could cause friction within the Price Cap Coalition, damaging trust and coordination, both of which are crucial for keeping pressure on Russian oil revenues," Katinas added, warning the project could be rendered "largely symbolic". The legislative chaos would immediately benefit the Kremlin, which has long sought to exploit loopholes to evade and undermine international sanctions. Moscow, though, would also face hurdles: the continued crackdown on "shadow fleet" vessels has forced the country to increase its reliance on G7 insurance, which, in theory, could make it easier for the EU to apply the revised measure. "If the EU alone decides to tighten the screws on the cap, it's an additional constraint on Russia's oil exports but not as tight as with a whole of G7 approach," said Elisabetta Cornago, a senior researcher at the Centre for European Reform (CER). Besides practical snags and legal matters, there is geopolitics to consider. One of the reasons why the G7 initiative has fallen short of expectations is that, as the name suggests, it has remained a G7-exclusive plan. Countries in Asia, Latin America and Africa have refused to play along and join the coalition. China and India openly buy Russian crude oil, sometimes to refine it and resell it under a different label. Having the EU and the US go separate ways would further destabilise the Western alliance and create the impression of a transatlantic break-up. But for many, that is already a reality: the "Coalition of the Willing", born after Donald Trump unilaterally launched negotiations with Vladimir Putin, bears testament to the political divide. "The price cap was a G7 + EU initiative, and so in its current form, I do not see any pathway in which the EU could adjust the cap without the support of the broader coalition, including the US," said Ben McWilliams, an affiliate fellow with Bruegel. "That said, the EU is free to implement whatever measures it wants on its own domestic ships and insurance companies, which it could likely encourage the UK to join," McWilliams added. "So the EU can still move ahead – it would just need to be under a different institutional format than currently exists."
