North Korea gets a weapons bonanza from Russia
This picture taken on May 15 and released from North Korea's official Korean Central News Agency on May 17 shows North Korean leader Kim Jong Un (centre) beside a MiG-29 aircraft. PHOTO: AFP
SEOUL – Attack drones directed by artificial intelligence. Tanks with improved electronic warfare systems. A newly built naval destroyer fitted with supersonic cruise missiles. A new air defence system. Air-to-air missiles.
The list of new weapons being touted by North Korea grows almost by the week.
Long-held conventional wisdom had it that North Korea – crippled by international sanctions, natural disasters and the coronavirus pandemic – was unable to upgrade its decrepit Soviet-era military because it lacked the money, fuel, spare parts and technology required.
But its wily leader, Kim Jong Un, found a solution to his country's decades-old problem. He courted Russia after it invaded Ukraine three years ago and ran into a dire shortage of both troops and conventional weapons, like artillery shells. North Korea had plenty of both to provide.
In return, Moscow has revived a Cold War-era treaty of mutual defence and cooperation with Pyongyang, supplying North Korea not only with fuel and food, but also with materials and technologies to modernise its military, according to South Korean officials and analysts.
They warn that the growing expansion of military cooperation between Russia and North Korea, if left unchecked, could threaten a delicate military balance around the Korean Peninsula.
The disintegration of the old Soviet bloc, and the subsequent collapse of North Korea's economy, created a yawning gap between North and South Korea in their conventional weapons abilities.
To counter that, North Korea in recent decades dedicated its limited resources to developing nuclear warheads and their delivery missiles. Still, the North's conventional weaponry remained many years behind that of South Korea and the United States, which keeps 28,500 troops in the South.
Russia's war against Ukraine has brought Mr Kim a military bonanza.
It gave North Korea opportunities to test its weapons and troops, and to gain valuable insights into modern warfare. Its conventional weapons industry has entered a renaissance, thanks to Russia's insatiable demand for its artillery shells and missiles and the military technology flowing the other way, South Korean analysts said.
Mr Kim now has greater ability to destabilise the East Asia region and more leverage should he sit down again with US President Donald Trump or China's leader Xi Jinping, they said.
'North Korea appears to be entering a strategic golden age,' said Mr Yang Uk, an expert on the North Korean military at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies in Seoul, South Korea.
The alliance has benefited President Vladimir Putin of Russia, too. For months, Russian officials concealed the fact that North Korean troops were taking part in efforts to push Ukrainians out of the Kursk region, in western Russia.
It was only at the end of April, when most of the Ukrainian-occupied area had been liberated, that the head of the Russian General Staff said during a public meeting with Mr Putin that North Korean troops 'provided significant assistance' to the Russian army there.
Perhaps more valuably, North Korea sent millions of artillery rounds, as well as many missiles, to Russia. South Korean officials said that North Korea was also cooperating with Russia to build drones for both nations.
Russia's resurgence in the war has given Mr Putin a stronger hand in any potential peace negotiations with Ukraine, and with Mr Trump.
The courtship between Mr Kim and Mr Putin deepened when they met in Russia's Far East in September 2023. Mr Kim was shown around a Russian space-launch station, an aircraft manufacturing factory and air force and naval bases, compiling what South Korean analysts called a 'bucket list' of Russian technologies he wanted to get his hands on.
Last June, Mr Kim invited Mr Putin to Pyongyang, the North's capital, to sign an alliance treaty. Soon, North Korean troops began streaming into Russia, numbering up to 15,000 in all, according to South Korean intelligence officials
North Korean troops took part in recapturing two villages in the Kursk region, said Mr Dmitri Kuznets, an analyst with the news outlet Meduza, which was outlawed by the Kremlin and operates from Latvia. But the true extent of the troops' contributions has been debated.
A handout satellite image made available by Maxar Technologies shows a new North Korean warship at the harbour May 25 after an accident during the launch ceremony in Chongjin, North Korea.
PHOTO: EPA-EFE
Mr Valery Shiryaev, an independent Russian military analyst, said in a post on Telegram, a popular messaging app, that the participation of Koreans in real battles was Mr Kim's idea, so that he could test his army.
'All of them are getting an incredible experience now and will come back as real veterans,' Mr Shiryaev said. 'There are no such people in the South Korean army, which undoubtedly fills Kim Jong Un with pride.'
Analysts in South Korea and other Western powers have been tallying Mr Kim's hardware gains. They have monitored aircraft and ships carrying what appeared to be Russian military technologies to North Korea.
Mr Kim also began more frequently visiting munitions factories and watching weapons tests. He oversaw the test firing of an anti-aircraft missile system in March amid indications that he was getting badly needed Russian help to modernise the North's decrepit air defence.
He later inspected reconnaissance and the self-destructing attack drones that used AI to hit targets. His prioritising of drones alone would help significantly narrow the gap with South Korea in conventional weapons, analysts said.
In April, Mr Kim and his daughter, Kim Ju Ae, widely believed to be his heir, attended the launching of the North's first naval destroyer, the Choe Hyon. He later watched the ship test-fire various missiles.
One of them was called a supersonic cruise missile by North Korea, and it resembled the nuclear-capable Russian cruise missile 3M22 Zircon, said Mr Hong Min, a military expert at the Korea Institute for National Unification in Seoul.
While launching the destroyer, Mr Kim reconfirmed that he was also building a nuclear-powered submarine.
Early in May, he visited a tank factory where he said that 'the armoured weapons of the last century' were being replaced, state media reported. He later inspected expanded and modernised munitions factories, praising a four-fold increase in artillery shells, a key North Korean export to Russia.
Mr Kim also visited an air force unit and watched what looked like a MiG-29 fighter jet hitting a midair target with an air-to-air missile. Such a scene was a far cry from the days when North Korea could rarely get its fighter jets off the ground for lack of fuel and spare parts.
The weapons that North Korea has been brandishing suggest Russian help in developing them, said Mr Lee Sung-joon, a South Korean military spokesperson.
South Korean officials usually take North Korea's claims with a dose of scepticism as it has often exaggerated its military achievements for propaganda purposes.
And the pressure that Mr Kim has been exerting on his engineers to complete new weapons quickly has led to mishaps. This past month, when North Korea launched its second destroyer, the ship capsized, prompting an angry Mr Kim to order the arrest of several officials.
But with Russia's help, North Korea is moving faster to fulfill its ambitious plans for upgrading weaponry announced in 2021, said Mr Choi Yong-hwan, an analyst at the Institute for National Security Strategy in Seoul. Building bigger ships would allow North Korea to start joint naval exercises with Russia around the Korean Peninsula, as South Korea has done with the United States for decades, he said.
Multiple United Nations Security Council resolutions ban arms trading with North Korea. But military cooperation with Russia 'has proved a perfect route for the North to evade sanctions and overcome its technological limits,' said a report from the institute.
There remains doubt over how much sensitive technology Russia is willing to share with North Korea. North Korea has repeatedly failed to launch military spy satellites. And to build a nuclear-powered submarine, the country would need a small nuclear reactor.
Such a submarine, which would vastly improve its ability to cross the Pacific and launch a nuclear attack on the US mainland, was so politically risky that Moscow would be 'very, very cautious,' said Mr Doo Jin-ho, a senior analyst at the Korea Institute for Defence Analyses in Seoul.
But the mere threat it could happen gives Mr Kim more leverage, and North Korean state media has shown part of what it said was a nuclear-powered submarine under construction.
'It's the most dangerous weapon North Korea has unveiled so far,' said Mr Hong, of the Korea Institute for National Unification. NYTIMES
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Straits Times
an hour ago
- Straits Times
US gives nod to Syria to bring foreign jihadist ex-rebels into army
US gives nod to Syria to bring foreign jihadist ex-rebels into army DAMASCUS/AMMAN - The United States has given its blessing to a plan by Syria's new leadership to incorporate thousands of foreign jihadist former rebel fighters into the national army, provided that it does so transparently, President Donald Trump's envoy said. Three Syrian defence officials said that under the plan, some 3,500 foreign fighters, mainly Uighurs from China and neighbouring countries, would join a newly-formed unit, the 84th Syrian army division, which would also include Syrians. Asked by Reuters in Damascus whether Washington approved the integration of foreign fighters into Syria's new military, Thomas Barrack, the US ambassador to Turkey who was named Mr Trump's special envoy to Syria last month, said: "I would say there is an understanding, with transparency." He said it was better to keep the fighters, many of whom are "very loyal" to Syria's new administration, within a state project than to exclude them. The fate of foreigners who joined Syria's Hayat Tahrir al-Sham rebels during the 13-year war between rebel groups and President Bashar al-Assad has been one of the most fraught issues hindering a rapprochement with the West since HTS, a one-time offshoot of al Qaeda, toppled Assad and took power last year. At least until early May, the United States had been demanding the new leadership broadly exclude foreign fighters from the security forces. But Washington's approach to Syria has changed sharply since Mr Trump toured the Middle East last month. Mr Trump agreed to lift Assad-era sanctions on Syria, met Syria's interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa in Riyadh and named Mr Barrack, a close friend, as his special envoy. Two sources close to the Syrian defence ministry told Reuters that Sharaa and his circle had been arguing to Western interlocutors that bringing foreign fighters into the army would be less of a security risk than abandoning them, which could drive them into the orbit of al Qaeda or Islamic State. The US State Department and a Syrian government spokesperson did not respond to requests for comment. Chinese concerns Thousands of Sunni Muslim foreigners joined Syria's rebels early in the 13-year civil war to fight against Assad, who was himself aided by Iranian-backed Shi'ite militias. Some fighters formed their own factions, while others joined established groups such as Islamic State, which briefly declared a caliphate in swathes of Syria and Iraq before being routed by an array of forces backed both by the United States and Iran. Foreign fighters within HTS earned a reputation as loyal, disciplined and experienced militants, and formed the backbone of the group's elite so-called suicide units. They fought against Islamic State and against other wings of al Qaeda from 2016, when HTS broke away from the group founded by Osama bin Laden. The Uighur fighters from China and Central Asia are members of the Turkistan Islamic Party, a group designated as terrorists by Beijing. A Syrian official and a foreign diplomat said China had sought to have the group's influence in Syria restricted. A Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson said: "China hopes that Syria will oppose all forms of terrorism and extremist forces in response to the concerns of the international community." Osman Bughra, a TIP political official, told Reuters in a written statement that the group had officially dissolved and integrated into the Syrian army. "At present, the group operates entirely under the authority of the Ministry of Defence, adheres to national policy, and maintains no affiliations with external entities or groups," he said. In December, the appointment of a handful of foreign jihadists who were part of HTS's senior leadership to top military posts had alarmed Western governments, raising concerns over the direction of Syria's new Islamist leadership. Demands to freeze the appointments and expel rank-and-file foreign fighters became a key point of contention with Washington and other Western countries up until the week of Mr Trump's landmark meeting with Sharaa. Sharaa has said that foreign fighters and their families may be granted Syrian citizenship due to their role in fighting Assad. Abbas Sharifa, a Damascus-based expert on jihadist groups, said the fighters being included in the army had shown loyalty to Syria's leadership and were "ideologically filtered." But "if you abandon them they become prey to ISIS or other radical groups" he said. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Business Times
4 hours ago
- Business Times
South Korea presidential candidates rally in final campaign stretch
[SEOUL] Candidates running in South Korea's snap presidential election made a last push for votes on Monday (Jun 2), the eve of a poll triggered by ex-leader Yoon Suk-yeol's martial law declaration. South Koreans are desperate to draw a line under six months of political turmoil sparked by Yoon's brief suspension of civilian rule in December, for which he was impeached and removed from office. All major polls put liberal Lee Jae-myung well ahead in the presidential race, with the latest Gallup survey showing 49 per cent of respondents viewed him as the best candidate. Conservative Kim Moon-soo, from the People Power Party (PPP) – Yoon's former party – trailed Lee on 35 per cent. Both candidates have framed the campaign as a fight for the soul of the nation. Lee spent much of his final day of campaigning in his old stomping grounds of Gyeonggi Province – where he previously served as governor and built much of his support base. 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 He then headed to Seoul's Yeouido, to hold his final rally at the site where people gathered to demand disgraced president Yoon be impeached after he attempted to suspend civilian rule in December. By Monday evening, thousands of Lee's supporters had gathered, waving blue balloons, as K-pop music blasted and vendors sold glo-sticks emblazoned with Lee's beaming face. 'I expect him to win soundly tomorrow. I'm sure he will govern with care for the underprivileged and provide fair and equal opportunities for all,' said Jeong Hea-sun, a 59-year-old factory worker. Conservative Kim began his final campaign push from the southernmost tip of the country, Jeju Island, before making his way north and wrapping up in Seoul's hip Gangnam district where he is set to meet with young voters. Late controversy Dominating the headlines of the last day of campaigning are allegations the Democratic Party fabricated an endorsement of Lee by veteran Singapore-based investor Jim Rogers. The Democratic Party said on Friday that Rogers described Lee as 'a leader who can open a new chapter of peace, prosperity, and global leadership'. But local media quoted him as telling them he had 'not endorsed anyone in Korea ever', saying 'Mr Lee is making things up'. Rogers did not immediately respond to an AFP request for comment. Despite the controversy, experts say Lee remains the strong favourite to win. 'The presidential race has effectively become a contest between Lee Jae-myung and those rallying against him,' Kang Joo-hyun, a political science professor at Sookmyung Women's University, told AFP. 'The most recent polls show that Lee has consistently maintained a lead near or just below the majority threshold,' she added. South Korea has entered a so-called 'dark campaign period' – meaning the results of public opinion polls are barred from being disclosed although pollsters are still conducting surveys. More than a third of voters have already cast their ballots, taking advantage of two days of early voting last week, according to the National Election Commission. The winner of the Jun 3 election takes office the following day on a single five-year term, with no transition period. AFP

Straits Times
5 hours ago
- Straits Times
Trump plans to offload national park sites, but states don't want them
The Trump administration may walk away from Florida's Big Cypress National Preserve and other areas that aren't among the 63 with 'national park' in their name. PHOTO: AFP FLORIDA - Florida's Big Cypress National Preserve sprawls north from Everglades National Park over 729,000 acres of swamp, an ancient forest that protects the endangered Florida panther and the pristine waters of the Everglades – the source of drinking water for millions of south Floridians. About 2.2 million people visited in 2024, roughly three times the number at Everglades National Park, according to National Park Service (NPS) data. The preserve and others like it are 'typically the places where the local people enjoy the most,' said Mr Neal McAliley, an environmental lawyer at Carlton Fields in Miami and a former environmental litigator at the Justice Department. The Trump administration may walk away from Big Cypress and some other national monuments, historical parks, battlefields and protected areas that aren't among the 63 with 'national park' in their name. The White House is proposing to cut about US$1.2 billion (S$1.54 billion) from the NPS's budget, including US$900 million from park operations, mainly by shedding sites that it considers too obscure or too local to merit federal management, transferring these to states and tribal governments. But some states with large numbers of such sites – there are roughly 370 in total – warn that they can't afford to manage and staff them, either, and that some could end up closing. 'It takes about 350 parks to wipe out in order to get US$900 million in budget savings,' said Ms Kristen Brengel, senior vice president of government affairs for the National Parks Conservation Association. 'So it's everything from battlefields to seashores, to recreation areas to monuments.' The stakes are high: Big Cypress as well as Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area, in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, protect their regions' drinking water supplies. Park Service staff at Cape Hatteras National Seashore in North Carolina keep the sand on Outer Banks beaches in place and the islands from eroding away. Dozens of NPS locations preserve American history, from the birthplaces of Theodore Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln to Gettysburg National Military Park and the Flight 93 National Memorial in Pennsylvania. It's not clear who wants the national park system to be trimmed, other than the White House and some conservative groups who say the plan promotes federalism. But even some Republicans who are eager to see other federal lands developed or taken over aren't necessarily excited about breaking up the national park system. Congress has long responded to members' requests to protect a historic site in their district by putting the NPS in charge of it, which has bloated the national park system, said representative Mike Simpson, an Idaho Republican. But Mr Simpson warned: 'Let's not screw up the national parks because that's something the American people will never forgive us for.' Birthplaces, battlefields scrutinised The White House doesn't yet have a list of places to offload, although a more detailed budget for the Interior Department is expected in coming days. Asked at a Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing on May 21 whether Big Cypress and other large NPS sites could be transferred, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum told Bloomberg Law only that the 63 'crown jewel' national parks will be left alone. Mr Burgum named a few possible transfer candidates: Theodore Roosevelt Birthplace National Historic Site in New York City, Knife River Indian Villages National Historic Site in North Dakota and possibly 'a battlefield site someplace'. Only about 25,000 people stopped by Roosevelt's birthplace in Manhattan in 2024. About 10,800 people visited Knife River Indian Villages in 2024, which puts it at number 370 on the NPS' ranking of 398 park units for which visitation statistics are kept. The park service spends less than US$2 million annually to keep each of these sites open. Park advocates bristle at visitation numbers being used as a criterion. 'Regardless whether they're well visited or not, whether people can view it themselves or watch it on TV, they don't want to see them dismantled,' Ms Brengel said. 'These schemes to save a couple of nickels by getting rid of parks – it's unpopular.' Republican Representative Tom Cole of Oklahoma has offered Chickasaw National Recreation Area in Oklahoma as a candidate to be transferred to the Chickasaw Nation, which sold it to the federal government in 1902. Congress turned it into Platt National Park, until it stripped the park of 'crown jewel' status and changed its name in 1976. Today, the park service spends about US$4.5 million to accommodate more than 1.5 million annual visitors at Chickasaw NRA. Mr Cole's office said the Chickasaw Nation hasn't asked for the recreation area to be returned, but the nation's governor, Mr Bill Anoatubby, said in a statement that it's interested. So far, though, there's little other interest in transfers. States wary of taking on more Many states have long been eager for Congress to designate their facilities as National Park System sites because that increases tourist traffic, boosts the economies of nearby communities and spares states the financial burden of managing those sites, said Ms K.K. Duvivier, a natural resources law professor at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law. That's among the top reasons why Maryland, New Mexico, North Carolina and Colorado state governments say they oppose transfers. New Mexico has 18 NPS sites at risk, including Valles Caldera National Preserve, one of the region's newest additions to the national park system. Any national park units transferred to the state would likely end up closing because it already struggles to maintain its parks with limited funding, outdated facilities and high personnel vacancy rates, said Mr Toby Velasquez, state parks director. Maryland, which doesn't have a 'crown jewel' national park but has at least 14 other NPS sites, would step in to save them if necessary, but the federal government should continue to support them because of the tourist draw, said Mr AJ Metcalf, spokesman for the state's Department of Natural Resources. The state's NPS sites supported a total of 2,940 jobs in Maryland and generated US$344 million in economic benefits to the state, he said, citing 2022 NPS data. 'If the federal government does approve these cuts, Maryland will consider all options to obtain and manage these sites to ensure they remain open and accessible to the public,' Mr Metcalf said. Mr Will Yeatman, senior legal fellow at the Pacific Legal Foundation, which has argued for federal land transfers in court, said more than half the Western US is under federal control. It makes sense to return some of that to the states, he said. 'In those states primarily, there is considerable political traction for policies like this,' Mr Yeatman said. 'I know Utah has passed a bill seeking the return of federal lands.' Utah did try in 2024 to force the Interior Department to transfer 18 million acres of other federal land to it, but it hasn't asked for park service properties, said Mr Redge Johnson, executive director of the Utah Governor's Public Lands Policy Coordinating Office. 'Would we step in?' he said. 'Yeah, we'd want to make sure they stay solvent and operational. We're not actively seeking anything there.' New legal questions In some cases, the National Park Service was put in charge of some areas because residents didn't trust the states to manage them. That's what happened at Big Cypress, which became the first national preserve in 1974. Congress agreed with many south Floridians that the Rhode Island-sized wetland needed to be protected from the state's plan to build what would have been the world's largest commercial airport. Floridians 'wanted to protect it and they didn't trust the state,' Mr McAliley said. 'People wanted the Park Service because they trusted them to manage natural qualities.' That's still true today, said Ms Eve Samples, executive director of the Friends of the Everglades. 'Every single year those of us engaged in environmental advocacy in Florida are fighting off bad bills in Tallahassee, and there's not a high degree of trust in the state legislature doing what's right for our public lands,' Ms Samples said. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, a Republican, didn't respond to requests for comment about whether state officials have discussed a possible transfer and if the state could afford it. Big Cypress's fiscal 2024 budget was about US$7.8 million. Congress made Big Cypress a preserve, not a national park, because it wanted to allow hunting, oil and gas drilling, off-highway vehicle and swamp-buggy use, and other activities that aren't usually allowed in national parks. Transferring the preserve to the state would open a host of legal questions, including how the federal government's duty of trust to area tribes would be handled, whether proposed wilderness areas in Big Cypress would be respected, and whether the land would be given or sold to the state, Mr McAliley said. 'If they're just going to be giving it, they'd be giving away a tremendously valuable asset,' he said. 'Then the state has to manage it. If the president is trying to cut the expenses of the park service, doesn't that assume the state is going to have to pay the money?' 'Whoever approved this,'' he said, 'this is like a meat-cleaver approach.' BLOOMBERG Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.