Putin Holds Call with North Korea's Kim, Discusses US-Russia Talks, Kremlin Says
North Korea's state news agency KCNA later reported the two leaders' call without mentioning the meeting scheduled on Friday between Putin and Trump.
Kim and Putin discussed the development in the countries' ties under a strategic partnership agreement signed last year 'confirming their will to strengthen cooperation in the future,' KCNA said.
Putin expressed appreciation for North Korea's help in 'liberating' the Kursk region in western Russia in the war against Ukraine and 'the bravery, heroism and self-sacrificing spirit displayed by service personnel of the Korean People's Army,' it said.
North Korea has dispatched more than 10,000 troops to support Russia's campaign in western Russia in the Ukraine conflict and is believed to be planning another deployment, according to a South Korean intelligence assessment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Japan Today
33 minutes ago
- Japan Today
N Korea says S Korea's peace overtures a 'pipe dream'
FILE PHOTO: Kim Yo Jong, sister of North Korea's leader Kim Jong Un, arrives at the Vostochny Сosmodrome before a meeting of Russia's President Vladimir Putin with North Korea's leader Kim Jong Un, in the far eastern Amur region, Russia, September 13, 2023. Sputnik/Vladimir Smirnov/Pool via REUTERS/File Photo By Jack Kim The North Korean leader's powerful sister said on Thursday that the country has never taken down propaganda loudspeakers and will not do so, calling South Korea's belief that Pyongyang was responding to its peace overtures a "pipe dream." Kim Yo Jong, who is a senior official in the North's ruling Workers' Party, also said adjustments made to the plan for annual joint military drills by South Korea and the U.S. were a "futile" move that did not change the allies' hostile intent. Kim, who officials and analysts believe speaks for her brother, has in recent weeks rebuffed moves taken by South Korea's new liberal government aimed at easing tension between the two Koreas. "I am confident that Seoul's policy towards the DPRK remains unchanged and can never change," Kim was quoted as saying by KCNA official news agency. DPRK is short for the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, North Korea's official name. South Korea's military has said it detected moves by the North's military to dismantle some propaganda loudspeakers directed at the South, following similar moves by the South. Seoul's Joint Chiefs of Staff said on Thursday it stood by its assessment of activities it had observed at some parts of the border, adding it was continuing to monitor the situation. The military's spokesman Lee Sung-jun said he believed caution was needed when interpreting statements made by the North to avoid being misled and that Pyongyang had often made "claims that are untrue." He declined to elaborate. Lee did not directly address a question about a news report that the North had taken down only one loudspeaker out of the dozens it had positioned along the border. During former President Yoon Suk Yeol's term, South Korea blasted loudspeaker broadcasts criticizing the North's leadership in a propaganda campaign that angered its rival. There has been cautious optimism in the South that the North may be responding positively to a policy by President Lee Jae Myung to engage Pyongyang after a period of cross-border tension and even show willingness to return to dialogue. Kim Yo Jong also said North Korea will not be sitting down with the United States for dialogue, saying reports raising the possibilities of such a development were "false suppositions." Hong Min, a senior analyst at South Korea's Institute for National Unification, said Pyongyang likely anticipated further conciliatory gestures by the South and may be trying to pace the development while driving home leader Kim Jong Un's earlier vow to permanently break off ties with Seoul. © Thomson Reuters 2025.
The Diplomat
an hour ago
- The Diplomat
How South Korea's ‘MASGA' Proposal Could Reshape US Shipbuilding
South Korea offered in trade negotiations to 'Make American Shipbuilding Great Again.' It could mark a new phase for the alliance. When the United States threatened to impose 25 percent tariffs on South Korean exports in mid-2025, the dispute appeared set to become another flashpoint in the alliance, highlighting the current U.S. administration's transactional approach to both trade and security. The stakes were high: tariffs at that level would have disrupted billions of dollars in goods, strained political trust, and reinforced the perception that even close allies were not exempt from the United States' protectionist turn. The eventual compromise, reached just before the August 1 deadline, cut tariffs to 15 percent in exchange for a sweeping economic and industrial package from Seoul. At the center of that package was an initiative that quickly captured media attention and political imagination – 'Make American Shipbuilding Great Again' (MASGA). MASGA proposes $150 billion in investments from South Korea's world-class shipbuilders into the U.S. maritime sector. This would include upgrading U.S. shipyards, training U.S. workers, supporting U.S. Navy maintenance backlogs, and co-producing vessels on U.S. soil. The branding was deliberate: borrowing from U.S. President Donald Trump's 'Make America Great Again' slogan, MASGA appealed directly to the White House's political messaging while offering substantive industrial cooperation. The sight of red MASGA hats at the negotiation table underscored Seoul's deft use of symbolic diplomacy. A Structural Problem Meets a Willing Partner The United States has been grappling with a long-term erosion of its shipbuilding base. Since the end of the Cold War, consolidation in the sector has left only a handful of major shipyards. These yards face aging infrastructure, shortages of skilled labor, and program delays that have pushed naval construction timelines into the realm of decades rather than years. Even as the Pentagon and Congress debate fleet expansion – most recently aiming for a 355-ship navy – U.S. shipyards are already at capacity, struggling to meet existing orders. Maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) facilities face their own crisis, with warships idled for months awaiting work. By contrast, South Korea remains a global shipbuilding powerhouse. Hyundai Heavy Industries, Hanwha Ocean, and Samsung Heavy Industries lead in commercial tonnage, advanced modular construction, and digitalized production systems. Korean shipyards routinely deliver complex vessels – both military and civilian – on time and within budget. For Washington, tapping this capacity could help bridge a dangerous gap between naval ambition and industrial reality. MASGA is not about importing foreign-built ships into U.S. service – something prohibited for domestic routes under the Jones Act and restricted for defense programs under Buy American rules. Instead, it proposes onshore investment by Korean firms in partnership with U.S. yards, combining the strengths of both countries through joint ventures, licensed production, technology transfer, and workforce development. Korean shipbuilders would partner with U.S. companies to share design, project management, and production methods, while U.S. yards could build Korean-designed vessels domestically, in full compliance with U.S. content laws. The Korean investments would introduce advanced modular construction techniques, automation systems, and integrated supply chain management to improve efficiency; U.S. workers would receive training in proven Korean shipbuilding methods through exchange programs and on-site instruction. The investment would be distributed across multiple U.S. shipyards – both naval and commercial – targeting bottlenecks in the construction of auxiliary vessels, logistics ships, smaller combatants, and unmanned surface platforms, with the aim of increasing output, reducing delays, and modernizing facilities without compromising U.S. control over sensitive capabilities. Looking at the U.S. shipbuilding sector, the U.S. Navy's MRO backlog is a persistent and costly problem. Delays in scheduled maintenance mean fewer ships are available for deployment, undermining fleet readiness. South Korean shipyards, with their proven ability to service advanced warships and large commercial vessels, could provide relief in several ways. One model would see Korean firms upgrade and operate MRO facilities on U.S. soil, applying their efficiency-focused processes to U.S. platforms. Another would allow Korean yards to handle non-sensitive maintenance overseas, freeing up U.S. facilities for high-priority or classified work. Both approaches would reduce downtime and extend the operational life of the fleet. This component of MASGA is particularly attractive to the Pentagon, as it addresses a short-term readiness issue without requiring entirely new construction – something Congress may find easier to approve. From Trade Concession to Strategic Integration What makes MASGA significant is its potential to turn a contentious trade negotiation into a blueprint for long-term alliance integration. Shipbuilding is not just another industrial sector – it is a strategic asset. Control over production timelines, maintenance schedules, and technology flows directly affects a nation's ability to project power and respond to crises. By embedding South Korean firms in the U.S. shipbuilding ecosystem, MASGA would create a form of industrial interdependence that strengthens the alliance. It would also lock in long-term cooperation, making the economic and security costs of alliance friction higher for both sides. For Washington, MASGA represents a politically palatable solution: it expands domestic capacity while creating U.S. jobs, deflecting charges of outsourcing. For Seoul, it offers access to a market that has historically been closed to foreign shipbuilders, along with a seat at the table in shaping future maritime strategies. The geopolitical implications are also significant. The Indo-Pacific maritime balance is shifting rapidly. China's shipyards are producing warships at a pace unmatched in peacetime history, while also expanding their commercial dominance. For the United States and its allies, matching this surge is as much about industrial mobilization as it is about naval doctrine. MASGA aligns with the U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy by ensuring that allied capacity – not just U.S. capacity – underpins forward presence in the region. In a crisis, an integrated South Korean-U.S. shipbuilding base could surge production, repair battle-damaged vessels more quickly, and sustain logistics flows. This fits into a broader trend of allies contributing niche industrial strengths to collective deterrence. Just as Japan's advanced electronics feed into missile defense and Australia's shipyards support regional patrol fleets, South Korea's shipbuilding prowess could become a core enabler of allied maritime power. Navigating Domestic Politics Despite its strategic logic, MASGA faces significant political headwinds in the United States. Shipyard operators and labor unions have historically resisted foreign participation, fearing competition and job losses. Congressional protectionists could seek to tighten Buy American provisions, limiting the scope of cooperation. To overcome this, MASGA must be framed not as an outsourcing arrangement but as capacity-building within the United States. Korean firms would need to invest visibly in U.S. facilities, hire U.S. workers, and ensure that intellectual property and sensitive technologies remain under U.S. control. The aerospace sector of the defense industry offers a precedent. Co-production programs such as the F-35 have shown that carefully structured international partnerships can be politically acceptable while meeting industrial goals. MASGA's success may hinge on adopting a similar model. The genius of MASGA lies in its dual identity. On one level, it is a tactical concession, designed to ease tariff pressure and satisfy U.S. political optics. On another, it is a strategic vision for integrating two advanced shipbuilding nations in ways that bolster both economic and military strength. If fully realized, MASGA could help reverse decades of U.S. shipbuilding decline, accelerate naval modernization, and reinforce the industrial foundation of the South Korea-U.S. alliance. For the United States, that would mean a stronger maritime posture in the Indo-Pacific and globally. For South Korea, it would mean deeper integration into the supply chains and decision-making processes that shape allied naval power. In an era where industrial capacity is a decisive element of strategic competition, MASGA offers something rare: a solution that addresses domestic political imperatives while delivering genuine alliance capability. Turning the slogan into reality will not be easy, but if Seoul and Washington can navigate the political shoals, MASGA could yet become a defining success story of 21st-century alliance management.
Yomiuri Shimbun
an hour ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Trump Warns of ‘Severe Consequences' If Putin Does Not Agree to Stop War after Summit
BERLIN (AP) — President Donald Trump warned Wednesday that there will be 'very severe consequences' if Russian President Vladimir Putin does not agree to stop the war against Ukraine after the two leaders meet for a summit later this week in Alaska. Trump made the comment in response to a question from a reporter after announcing this year's Kennedy Center Honors recipients in Washington. He did not say what the consequences might be. The remark came soon after Trump consulted with European leaders, who said the president assured them he would make a priority of trying to achieve a ceasefire in Ukraine when he speaks with Putin on Friday in Anchorage. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy joined several of Kyiv's main allies in the virtual meeting with the U.S. leader, and Zelenskyy told the group that Putin 'is bluffing' ahead of the planned summit about Russia's ability to occupy all of Ukraine and shake off sanctions. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said afterward that 'important decisions' could be made in Alaska, but he stressed that 'fundamental European and Ukrainian security interests must be protected.' Merz convened Wednesday's meeting in an attempt to make sure European and Ukrainian leaders are heard ahead of the summit. He stressed that a ceasefire must come at the beginning of negotiations. He told reporters that Trump 'also wants to make this one of his priorities' in the meeting with Putin. At a separate appearance in France, French President Emmanuel Macron said Trump 'was very clear' that the U.S. wants to achieve a ceasefire at the summit. Following Friday's summit, Macron added, Trump will 'seek a future trilateral meeting' — one involving Trump, Putin and Zelenskyy. He said he hoped that it could be held in Europe 'in a neutral country that is acceptable to all parties.' Merz, who described Wednesday's conversation as 'constructive and good,' said the Europeans made clear that 'Ukraine must sit at the table as soon as there are follow-up meetings.' European allies have pushed for Ukraine's involvement in any peace talks, fearful that discussions that exclude Kyiv could otherwise favor Moscow. The Ukrainian president, who traveled to Berlin to join the meeting alongside Merz, has repeatedly cast doubt on whether Putin would negotiate in good faith. He said Wednesday that he hoped an immediate ceasefire will be 'the central topic' in Alaska, but also argued that Putin 'definitely does not want peace.' Zelenskyy said Putin 'is trying to apply pressure … on all sectors of the Ukrainian front' in an attempt to show that Russia is 'capable of occupying all of Ukraine.' Putin is also bluffing that sanctions 'do not matter to him and are ineffective,' he added. 'In reality, sanctions are very helpful and are hitting Russia's war economy hard.' The stakes for Europe Trump has said he wants to see whether Putin is serious about ending the war, now in its fourth year, describing Friday's summit as 'a feel-out meeting' where he can assess the Russian leader's intentions. Yet Trump has disappointed allies in Europe by saying Ukraine will have to give up some Russian-held territory. He has also said Russia must accept land swaps, although it was unclear what Putin might be expected to surrender. Trump on Monday ducked repeated chances to say that he would push for Zelenskyy to take part in his discussions with Putin, and the president was dismissive of Zelenskyy and his need to be part of an effort to seek peace. Trump said that following Friday's summit, a meeting between the Russian and Ukrainian leaders could be arranged, or that it could also be a meeting with 'Putin and Zelenskyy and me.' The Europeans and Ukraine are wary that Putin, who has waged the biggest land war in Europe since 1945 and used Russia's energy might to try to intimidate the European Union, might secure favorable concessions and set the outlines of a peace deal without them. The overarching fear of many European countries is that Putin will set his sights on one of them next if he wins in Ukraine. Merz said that 'if there is no movement on the Russian side in Alaska, then the United States and the Europeans should and must increase the pressure' on Moscow. Land concessions a non-starter for Kyiv Zelenskyy said Tuesday that Putin wants Ukraine to withdraw from the remaining 30% of the Donetsk region that it still controls as part of a ceasefire deal, a proposal the Ukrainian leader categorically rejected. Zelenskyy reiterated that Ukraine would not give up any territory it controls, saying that would be unconstitutional and would serve only as a springboard for a future Russian invasion. He said diplomatic discussions led by the U.S. focused on ending the war have not addressed key Ukrainian demands, including security guarantees to prevent future Russian aggression and ensuring that Europe is included in negotiations. Three weeks after Trump returned to office, his administration took the leverage of Ukraine's NATO membership off the table — something Putin has demanded — and signaled that the EU and Ukraine must handle security in Europe now while America focuses its attention elsewhere. Senior EU officials believe Trump may be satisfied with simply securing a ceasefire in Ukraine and that he is probably more interested in broader U.S. interests and great power politics, aiming to ramp up business with Russia and rehabilitate Putin. Russian advances in Donbas Russian forces on the ground in Ukraine have been closing in on a key territorial grab around the city of Pokrovsk, in the eastern Donbas region that comprises Ukraine's eastern industrial heartland, which Putin has long coveted. Military analysts using open-source information to monitor the battles have said Ukraine's ability to fend off those advances could be critical. Losing Pokrovsk would hand Russia an important victory ahead of the summit and could complicate Ukrainian supply lines to the Donetsk region, where the Kremlin has focused the bulk of military efforts.
