North Korean leader Kim reaffirms support for Russia in Ukraine conflict, KCNA says, Asia News
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov is on a three-day visit to North Korea, which has provided troops and arms for Russia's war with Ukraine and pledged more military support as Moscow tries to make advances in the conflict.
Kim met Lavrov in the eastern coastal city of Wonsan where the two countries' foreign ministers held their second strategic dialogue, pledging further co-operation under a partnership treaty signed last year that includes a mutual defence pact.
Kim told Lavrov the steps taken by the allies in response to radically evolving global geopolitics will contribute greatly to securing peace and security around the world, North Korea's state news agency KCNA reported.
"Kim Jong Un reaffirmed the DPRK (Democratic People's Republic of Korea) is ready to unconditionally support and encourage all the measures taken by the Russian leadership as regards the tackling of the root cause of the Ukrainian crisis," KCNA said.
Lavrov earlier held talks with his North Korean counterpart Choe Son Hui in Wonsan, and they issued a joint statement pledging support to safeguard the national sovereignty and territorial integrity of each other's country, KCNA said.
On Saturday, Russian media reported Lavrov described the two countries' ties as "an invincible fighting brotherhood" in his meeting with Kim and thanked him for the troops deployed to Russia.
Relations between Russia and North Korea have deepened dramatically during the last two years of the war in Ukraine, which started in February 2022, with Pyongyang deploying more than 10,000 troops and arms to Russia to back Moscow's military campaign.
Kim's government has pledged to send about 6,000 military engineers and builders to help reconstruction work in Russia's Kursk region.
[[nid:720132]]
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
5 hours ago
- Straits Times
Who is Dmitry Medvedev, the Russian war hawk who got under Trump's skin?
FILE PHOTO: Dmitry Medvedev, Deputy Chairman of Russia's Security Council and Chairman of the United Russia political party, delivers a speech during the party's congress in Moscow, Russia, December 17, 2023. Sputnik/Yekaterina Shtukina/Pool via REUTERS ATTENTION EDITORS - THIS IMAGE WAS PROVIDED BY A THIRD PARTY./File Photo Former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev has become embroiled in a tense back-and-forth on social media that prompted U.S. President Donald Trump to announce he had ordered the re-positioning of two U.S. nuclear submarines. Who is Medvedev, what is his track record and how influential is he? PRESIDENT WHO BRIEFLY RAISED HOPES IN THE WEST Medvedev was elected Russian president in 2008 when Vladimir Putin, having served two terms, was barred from standing again under the law in force at that time. Medvedev ran the Kremlin for four years, with Putin as his prime minister but widely assumed by analysts in Russia and the West to be still calling the shots, before the two swapped places after the 2012 election - a political manoeuvre that provoked opposition protests. Medvedev, the son of two university professors, had studied law and worked for a time in the private sector. Short in height and quietly spoken, he was described by contemporaries as cultured and intelligent. As president, he was seen initially in the West as a potential moderniser and reformer, prepared to work to thaw relations with the United States. In 2009 he signed the New START nuclear arms reduction treaty with President Barack Obama. But Medvedev's presidency also saw Russia fight a brief war with its neighbour Georgia in 2008, and he failed to achieve his stated goals of tackling pervasive corruption, improving the rule of law in Russia, strengthening the role of civil society and rebalancing the economy to reduce its over-reliance on oil and gas production. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore No plans to fully liberalise cross-border ride-hailing services between Singapore and Johor: LTA Singapore LTA, Singapore bus operators reviewing Malaysia's request to start services from JB at 4am World Trump is winning his trade war, but Americans will pay the price Singapore President Tharman meets migrant workers who saved driver of car that fell into sinkhole Singapore Singapore must stay socially progressive while conserving its cultures: President Tharman Sport A 'wake-up call': National coach Gary Tan on Singapore swimmers' performances at WCH 2025 Opinion The charm – and drawbacks – of living in a time warp in Singapore Life KPop Demon Hunters to get sequels, expanded universe to include musical, live-action remake AFTER THE KREMLIN Medvedev served as Putin's prime minister for eight years in a period in which tensions with the West escalated anew, particularly over Russia's 2014 annexation of Crimea from Ukraine. But his political fortunes took a dive when he was removed in January 2020 and replaced by Mikhail Mishustin, who has held the post ever since. Medvedev was shunted into a new role as deputy chairman of the Security Council, a powerful body that includes the heads of Russia's intelligence services. WAR CHEERLEADER After Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Medvedev carved out a new role for himself as an arch-hawk and full-throated champion of the war, hurling aggressive rhetoric at Kyiv and the West and warning repeatedly of the risk of a nuclear "apocalypse". In May 2024 he said it would be a "fatal mistake" on the part of the West to think that Russia was not ready to use tactical nuclear weapons against Ukraine. He also spoke of the potential to strike unnamed hostile countries with strategic nuclear weapons. His statements - including personal attacks on foreign leaders - were frequently designed to shock, insult and provoke. He referred to Ukrainians as "cockroaches", in language Kyiv condemned as openly genocidal, and called President Volodymyr Zelenskiy a criminal, a drug addict, a louse, a rat and a freak. In January 2023, he accused Japan's prime minister of shameful subservience to the United States and suggested he should ritually disembowel himself. Russian opposition figures have dismissed Medvedev's outpourings as sad, impotent rants. However, some Western diplomats say they give a flavour of the thinking in Kremlin policy-making circles. Until now, they have rarely provoked a direct response from Western leaders. SPAT WITH TRUMP That changed last month when Trump rebuked Medvedev and accused him of throwing around the "N" word after the Russian criticised U.S. air strikes on Iran and said "a number of countries" were ready to supply Iran with nuclear warheads. When Trump imposed a deadline on Moscow to end the war in Ukraine or face further sanctions, including on buyers of its exports, Medvedev accused him of playing a "game of ultimatums" and moving a step closer to war between Russia and the U.S. Trump retorted: "Tell Medvedev, the failed former President of Russia, who thinks he's still President, to watch his words. He's entering very dangerous territory!" Medvedev waded in again last Thursday, saying Trump's "nervous reaction" showed Russia was on the right course and referring again to Moscow's nuclear capabilities. Trump delivered his statement the following day on posting U.S. nuclear submarines in "the appropriate regions", since when Medvedev has not posted again. REUTERS
Business Times
6 hours ago
- Business Times
Opec+ makes another large oil output hike in market share push
[LONDON] Opec+ agreed on Sunday (Aug 3) to raise oil production by 547,000 barrels per day for September, the latest in a series of accelerated output hikes to regain market share, as concerns mount over potential supply disruptions linked to Russia. The move marks a full and early reversal of Opec+'s largest tranche of output cuts plus a separate increase in output for the United Arab Emirates amounting to about 2.5 million bpd, or about 2.4 per cent of world demand. Eight Opec+ members held a brief virtual meeting, amid increasing US pressure on India to halt Russian oil purchases – part of Washington's efforts to bring Moscow to the negotiating table for a peace deal with Ukraine. President Donald Trump said he wants this by Aug 8. In a statement after the meeting, Opec+ cited a healthy economy and low stocks as reasons behind its decision. Oil prices have remained elevated even as Opec+ has raised output, with Brent crude closing near US$70 a barrel on Friday, up from a 2025 low of near US$58 in April, supported partly by rising seasonal demand. 'Given fairly strong oil prices at around US$70, it does give Opec+ some confidence about market fundamentals,' said Amrita Sen, co-founder of Energy Aspects, adding that the market structure was also indicating tight stocks. The eight countries are scheduled to meet again on Sep 7, when they may consider reinstating another layer of output cuts totalling around 1.65 million bpd, two Opec+ sources said following Sunday's meeting. Those cuts are currently in place until the end of next year. Opec+ in full includes 10 non-Opec oil producing countries, most notably Russia and Kazakhstan. The group, which pumps about half of the world's oil, had been curtailing production for several years to support oil prices. It reversed course this year in a bid to regain market share, spurred in part by calls from Trump for Opec to ramp up production. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up The eight began raising output in April with a modest hike of 138,000 bpd, followed by larger-than-planned hikes of 411,000 bpd in May, June and July, 548,000 bpd in August and now 547,000 bpd for September. 'So far the market has been able to absorb very well those additional barrels also due to stockpiliing activity in China,' said Giovanni Staunovo of UBS. 'All eyes will now shift on the Trump decision on Russia this Friday.' As well as the voluntary cut of about 1.65 million bpd from the eight members, Opec+ still has a 2-million-bpd cut across all members, which also expires at the end of 2026. 'Opec+ has passed the first test,' said Jorge Leon of Rystad Energy and a former Opec official, as it has fully reversed its largest cut without crashing prices. 'But the next task will be even harder: deciding if and when to unwind the remaining 1.66 million barrels, all while navigating geopolitical tension and preserving cohesion.' REUTERS
Straits Times
12 hours ago
- Straits Times
Trump is winning his trade war, but Americans will pay the price
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox All indications are that Americans will pay more for nearly all the goods they consume when the effects of all of US President Donald Trump's tariffs kick in. - Judging from the air of concession wafting across world capitals from Tokyo to Brussels, United States President Donald Trump is prevailing in his trade war. The White House is in a celebratory mood. Almost every day, press conferences and statements catalogue the many supposed benefits flowing from Mr Trump's strategy. The strategy has brought trade partners to the negotiating table, is catalysing trillions in foreign investment commitments, protecting America's strategic industries and generating billions in revenue. So much winning, in Trump-speak. If success, however, means more jobs, more trade and a stronger economy, the evidence is more suspect. All indications are that Americans will pay more for nearly all the goods they consume when the effects of all the tariffs kick in. The universal baseline tariffs of 10 per cent have already been in effect since April and will remain in place for around 100 nations with no trade deficits with the US, like Singapore and Australia. Effective from Aug 7, more than 70 nations will face 'reciprocal' tariffs , ranging from 10 to 50 per cent. The concept of reciprocity seems questionable as Mr Trump's strategy from the start has been to exert pressure on trade partners rather than strictly mirror their tariffs. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore LTA, Singapore bus operators reviewing Malaysia's request to start services from JB at 4am Singapore Despite bag checks and warnings, young partygoers continue to vape in clubs in Singapore Singapore President Tharman meets migrant workers who saved driver of car that fell into sinkhole Singapore Now flying solo, Acres CEO Kalaivanan Balakrishnan presses ahead with wildlife rescue efforts Opinion The charm – and drawbacks – of living in a time warp in Singapore Business UMS Integration becomes first SGX company with secondary listing in Malaysia Singapore Ong Beng Seng to plead guilty on Aug 4, more than 2 years after trip to Qatar with Iswaran Business Decoupling to save on tax? You may lose right to property if ties go awry For those nations running a trade surplus with the US, the rate is at least 15 per cent. It is higher still for others, where geopolitics and personal vendettas sharpen the blade. Brazil, for instance, has no trade surplus with the US. Nevertheless, it has been slapped with a rate of 50 per cent at least partly because Mr Trump has an issue with the government prosecuting former president and Trump ally Jair Bolsonaro on coup charges. India, at a 25 per cent rate , also faces an unspecified penalty for its import of Russian energy and arms. The US has also caught on to transshipping, the sly rerouting of goods through lower-tariff nations. This practice now invites a 40 per cent penalty. More deals are to come, if the President wants them, according to Trade Representative Jamieson Greer in an Aug 1 TV interview. It is not clear what kind of deal will be struck with America's near peer rival . China poses a peculiar problem and the US is still alternating between confrontation and pressing for an advantage. 'Their economy and ours are like a square peg and a round hole, they don't really fit together very well,' Mr Greer said. But what is crystal clear is that America has just executed a major turn, reshaping the post-World War II economy to reflect Mr Trump's priorities of preserving American dominance in all spheres, from military might and manufacturing to energy. And the man is just six months into the job. Costs are more tangible than benefits As Mr Trump is never tired of pointing out, the threat of tariffs has persuaded the European Union and Japan to commit to investing US$600 billion (S$774 billion) and US$550 billion in the US, respectively. Combined with earlier investment commitments, including from Saudi Arabia, Mr Trump has touted the figure of US$12 trillion. Tariff revenues now make up 5 per cent of federal revenues, much higher than the historical average of 2 per cent. The figures are impressive – US$150 billion was collected in mere months, with projections of 'several hundred billions' by the year end. And American companies can now sell their goods – beef, rice, cars and other items – with zero tariffs in many more nations. Key American industries are sheltered through sectoral tariffs enacted in auto, steel, aluminium and copper industries. Pharmaceuticals and semiconductors are next in line. But plenty of fine print applies. Analysts caution that many pledges from foreign partners may be delayed, only partially fulfilled, or merely symbolic. Foreign investments in the US usually flow in tandem with dollars earned by companies from exports to the US. If tariffs penalise these exports, investing more dollars is challenging. The actual inflow of foreign investment will likely surpass the levels seen in recent years, say analysts at the Peterson Institute of International Economics (PIIE) in Washington. Just not, they add, by the large margins claimed publicly by Mr Trump. Dr Marcus Noland, an international trade economist at PIIE, found a clear example of the impact of Mr Trump's tariffs right in his own kitchen. The granola he has for breakfast is made by an American company with a plant in Ontario, Canada. Due to higher tariffs, the price of this granola has risen more than 40 per cent. 'Shortages and higher prices, there's no good here,' he maintains. Experts have tallied the costs. The average US tariff rate in the first quarter was 2.4 per cent, but climbed to 10 per cent in June. The latest levy announcements are set to bring that to more than 18 per cent, according to analysts at Gavekal Research. The median US household stares down an extra US$1,270 in expenses for 2025, a number projected to reach US$1,619 next year. Economic growth slowed from near 3 per cent in 2024 to about 1.2 per cent over the first half of 2025 and may be zero for the rest of the year. Some models predict wages will fall and leave scars that will stay raw for a generation. A recession now appears 'very, very likely', to quote Moody's Analytics chief economist Mark Zandi, who has been warning of this outcome since Mr Trump made his 'Liberation Day' tariffs announcement in early April. Corporate bottom lines tell a similar story. Apple's June quarter results dazzled, but only because buyers rushed to beat tariffs. The 25 per cent levy on India – where the company now produces its smartphones for the US market – darkens the next quarter. Amazon says inventories are its buffer now. But the future is 'impossible to know', says its chief executive Andy Jassy as supply chains in China, where the e-commerce giant sources its vast array of products, are in the crosshairs. Manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers increasingly report paying higher prices for the goods and services they buy and are slowly beginning to raise the prices they charge their customers, says the US Chamber of Commerce. Higher tariffs will directly punish the domestic manufacturing industry given that approximately 56 per cent of US imports are composed of raw materials and intermediary and capital goods. These will especially hit the small businesses which operate on thin margins and will find it harder to absorb the tariffs. Defined as those with fewer than 500 employees, they account for over 40 per cent of the country's economic activity. Industry insiders are also sceptical of Mr Trump's push to expand access for American products. 'I don't know that we wanted zero tariffs on American goods,' said an analyst who advises American businesses operating in South-east Asia. 'The more important things are the non-tariff barriers.' Hoover Institution economist David Henderson narrowed in on the impact of tariffs on the most important actor in the US economy – the consumer. 'For some countries, notably those in the European Union, tariff rates will be lower than they were before Trump began. That is a victory. But we should be clear about whom it's a victory for,' he noted in a July 31 commentary. 'The main gainers are European consumers, and the secondary gainers are US exporters. The big losers, though, from the high US tariffs, are US consumers and producers who use the tariffed items as inputs, and the secondary losers are foreign exporters,' he said. He noted that while US consumers will pay a 19 per cent tariff rate on goods from the Philippines and Indonesia, and a 20 per cent on those from Vietnam, their consumers will pay a zero per cent tariff on imports from the US. 'Don't get me wrong. I'm glad that people in those three countries, almost all of whom are poorer than the average American, will get the benefits of one-way free trade,' he said. 'But I feel bad for Americans, who will pay higher taxes,' he said. The deals, although heralded as victories by the Trump Administration, have not been struck in the traditional way. No formal texts bind them; and there seem to be differences in how they are regarded in Washington and overseas. In his quest for a 'good' deal, nation by nation, Mr Trump may have squeezed out some advantages. But will a refusal to consider the reality of an interdependent world come back to bite America in ways not yet apparent? And no monetary or symbolic victory can be counted as a 'good deal' if it results in squandering a precious asset that took the US years to earn – global goodwill. Can America afford to arm-twist the very same countries whose help it needs in its geopolitical rivalry with China? And if tariffs continue to be applied in purely mercantilistic terms, they may have the effect of transforming America First into America Alone.
