Russia, North Korea foreign ministers meet, Pyongyang backs Ukraine war
Lavrov flew out of Malaysian capital Kuala Lumpur on Friday following the ASEAN foreign ministers' meeting, arriving the same day in Wonsan, North Korea, home to a newly opened seaside resort but also known for its missile and naval facilities.
Lavrov's visit is the latest high-level meeting between the two countries as they upgrade their strategic cooperation to now include a mutual defence pact.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
What Happens When You Massage Baking Soda Into Your Scalp
Lintmit.com
Read More
"We exchanged views on the situation surrounding the Ukrainian crisis ... Our Korean friends confirmed their firm support for all the objectives of the special military operation, as well as for the actions of the Russian leadership and armed forces," TASS quoted Lavrov as saying.
The South Korean intelligence service has said North Korea may be preparing to deploy additional troops in July or August, after sending more than 10,000 soldiers to fight with Russia in the war against Ukraine.
Live Events
North Korea has agreed to dispatch 6,000 military engineers and builders for reconstruction in Russia's Kursk region, where Ukrainian forces launched a mass cross-border incursion nearly a year ago.
Russian news agencies also reported Lavrov's arrival and said after North Korea he is expected to travel to China to attend the
Shanghai Cooperation Organisation meeting
, which is set to take place on Monday and Tuesday.
TASS said the new Wonsan coastal resort could boost Russian tourism to North Korea, citing the resumption of direct trains from Moscow to Pyongyang and a project to build a bridge across the Tumen River forming part of the boundary between North Korea, China and Russia.
TASS quoted Deputy Russian Foreign Minister Andrei Rudenko as saying more high-level delegations would visit North Korea later this year.
Rudenko said the accord on strategic partnership "clearly meets the changing needs over recent decades and strengthens traditionally friendly, good-neighbourly Russian-Korean relations to a qualitatively new level as allies."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
29 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Border Fire, Regional Fallout: Thailand, Cambodia, and the Fragility of Peace in Southeast Asia
On 24 July 2025, the long-disputed Thailand–Cambodia border once again erupted into open violence. Cambodian rocket fire reportedly killed Thai civilians and soldiers in Surin Province. In response, Thai F‑16 fighter jets carried out airstrikes near the Ta Muen Thom temple complex, escalating what had been a tense standoff into a full-blown military clash. Within hours, diplomatic relations nosedived—Thailand expelled the Cambodian ambassador, suspended border trade through major checkpoints, and deployed additional troops to reinforce its frontier. From Phnom Penh, Prime Minister Hun Manet condemned the Thai airstrikes as 'unprovoked aggression' and urgently appealed to the United Nations Security Council. Images of bomb craters, wounded villagers, and smouldering fields flashed across Cambodian state television. In Bangkok, the military framed its response as self-defence and insisted Cambodia had violated Thai sovereignty. Yet beyond the rhetoric and the troop movements lies a more concerning truth: this is no ordinary border dispute. It is a symptom of deeper regional instability and a stark warning about the declining capacity of ASEAN to maintain peace among its members. The conflict is rooted in long-standing historical disputes over border demarcation, particularly around temple complexes such as Preah Vihear and Ta Muen Thom. Though the International Court of Justice ruled in Cambodia's favour in 1962 and again in 2013 with respect to Preah Vihear, adjacent areas remain contested. The Ta Muen Thom temple, located in the Dangrek range, is similarly caught in cartographic ambiguity. While clashes in the past were sporadic and localised, the current situation is qualitatively different. Both governments are using the incident to rally nationalist support at home, entrenching positions that make de-escalation more difficult. In Thailand, the crisis coincides with a period of domestic political uncertainty. Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra was suspended just weeks earlier following the leak of a private conversation with Cambodian leaders, raising questions about civilian authority and foreign policy decision-making. The military's prompt retaliation, coupled with the ambassador's expulsion, marks a reassertion of hardline nationalism. In Cambodia, Hun Manet has used the incident to project strength and unity, positioning himself as the custodian of national sovereignty. Both sides are appealing to nationalist sentiments, reinforcing a cycle of confrontation with limited space for dialogue. What is particularly striking is the institutional vacuum into which this conflict has emerged. While ASEAN is yet to convene an emergency summit, appoint a special envoy, or offer a structured mediation process. The bloc's slow response contrasts sharply with the urgency of the situation. Cambodia's turn to the UN for redress is a clear sign of eroding confidence in ASEAN's ability to manage intra-regional disputes. While individual ASEAN members—most notably Indonesia and Singapore—have urged both parties to de-escalate, the regional body appears paralysed. The diplomatic fallout is already taking a toll. Cross-border trade, which supports thousands of livelihoods along the Thai–Cambodian frontier, has come to a halt. The tourism sector, recovering from years of pandemic-induced disruption, now faces renewed cancellations and travel advisories. At the geopolitical level, the crisis opens the door for external actors to play a greater role. China, which maintains strong bilateral ties with both governments, could step in to offer mediation. But such a role is unlikely to be viewed as neutral, particularly in Thailand, where concerns about Chinese influence have intensified in recent years. Meanwhile, Japan and the United States have both expressed concern, raising the prospect of a broader strategic entanglement if the situation worsens. For India, the clash is deeply troubling. As a key strategic partner of ASEAN and an advocate of its centrality in the Indo-Pacific, India has invested heavily in connectivity and trade across Southeast Asia. The India–Myanmar–Thailand Trilateral Highway, for example, hinges on border stability and regional coordination. If ASEAN is unable to fulfil its role as a security anchor, India's own regional engagement could be affected. Moreover, the dispute underscores the importance of effective multilateral institutions. India has always emphasised diplomacy and peaceful dispute resolution—principles that are now under strain in its extended neighbourhood. There is still a narrow window for de-escalation. A ceasefire agreement, ideally brokered through ASEAN's more capable members or with international support, must be prioritised. The Treaty of Amity and Cooperation offers mechanisms such as the High Council for mediation—mechanisms that must be activated. If bilateral efforts fail, a neutral monitoring arrangement under UN or ASEAN auspices could help stabilise the situation. But long-term peace will require more than ceasefires. It will need renewed political will, institutional reform within ASEAN, and a return to diplomacy over spectacle. What is unfolding between Thailand and Cambodia today is more than a frontier skirmish. It is a test of Southeast Asia's ability to preserve peace without descending into hardened nationalism or external dependency. The bullets may have been exchanged along an ancient border, but the real battleground is the future of regional cooperation. ASEAN cannot afford to remain silent. And the region cannot afford another failure. 'This article is part of sponsored content programme.'
Mint
29 minutes ago
- Mint
‘I will announce it…': Donald Trump to set new deadline for Putin to reach Ukraine truce or face economic penalties
US President Donald Trump said that he is shortening the timeline for Russian President Vladimir Putin to agree to a truce with Ukraine, warning that failure to do so could lead to economic consequences. The move marks a significant escalation in pressure on Moscow to end the ongoing conflict. 'I'm going to make a new deadline of about 10, 10 or 12 days from today,' Trump told reporters in Scotland on Monday during talks with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, as reported by Bloomberg. 'I'll announce it probably tonight or tomorrow,' Trump added. 'But there's no reason to wait. If you know what the answer is,' expressing frustration with Putin for rebuffing previous calls for a ceasefire. An end to the conflict has proven elusive for the American president, who as a candidate promised to quickly resolve the Russia-Ukraine war as well as the one between Israel and Hamas. Trump has announced his ultimatum to Putin, initially setting a 50-day deadline on July 14 set to expire on September 2, to halt the war in Ukraine or face severe economic sanctions. With no progress made and Russian missile and drone attacks intensifying, Trump has now signalled a shorter timeline. The Kremlin has yet to respond publicly to the updated deadline. Following Trump's announcement, the Russian ruble fell over 2%, dropping below 81 per US dollar—its weakest point since mid-May, Bloomberg reported. Oil prices also climbed amid concerns that escalating U.S.-Russia tensions could disrupt global crude supplies. 'What I'm doing is we're going to do secondary sanctions, unless we make a deal, and we might make a deal, I don't know,' Trump added Monday. Trump has intensified pressure on Putin, expressing growing frustration over stalled efforts to end the war in Ukraine. 'I'm not so interested in talking any more,' Trump said Monday. 'He talks. We have such nice conversations, such respectful and nice conversations, and then people die the following night with a missile going into a town.' Trump, who returned to office pledging a swift resolution to the conflict, has seen no progress, as Moscow continues to demand extensive territorial concessions and refuses direct negotiations with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Earlier this month, Trump said he would impose 100% tariffs on Russia if it did not halt the fighting. Officials have cast secondary levies that would fall on countries who buy Russian exports such as oil. Washington and other capitals allied with Kyiv view such oil purchases as a form of tacit support for Russia, helping to bolster its economy and undercut sanctions. I'm going to make a new deadline of about 10, 10 or 12 days from today. Trump, though, has threatened economic repercussions against Putin in the past but held off, suggesting that he wanted to preserve room for negotiations. (With inputs from Bloomberg) I'm not so interested in talking any more.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
29 minutes ago
- First Post
US must accept that North Korea will never give up nuclear weapons, says Kim Jong-Un's sister
Kim Yo-Jong, the powerful sister of North Korean ruler Kim Jong-Un, has said that the United States must accept the new reality that her nation will never give up nuclear weapons no matter how many rounds of talks are held about them. read more North Korea said on Tuesday the United States must accept that reality has changed since the countries' summit meetings in the past, and no future dialogue would end its nuclear programme, state media KCNA reported. Kim Yo-Jong, the powerful sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un who is believed to speak for his brother, said she conceded that the personal relationship between Kim and US President Donald Trump 'is not bad'. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD But if Washington intended to use a personal relationship as a way to end the North's nuclear weapons programme, the effort would only be the subject of 'mockery,' Kim Yo Jong said in a statement carried by KCNA. 'If the US fails to accept the changed reality and persists in the failed past, the DPRK-US meeting will remain as a 'hope' of the US side,' she said. DPRK is short for North Korea's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. North Korea's capabilities as a nuclear weapons state and the geopolitical environment have radically changed since Kim and Trump held talks three times during the US president's first term, she said. 'Any attempt to deny the position of the DPRK as a nuclear weapons state … will be thoroughly rejected,' she said. Asked about the North Korean statement, a White House official said Trump was still committed to the goal he had for the three summit meetings he held with Kim in his first term. 'The President retains those objectives and remains open to engaging with Leader Kim to achieve a fully denuclearised North Korea,' the White House official told Reuters. At their first meeting in Singapore in 2018, Trump and Kim signed an agreement in principle to make the Korean peninsula free of nuclear weapons. The subsequent summit in Hanoi next year broke down due to a disagreement over removing international sanctions that had been imposed against Pyongyang. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Trump has said he has a 'great relationship' with Kim, and the White House has said the president is receptive to the idea of communicating with the reclusive North Korean leader. (This is an agency copy. Except for the headline, the copy has not been edited by Firstpost staff.)
