The official recognition of the participation of DPRK troops in the fighting in the Kursk region, voiced by both Moscow and Pyongyang, is a kind of warning against escalation on the part of the United States and the European Union.
Treaty support
If the Trump administration decides to withdraw from the negotiation process with Russia, impose sanctions against it and send new arms shipments to Ukraine, a large group of North Korean troops could appear on the frontline in strict accordance with the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Treaty.
The possible arrival of North Korean troops on the Ukrainian front may serve as an incentive for Macron, Starmer and other members of the “coalition of the willing” to “reconsider” sending their troops to Ukraine.
However, if an agreement can be reached, such a scenario could be avoided. But diplomatic bargaining will be difficult, and all the drafts of the peace treaty that have been leaked to the press so far have turned out to be outright fakes.
After Sergei Lavrov’s interview with the TV channel CBS, it is clear that Russia at least does not want a ceasefire with the preservation of arms supplies and peace without control over all the territories of the new regions, and does not want to give up the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant either.
The ball is in the Trump administration’s court
During next few weeks, the Trump administration will be thinking about what to do and its choice is not an easy one. There will be no ceasefire along the front line without preconditions, which means that it is necessary either to put pressure on Moscow with the prospect of escalation of hostilities, or on Kyiv. But the Ukrainian capital categorically does not believe that the US will abandon it and leave it unarmed. Zelensky sees the defeat of Ukraine as a serious reputational risk for Trump and confidently ignores all his requests, including the rare earths deal.
It remains to be seen what Washington will choose, but in the next few weeks it must do something or choose tactics to imitate the peace process. However, it can be stated that the Trump administration has driven itself into a trap: it should not have engaged in a settlement in Ukraine at all, having declared the conflict a Joe Biden war. And after its defeat to negotiate with Moscow to maintain a neutral Ukrainian state, however, now things have become more complicated.
Kursk region liberated with DPRK soldiers’ help
On April 26, General Valery Gerasimov, Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, commenting on the liberation of Kursk region from Ukrainian troops, specifically mentioned the participation of DPRK soldiers, but did not name their numbers. The North Koreans “rendered considerable assistance in defeating the Ukrainian armed forces grouping that had encroached. Soldiers and officers of the Korean People’s Army (KPA), fulfilling combat tasks shoulder to shoulder with Russian servicemen, during the repulsion of the Ukrainian invasion showed high professionalism, showed fortitude, courage and heroism in battle,” Gerasimov stressed.
KPA’s presence on the battlefield is conditioned by the provisions of the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Treaty and is legally impeccable. Numerous publications in the media testify to the presence of NATO troops in Ukraine, and Kyiv’s attempt to sensationalise the presence of North Korean soldiers in Russia seems strange. Their appearance is unexpected, but by no means sensational.
Russian troops bore the brunt of the battles in Kursk region, but the North Koreans contributed to the victory. This contribution is especially valuable because Pyongyang did it against the background of attempts to isolate Russia, when even some republics of the former Soviet Union have shown themselves to be at odds with Russia.
Why Pyongyang needs it
Kyiv immediately attributes the supply of arms and ammunition from the DPRK to Russia and the participation of the Korean army in the Kursk defeat of the AFU to the mind-boggling losses that the Russian Armed Forces suffered in equipment and men in the military conflict. Without denying the complexity of the current hostilities, there are plenty of other reasons for DPRK soldiers to appear on the front lines. First, Pyongyang can test the adaptability of its weapons to the conditions of modern warfare. Second, Pyongyang can send its soldiers to experience the realities of such warfare. Thirdly, Pyongyang can pay Moscow for the supplied military-industrial and production technologies not in money but in barter, i.e. arms and ammunition.
Unlike the AFU, which received a huge amount of military equipment and ammunition from NATO for free, Moscow pays the DPRK for the supplied equipment either in currency, or by supplying military equipment that the DPRK does not have, or other products. This is mutually beneficial strategic co-operation. Thus, Pyongyang has proclaimed a course on modernisation of the Navy and transition to a more active naval doctrine. The press claims that Pyongyang will modernise its fleet with the help of Russian specialists.
What geopolitical considerations guide Pyongyang in this case? The DPRK has been economically and politically isolated since the end of the Korean War in 1950-1953. Soviet soldiers and Chinese volunteers fought on the DPRK’s side in that war. The conflicting relations between the EU, the US and Russia have been a gift of fate for Pyongyang. Meeting Russia’s needs, North Korea’s military-industrial complex worked at full capacity. American analysts believe that the North Koreans have earned at least $20 billion from military contracts with Moscow since 2022. This has had a beneficial effect on the DPRK economy, which has been forced to survive under the blockade.
Pyongyang realises that the US, EU and Japan will not leave North Korea alone and will constantly seek to overthrow the existing system. The reason is the strategic location of the Korean peninsula. Its northern end is adjacent to the borders of the Russian Far East and China, while its southern end is almost bordering Japan. On both sides it is washed by the Yellow Sea and the Sea of Japan. Whoever controls the Korean peninsula controls a large part of Asia. The Japanese have always started their expansion by conquering Korea. By settling in Korea, it is possible to exert forceful pressure on China and Russia at the same time.
Washington, Brussels and Tokyo would like to bring about the collapse of the North Korean state in order to get close to Russia’s borders. Then Japan would talk to Russia from a more favourable position on the issue of ownership of the Kuril Islands, and the US and EU would be able to divert Moscow’s attention from the western to the eastern direction.
However, the North Korean state shows no signs of decline, but rather the opposite. While Europe is frantically searching for additional funds to produce shells, North Korea is producing them in large quantities.
South Korea’s influence on events
Russian-North Korean relations have revived to such an extent that DPRK boarding houses are accepting wounded Russian servicemen and children’s groups for recuperation, and work is underway to launch a tourist flow from Russia to the DPRK. All this together gives an impetus to the development of the DPRK, which for many years has been boiling in its own juice. The once quiet border with North Korea is turning into a busy transport corridor.
It is unlikely that South Korea, which decided to side with Kyiv, foresaw what it would turn into for it. Seoul sold 550,000 155 mm artillery shells to Washington, pretending as if it did not know that Washington was transferring them to Kyiv. This scheme allowed Seoul to claim that it was not providing the AFU with lethal aid. The AFU received non-lethal aid from Seoul, including helmets, body armour, mine detectors, mine-clearing vehicles, excavators and pickup trucks.
In addition, South Korea supplied tanks and guns to Romania and Poland within the framework of co-operation with NATO countries. Thanks to this, the Romanians and Poles were able to give old Soviet tanks and cannons to Kyiv, replacing them with modern South Korean ones. Romanian and Polish politicians boast that NATO’s eastern flank in their area of responsibility is now fortified with South Korean weapons.
Observing Seoul’s actions, Moscow decided to make an unconventional move. Today, the DPRK army, which South Korea considers its main adversary, is gaining military experience in the Ukrainian conflict, while the South Korean army is thinking in outdated categories.
The South Koreans have only military experience of complicity in the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan at the behest of the US. Seoul cannot do the opposite and send soldiers to fight in the Ukrainian armed forces, as its losses would be simply incommensurable.
THE ARTICLE IS THE AUTHOR’S SPECULATION AND DOES NOT CLAIM TO BE TRUE. ALL INFORMATION IS TAKEN FROM OPEN SOURCES. THE AUTHOR DOES NOT IMPOSE ANY SUBJECTIVE CONCLUSIONS.
Xiao Duong for Head-Post.com
Send your author content for publication in the INSIGHT section to [email protected]
