Informal Institute for National Security Thinkers and Practitioners

Quotes of the Day:

"Writing is good, thinking is better. Cleverness is good, patience is better."

– Hermann Hesse

"Education is the ability to listen to almost anything without losing your temper or your self-confidence."

– Robert Frost

“We are in control. Not the ferocious attacker, not even death and dying; whether we react to those things with terror or with harmony it is up to us.”

– Chen Man Ching

1. America’s Allies Are Shaken, and Now They’re Taking Action

2. North Korea makes new US military demands of Trump

3. South Korea’s Hanwha Takes Stake in Australian Shipbuilder Austal

4. North Korea rejects G7 call for denuclearization, vows to 'strengthen' nuclear forces

5. What to do with North Korean POWs in Ukraine? Kyiv, Seoul discuss

6. How Ukraine’s Offensive in Russia’s Kursk Region Unraveled

7. Whether Korea-Japan warming survives Seoul turmoil is up in the air

8. Chinese media, Hun Sen celebrate White House order to close US-funded news outlets

9. South Korean Government: “Strengthening Resident Control” at North Korea’s ‘National People’s Committee Meeting’

10. Salmon Report: “46% of North Koreans Estimated to be Malnourished”

11. S. Korea's sensitive country listing 'not a big deal,' says acting U.S. envoy

12. (Sensitive Countries List) If this continues, it will really be 'Korea passing'... "Political circles should refrain from immature nuclear armament theories" [view]

13. Acting president stresses need for strong joint defense posture with visit to CFC command post

14. South Korea's 'sensitive country' designation linked to attempted leak of U.S. reactor design software

15. Surveillance mandate breeds discontent among N. Korean party ranks

16. Beyond denuclearization: S. Korea's case for conditional nuclear armament

17. I moved to South Korea without knowing anyone. A family of strangers took me in, and we're still in touch 18 years later.

1. America’s Allies Are Shaken, and Now They’re Taking Action

Excerpts:

Extended deterrence has been recognized by Democratic and Republican presidents as beneficial to the United States, in part because it tightens military alliances. But perhaps more important, it has discouraged other nations from expending the time, money and energy of going nuclear and creating a more destabilized world.

The policy has worked surprisingly well. Just nine nations possess nuclear arsenals, despite many more having the technical ability to build one. Public polls in South Korea, for instance, have shown for a decade that more than half the population wants homegrown nuclear weapons. North Korea’s fast-growing nuclear arsenal and routine threats by its leader, Kim Jong-un, to use them have made South Koreans uneasy about the arrangement with the United States.

And while South Korea’s government has shown an interest in building an atomic bomb since the 1950s, its nuclear security concerns have been mollified by successive U.S. presidents through various agreements and a constant American troop presence on the Korean Peninsula.

The arrangement now appears shaky. On Feb. 26, South Korea’s top diplomat, Cho Tae-yul, left open the possibility of developing weapons, publicly saying that nuclear armament was “not off the table.” It was the most significant shift in government sentiment since South Korea signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, the landmark international agreement signed by 191 countries that went into force in 1970 and prevents the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology.

If South Korea sprints for the bomb, it could spur other signatories to follow suit. Japan and Taiwan, regularly facing military intimidation from China, may be forced to reconsider their options. In the Middle East, Iran is dangerously close to a full-blown bomb program, which could prompt Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey and other nations to consider acquiring nuclear weapons. In short: more nukes, more problems for the United States and the wider world.

America’s Allies Are Shaken, and Now They’re Taking Action

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/12/opinion/nuclear-umbrella-us-allies.html?searchResultPosition=7

March 12, 2025

Credit...Vanessa Saba; source photograph by Bildagentur-online/Getty Images

By W.J. Hennigan

Mr. Hennigan writes about national security issues for Opinion.

President Trump’s deference to Russia, his unprecedented rebuke of Volodymyr Zelensky and his no-holds-barred approach in prodding European partners to spend more on their military budgets are having an unintended impact among America’s longtime allies: a possible nuclear free-for-all.

In recent days, emergency meetings have been convened in foreign capitals, and alarming public statements have been delivered by Poland, Germany and South Korea about their consideration of acquiring nuclear weapons. It’s a remarkable turn of events that portends a new nuclear landscape.

America’s European and Asian allies haven’t contemplated their nuclear futures this earnestly — and openly — since the dawn of the atomic age. For decades, they have relied on Washington’s policy of extended deterrence, which, by dint of treaties, promises more than 30 allies safety under America’s nuclear umbrella in exchange for forgoing the development of their own arsenals. The nations don’t need nuclear weapons to deter adversaries from a nuclear attack, according to the policy, because the United States guarantees to strike back on its allies’ behalf.

But confidence in that longstanding arrangement began to break down after allies watched Mr. Trump pull weapons and intelligence support from Ukraine last week in its war with Russia. It weakened further when he again upbraided NATO allies for not boosting their military spending, warning the other 31 alliance members not to count on the United States to defend them if they fail to meet their obligation to spend 2 percent or more of their gross domestic product on defense.

Tremors from the president’s actions were promptly felt across the Atlantic. Prime Minister Donald Tusk of Poland warned Friday about the “profound change of American geopolitics,” which put his country, and Ukraine, in an “objectively more difficult situation.” Poland must now consider reaching “for opportunities related to nuclear weapons,” he said in a speech to the Polish Parliament. “This is a serious race: a race for security, not for war.”

Sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter Get expert analysis of the news and a guide to the big ideas shaping the world every weekday morning. Get it sent to your inbox.

Friedrich Merz, who is expected to become Germany’s next chancellor, expressed a similar sentiment last Sunday when he told a national broadcaster that Berlin should discuss a nuclear sharing agreement with France and Britain, which, unlike Germany, are nuclear powers. The two nations have far fewer weapons than the United States’ and Russia’s stockpiles of more than 5,000 warheads, but they do have sizable arsenals, with Britain at 225 weapons and France at 290.

President Emmanuel Macron of France said his country was willing to consider extending the protection offered by its arsenal to European allies that are interested. It remains an open question whether and how that would work, but it’s an interesting idea. While Britain’s nuclear arsenal depends on U.S. technical input for its ballistic missile systems, France’s does not. “Our nuclear deterrent protects us. It is comprehensive, sovereign and French through and through,” Mr. Macron said last Wednesday in a televised address.

France’s arsenal has been that way since the 1960s, when then-President Charles de Gaulle started a nuclear program against the wishes of Washington. Although he was offered a place under the U.S. nuclear umbrella, he questioned America’s commitment to protecting Europe: Would the United States risk a nuclear attack on Washington if Paris was hit? He surmised it might not, calculating that American politicians’ interests would not always align with a European nation’s concerns.

That view proved prophetic over the past few weeks as Mr. Trump has disparaged Ukraine’s attempts at defending itself against unprovoked Russian military aggression. The world watched as Mr. Zelensky was berated in front of television cameras at a White House meeting on Feb. 28 for being “disrespectful” and risking “World War III.” The extraordinary dressing down of a nominal ally at war, coupled with the subsequent White House decision to pause military aid and intelligence support for Ukrainian forces, roused allied leaders into thinking: Can we still rely on the United States to come to our defense in a struggle?

Signaling their misgivings about the answer to that question, European leaders last week discussed a collective military spending plan, totaling about $160 billion, for missile defense, weapons systems and other military hardware. While the decision to take the Europeans’ conventional military capabilities into their own hands is welcome — and perhaps overdue — the possibility of nuclear expansion is unnerving.

The goal of every American president since Harry Truman has been to limit the spread of nuclear arms rather than encourage their development. During the Cold War, the United States deployed nuclear weapons in nations around the world in the event of an all-out war with Moscow, as well as to reassure allies of America’s commitment to their defense. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, most of these weapons were removed from those nations. Those that remained became more symbolic of a lasting partnership and a visceral extension of the nuclear umbrella than a practical tool of war. Today, roughly 100 nuclear bombs are deployed in five NATO nations: the Netherlands, Germany, Italy, Belgium and Turkey.

Extended deterrence has been recognized by Democratic and Republican presidents as beneficial to the United States, in part because it tightens military alliances. But perhaps more important, it has discouraged other nations from expending the time, money and energy of going nuclear and creating a more destabilized world.

The policy has worked surprisingly well. Just nine nations possess nuclear arsenals, despite many more having the technical ability to build one. Public polls in South Korea, for instance, have shown for a decade that more than half the population wants homegrown nuclear weapons. North Korea’s fast-growing nuclear arsenal and routine threats by its leader, Kim Jong-un, to use them have made South Koreans uneasy about the arrangement with the United States.

And while South Korea’s government has shown an interest in building an atomic bomb since the 1950s, its nuclear security concerns have been mollified by successive U.S. presidents through various agreements and a constant American troop presence on the Korean Peninsula.

The arrangement now appears shaky. On Feb. 26, South Korea’s top diplomat, Cho Tae-yul, left open the possibility of developing weapons, publicly saying that nuclear armament was “not off the table.” It was the most significant shift in government sentiment since South Korea signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, the landmark international agreement signed by 191 countries that went into force in 1970 and prevents the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology.

If South Korea sprints for the bomb, it could spur other signatories to follow suit. Japan and Taiwan, regularly facing military intimidation from China, may be forced to reconsider their options. In the Middle East, Iran is dangerously close to a full-blown bomb program, which could prompt Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey and other nations to consider acquiring nuclear weapons. In short: more nukes, more problems for the United States and the wider world.

American presidents had a challenging enough time avoiding nuclear conflict during the Cold War, when it primarily hinged on two nations — the United States and the Soviet Union — and on itchy trigger fingers constrained from releasing nuclear weapons pointed at each other. The idea of more nuclear countries and their regional baggage on the chessboard is frightening to fathom.

To be clear, the president claims he has not parted ways with his predecessors in his views on nuclear proliferation. He has often talked about the scourge of nuclear weapons, and the day after Mr. Macron’s comments, Mr. Trump told reporters he was interested in pursuing disarmament agreements among world powers. “It would be great if everybody would get rid of their nuclear weapons,” he said. “It would be great if we could all denuclearize, because the power of nuclear weapons is crazy.”

This is true, of course, but his policies are having the opposite effect. Thanks to Mr. Trump’s words and actions, the perceived value of acquiring nuclear weapons among allies appears to have quickly gone up, while the confidence in extended deterrence has gone down.

If Mr. Trump truly believes nuclear weapons should go, he must act swiftly to cut short the proliferation debates taking place in foreign capitals and move to reassure allies that American extended deterrence policy is unshakable. If he is successful, he will save himself — and future presidents — the anguish of watching allies around the world amass new arsenals, only to hope later that the United States has some say in whether future wars may turn life-or-death for us all.

W.J. Hennigan writes about national security issues for Opinion from Washington, D.C. He has reported from more than two dozen countries, covering war, the arms trade and the lives of U.S. service members.

This Times Opinion series is funded through philanthropic support from the Carnegie Corporation of New York, Outrider Foundation and the Prospect Hill Foundation. Funders have no control over the selection or focus of articles or the editing process and do not review articles before publication. The Times retains full editorial control.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Bluesky, WhatsApp and Threads.

2. North Korea makes new US military demands of Trump

I am not sure these are "demands." These statements are routine rhetoric in support of the regime's political warfare and blackmail diplomacy strategies.

North Korea makes new US military demands of Trump

Newsweek · by Ryan Chan · March 17, 2025

North Korea warned that the United States "war reinforcements" will be "contained and wiped out" after additional American stealth fighter jets were sent to Northeast Asia.

The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request from Newsweek for comment.

Why It Matters

The U.S. Marine Corps sent a group of F-35B fighter aircraft to Iwakuni in Japan from its base in Arizona on March 8, providing continental U.S.-based units with experience of operating in the Indo-Pacific region and augmenting two other F-35B squadrons in Japan.

While President Donald Trump has claimed that he has a "great relationship" with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, the U.S. continues to hold military exercises with its South Korean treaty ally. Pyongyang has called such military maneuvers "war rehearsals."

North Korea is one of the nine nations armed with nuclear weapons. The White House has claimed that the complete denuclearization of North Korea remains a priority for Trump.

A United States Marine Corps F-35B fighter jet prepares to land at Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni in Japan on March 8, 2025. A United States Marine Corps F-35B fighter jet prepares to land at Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni in Japan on March 8, 2025. Cpl. Samantha Rodriguez/U.S. Marine Corps

What To Know

In a commentary published on Sunday, the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) said the U.S. is a "hostile and confrontational entity," referring to the recent deployment of the F-35B fighter jets to Japan.

The original two Japan-based F-35B squadrons "have always been involved in the various U.S.-led war drills conducted in the vicinity of the Korean Peninsula," the KCNA added.

"The additional deployment of offensive war reinforcements to cope with contingency in the Korean Peninsula is hourly increasing the unpredictability of actual armed conflict and a nuclear war," the commentary said, adding that these jets can make "immediate sortie[s]."

Regarding the ongoing U.S.-South Korea Freedom Shield military drill, the KCNA claimed that the exercise, which is taking place in South Korea, includes a "nuclear war rehearsal" aimed at what it called a "preemptive strike" on North Korea's core facilities and areas.

During the bilateral drill, the allies conducted a training exercise with stealth fighter jets on Thursday, which involved F-35 aircraft from the U.S. and South Korean air forces, in addition to an F-35 jet assigned to the U.S. Navy aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson.

The exercise "highlighted the capability of U.S. and [South Korean] forces to seamlessly integrate air, ground and maritime operations," the South Korea-based U.S. Seventh Air Force said on Friday.

According to the U.S. Seventh Air Force, the air component operations of Freedom Shield do not involve F-35B fighter jets, with only four F-35As and one F-35C taking part. The drill is scheduled to end on March 21.

United States and South Korean F-35 fighter jets fly in formation over the U.S. Navy aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson during the Freedom Shield military exercise on March 13, 2025. United States and South Korean F-35 fighter jets fly in formation over the U.S. Navy aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson during the Freedom Shield military exercise on March 13, 2025. South Korean Air Force

What People Are Saying

The Korean Central News Agency said in a commentary on Sunday: "The U.S. desperate moves of military adventurism aimed to create military imbalance and incite a new geopolitical conflict in the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia provide [North Korea] with reasonable justification and the urgent need to give tougher warning of action."

U.S. Air Force Lieutenant General David Iverson, commander of the Seventh Air Force, said in a press release on Friday: "By integrating our advanced forces and weapons across all domains, we're demonstrating our combined commitment and ability to defend the peace and stability of the [Korean] Peninsula."

What Happens Next

North Korea fired multiple ballistic missiles into its western waters hours after the U.S. and South Korea commenced Freedom Shield on March 10. It remains to be seen whether Pyongyang will launch another round of missiles before the end of the annual exercise.

Ryan Chan is a Newsweek reporter based in Hong Kong, where he previously had over a decade of experience at a local newspaper, covering China and current events around the world. His focus is on security and defense issues in the Western Pacific region. He is a graduate of Hong Kong Baptist University. You can get in touch with Ryan by emailing r.chan@newsweek.com.

Newsweek · by Ryan Chan · March 17, 2025

3. South Korea’s Hanwha Takes Stake in Australian Shipbuilder Austal

Perhaps South Korea's Hanwha could be the anchor in a JAROKUSAUS (Japan, ROK, US, and Australia) shipbuilding consortium.

South Korea’s Hanwha Takes Stake in Australian Shipbuilder Austal

Hanwha plans to engage with Austal about board representation

https://www.wsj.com/business/deals/south-koreas-hanwha-takes-stake-in-australian-shipbuilder-austal-7846e514?mod=latest_headlines

By Stuart Condie

March 17, 2025 10:09 pm ET

Hanwha had offered far less last year when it made an unsolicited approach for Austal. Photo: arnd wiegmann/Reuters

SYDNEY—South Korea’s Hanwha Group has taken a 9.9% stake in Australia’s Austal almost a year after it proposed a full takeover, saying it now aims to become a long-term strategic partner to the ASX-listed shipbuilder.

Hanwha on Tuesday said it had acquired 41.2 million shares in Austal, which operates in the U.S. as well as the Asia-Pacific region. A market filing showed it paid 4.45 Australian dollars a share, equivalent to about US$2.84, representing a 16% premium to Monday’s closing price.

Hanwha had offered far less last year, when it made an unsolicited approach for Austal at A$2.825 a share. In April 2024, Austal said it was open to engagement but Hanwha withdrew its interest in September, citing disagreements about a potential break fee.

On Tuesday, the conglomerate framed its acquisition of a near 10% stake as a move toward partnership rather than a takeover.

“As a strategic shareholder there will be a great opportunity for us to add significant value to Austal’s business, including in global defense and shipbuilding,” said Michael Coulter, global chief executive at Hanwha Defense.

Hanwha said it had an additional 9.9% economic exposure to Austal through a cash-settled total return swap arrangement. It has applied to Australia’s foreign investment regulator for permission to take its holding to 19.9%.

Hanwha plans to engage with Austal about board representation, Coulter said.

“Hanwha’s position as a global leader in smart shipbuilding will provide Austal access to capital, international relationships and operational and technical expertise which can accelerate the development of Austal’s business and in turn enhance Australia’s sovereign defense capability, at a time when this capability is more important than ever,” Coulter said.

Austal shares were up 8.4% at A$4.15 after about two hours of Tuesday’s session.

Write to Stuart Condie at stuart.condie@wsj.com

4. North Korea rejects G7 call for denuclearization, vows to 'strengthen' nuclear forces

But Kim Jong Un's inside voice said he is also grateful for the attention of the G7.

World News March 17, 2025 / 5:31 AM

North Korea rejects G7 call for denuclearization, vows to 'strengthen' nuclear forces

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2025/03/17/North-Korea-rejects-G7-denuclearization-call-vows-to-strengthen-nuclear-forces/6131742202005/

By Thomas Maresca

North Korea on Monday rejected a G7 Foreign Ministers statement calling for denuclearization, vowing instead to strengthen its nuclear forces. Leader Kim Jong Un oversaw a cruise missile test-launch last month as Pyongyang continues to develop weapons. File Photo by KCNA/EPA-EFE

SEOUL, March 17 (UPI) -- North Korea on Monday vowed to "steadily update and strengthen" its nuclear arsenal, rejecting a joint statement by the Group of Seven Foreign Ministers calling for Pyongyang to give up its nuclear ambitions.

The North's Foreign Ministry said its position as a nuclear weapons state has been "fixed permanently by the supreme law of its state."

"The DPRK's nuclear armed forces will exist forever as a powerful means of justice which defends the sovereignty of the state, territorial integrity and fundamental interests, prevents a war in the Korean peninsula and Northeast Asia and guarantees a strategic stability of the world," the ministry said in a statement carried by state-run Korean Central News Agency.

The Democratic People's Republic of Korea is the official name of North Korea.

"The DPRK will steadily update and strengthen its nuclear armed forces both in quality and quantity in response to the nuclear threat from outside," it added.

In September 2022, the North passed a law declaring itself a nuclear weapons state and giving it the right to conduct a preemptive nuclear strike to protect itself. North Korean leader Kim Jong Un called the decision "irreversible" and later amended the country's constitution to enshrine the permanent growth of Pyongyang's nuclear arsenal.

North Korea's statement followed a meeting of the G7 Foreign Ministers in Charlevoix, Canada last week. On Friday, the group of advanced nations issued a joint statement, calling on the North to "abandon all its nuclear weapons and any other weapons of mass destruction as well as ballistic missile programs in accordance with all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions."

In its response, the North Korean Foreign Ministry slammed the G7 states as the "chief criminals wrecking the global peace and security and the international nuclear non-proliferation system."

"G7, which has turned into a nuclear criminal group gravely threatening the global peace and security, should thoroughly abandon its anachronistic ambition for nuclear hegemony before talking about someone's 'denuclearization' and 'dismantlement of nukes,'" the ministry said.

The United States and South Korea kicked off their annual springtime Freedom Shield military exercise last week. While Washington and Seoul say their joint drills are defensive, North Korea frequently condemns the exercises as rehearsals for an invasion.

The state-run KCNA issued a commentary on Wednesday calling the joint drills "dangerous and undesirable doings germinating a touch-and-go situation, the world's first nuclear war."

Earlier in the week, North Korea fired a salvo of close-range ballistic missiles into the Yellow Sea following a pair of statements criticizing Freedom Shield and warning of retaliatory provocations.

Despite facing a raft of international sanctions, Pyongyang has continued to develop its nuclear and missile programs. North Korean leader Kim Jong Un recently visited the construction site of the country's first "nuclear-powered strategic guided missile submarine," according to a KCNA report.

While the report did not provide specific details about the submarine, the North generally uses the term "strategic" to indicate that missiles are nuclear-capable.

5. What to do with North Korean POWs in Ukraine? Kyiv, Seoul discuss

Individual freedom of choice. We must not force the repatriation of anyone to an authoritarian country where he has no freedom to choose.

And they must be used as bargaining chips.

South Korea

Asia East Asia

What to do with North Korean POWs in Ukraine? Kyiv, Seoul discuss

Ukraine says it has captured North Korean soldiers in Russia’s Kursk region. Thousands more are thought to have been killed or injured

https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/east-asia/article/3302763/what-do-north-korean-pows-kyiv-seoul-discuss?module=perpetual_scroll_0&pgtype=article

Reuters

Published: 8:45am, 18 Mar 2025Updated: 9:44am, 18 Mar 2025

South Korea has sought Kyiv’s cooperation in the handling of North Korean prisoners of war.

Foreign Minister Cho Tae-yul made the request during a telephone call on Monday with his Ukrainian counterpart Andrii Sybiha, Seoul’s foreign ministry said.

North Korea has deployed thousands of troops to support Russian forces fighting in Ukraine, Ukrainian, US and South Korean assessments show, for Pyongyang’s first major involvement in a war since the 1950s.

Cho reaffirmed Seoul’s efforts to support the Ukrainian people and said Seoul would accept all North Korean soldiers captured by Ukraine if they wished to go to South Korea, the foreign ministry said in a statement.

Ukraine releases video of captured North Korean soldiers, says ready for prisoner swap

Kyiv says more than 3,000 North Korean soldiers were killed or injured in Russia by early January 2025.

This year Seoul’s Joint Chiefs of Staff said they suspected Pyongyang was preparing to send more troops to Russia to fight Ukrainian forces, despite suffering losses and the capture of some of its soldiers.

In January, President Volodymyr Zelensky said Ukraine had captured two North Korean soldiers in Russia’s Kursk region, in his country’s first revelation of such captives taken alive since their entry into the war last autumn.

6. How Ukraine’s Offensive in Russia’s Kursk Region Unraveled

This is what combat experience informed training can do for militaries that are learning organizations. The question is can north Korea transfer these experiences and create training for the north Korean People's Army on a large scale so as to make a difference in an attack on South Korea?

Excerpts:

Ukraine had dispatched some of its most experienced brigades to the Kursk operation, but months of unrelenting assaults by Russian forces and the thousands of North Korean troops fighting alongside them were taking a growing toll.

While the North Korean troops had withdrawn from the battlefield in January to regroup, they returned to the fight in early February. And Ukrainian soldiers said their combat skills had improved.

“Many of them executed very smart tactical maneuvers,” said Boroda, the platoon commander.

...

And here is the reason why the Russians appear to have achieved success.

Excerpts:

Ukraine’s hold in Kursk was already in danger when the Trump administration announced the suspension of military aid and intelligence sharing on March 3.

The sudden loss of American intelligence for precise targeting compounded the difficulties, according to Andrii, the intelligence officer. Without it, he and other soldiers said, the American-made multiple-rocket launchers known as HIMARS fell silent.

“We could not allow expensive missiles to be fired at the wrong target,” Andrii explained.

Then on March 8, Russian troops made a breakthrough, sneaking behind Ukrainian lines by walking for miles through a disused gas pipeline to stage a surprise attack. Russian propagandists and officials cast the operation as a heroic feat, while Ukrainian sources called it a risky move that they claimed had led to many deaths caused by residual methane in the pipeline.

While the exact number of Russian troops involved and the success of the attack was impossible to independently confirm, “it caused enough confusion and havoc behind Ukrainian lines that it likely triggered them to start withdrawing,” said Mr. Paroinen from Black Bird Group, which analyzes satellite imagery and social media content from the battlefield.

The Russians “outplayed us a bit,” Andrii said. “There was a little panic.”

At around the same time, North Korean troops were helping lead an assault that broke through Ukrainian lines south of the small village of Kurylivka, further constraining Kyiv’s ability to supply its troops.

How Ukraine’s Offensive in Russia’s Kursk Region Unraveled

At the height of the campaign, Ukrainian forces controlled some 500 square miles of Russian territory. Now they hold just a small sliver of land along the border.

A Russian soldier in the Kursk region in December.Credit...Nanna Heitmann for The New York Times

By Marc Santora

Reporting from eastern Ukraine

March 16, 2025

Want to stay updated on what’s happening in North Korea, Russia and Ukraine? Sign up for Your Places: Global Update, and we’ll send our latest coverage to your inbox.

Ukrainian forces have pulled almost entirely out of the Kursk region of Russia, ending an offensive that had stunned the Kremlin last summer with its speed and audacity.

Ukrainian soldiers at the front described a retreat that was organized in places and chaotic in others, as Russian forces stormed through their lines and forced them back to a sliver of land along the border.

By the time one Ukrainian assault platoon retreated from its position less than a week ago, all their vehicles had been destroyed, drones hunted them night and day and they were almost out of ammunition.

Russian forces were closing in from all directions, said the platoon’s commander, “prompting our retreat.”

The commander, who asked to be identified only by his call sign, Boroda, in keeping with military protocol, said it took his unit two days to hike more than 12 miles from their positions near the Russian village of Kazachya Loknya to the Ukrainian border. By then, “the area where our positions had been was already occupied by Russian forces,” he said when reached by phone.

At the height of the offensive, Ukrainian forces controlled some 500 square miles of Russian territory. By Sunday, they were clinging to barely 30 square miles along the Russia-Ukraine border, according to Pasi Paroinen, a military analyst with the Finland-based Black Bird Group.

“The end of the battle is coming,” Mr. Paroinen said in a phone interview.

How much Russian territory Ukraine still controls in Kursk could not be independently confirmed, and soldiers reported fierce fighting was ongoing. But the fighting near the border is now less about holding Russian land, Ukrainian soldiers said, and more about trying to prevent Russian forces from pouring into the Sumy region of Ukraine and opening a new front in the war.

Russian advances

Russian-claimed advances

Ukrainian-held territory

Russia has pushed Ukrainian forces almost entirely out of the Kursk region of Russia.

RUSSIA

Korenevo

Glushkovo

Snagost

Sudzha

Guyevo

UKRAINE

Detail

UKRAINE

Sumy

5 miles

Note: As of March 16.Source: The Institute for the Study of War with American Enterprise Institute’s Critical Threats ProjectBy Samuel Granados

The soldiers said they are trying to set up strong defensive positions along ridgelines on the Russian side of the border.

“We continue to hold positions on the Kursk front,” said Boroda, the assault platoon commander. “The only difference is that our positions have shifted significantly closer to the border.”

Andrii, a Ukrainian intelligence officer fighting in Kursk, put it more bluntly: “The Kursk operation is essentially over” he said. “Now we need to stabilize the situation.”

The Kursk operation was seen by some analysts as an unnecessary gamble, stretching Ukraine’s troops and leading to heavy casualties at a time when they were already struggling to defend a long front line in their own country. But it provided a much-needed morale boost to Ukraine, which had sought to show it could bring the war home to Russia and had hoped the territory it occupied there would serve as leverage in any cease-fire negotiations.

While Kyiv has managed to stall Russia’s advance in eastern Ukraine, the turn in Kursk comes as the Trump administration is pushing for a quick truce.

The reversal of Ukraine’s fortunes in Kursk did not come down to any one factor. Russian forces pounded Ukraine’s supply lines and began to cut off escape routes. North Korean troops brought in by Moscow, who faltered at first, improved their combat capabilities. And at a crucial moment, U.S. support — including intelligence sharing — was put on hold.

How the tide turned

When The New York Times last visited the border between Sumy and Kursk in late January, daytime movement was nearly impossible because the skies were filled with Russian drones.

The main road from Sumy to Sudzha, a small Russian town about six miles to the northeast that Ukrainian forces had occupied since August, was already littered with burned-out cars, tanks and armored vehicles.

Ukraine had dispatched some of its most experienced brigades to the Kursk operation, but months of unrelenting assaults by Russian forces and the thousands of North Korean troops fighting alongside them were taking a growing toll.

While the North Korean troops had withdrawn from the battlefield in January to regroup, they returned to the fight in early February. And Ukrainian soldiers said their combat skills had improved.

Image

Ukrainian soldiers in a village in the Sumy region in January, after returning from the Kursk region of Russia.Credit...Finbarr O'Reilly for The New York Times

“Many of them executed very smart tactical maneuvers,” said Boroda, the platoon commander.

By mid-February, Russian forces had advanced to within five miles of Ukraine’s main resupply routes into Sudzha, allowing them to target the roads with swarms of drones — many of which were tethered to ultrathin fiber optic cables and therefore immune to jamming.

Other Ukrainian soldiers, who like Boroda asked to be identified only by their first name or call sign in accordance with military protocol, described Russian forces using attack drones for ambushes.

“Their drones would land near key supply routes and wait for a target to pass by,” said Cap, a 36-year-old Special Operations Forces fighter who asked to be identified by his call sign.

Russian drones were also hitting pre-placed explosives to destroy bridges in Kursk, to try to make it harder for Ukrainian troops to retreat, Ukrainian soldiers said.

Russian warplanes also attacked bridges, in one case dropping a 6,000-pound guided bomb to cut off one major artery, according to Ukrainian soldiers and military analysts.

Artem, a senior Ukrainian brigade commander, said that the destruction of the bridges was one of the key reasons Kyiv’s forces had to abandon positions so suddenly in recent weeks. Not everyone made it out, but most did, he said.

Russia’s breakthrough moment

Ukraine’s hold in Kursk was already in danger when the Trump administration announced the suspension of military aid and intelligence sharing on March 3.

“We could not allow expensive missiles to be fired at the wrong target,” Andrii explained.

The Russians “outplayed us a bit,” Andrii said. “There was a little panic.”

Image

Razor wire defenses in the forest in the Sumy region of Ukraine, along the border with Russia, earlier this year. Credit...Finbarr O'Reilly for The New York Times

As Ukrainian forces there retreated along designated defensive lines, Russian forces kept pushing toward Sudzha and the pace of attacks increased.

Given the Russian positions, evacuating by vehicle would have given drones an easy target, analysts said. And the destroyed military vehicles littering the roads also created obstacles for a retreat — which is why a “significant part of the withdrawal was done on foot,” according to Serhii Hrabskyi, a military analyst and former Ukrainian Army colonel.

Some Ukrainian soldiers burned their own equipment to prevent it from falling into Russian hands before hiking out, soldiers said.

On March 10, the order was issued for some units to withdraw from Sudzha, three Ukrainian soldiers and commanders said.

“It was a mix of organized and chaotic retreat,” Boroda said. “Various factors influenced the nature of the withdrawal: fatigue, good or poor orders from individual commanders, miscommunication or well-established coordination.”

However, despite claims to the contrary made by President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia and President Trump, at no point were large numbers of Kyiv’s forces surrounded, according to military analysts who use geolocated combat footage to map battlefield developments, Ukrainian soldiers fighting in Kursk and even some prominent Russian military bloggers.

Three days later, Russia’s Defense Ministry said it had regained full control of Sudzha. On Saturday, it claimed its forces had retaken two villages outside the town.

While the Ukrainian military’s general staff has not directly addressed Russia’s capture of Sudzha, it on Sunday released a map of the battlefield showing the town outside the territory it controls in Kursk — which has shrunk to a narrow strip of land.

Sudzha, once home to 5,000 people, sustained heavy damage in the fighting. And since the Kursk operation began, military analysts say, both sides suffered heavy losses.

Fears of a new front

While Kyiv had hoped to use its control over Russian land as leverage in any negotiation to end the war, now Mr. Putin appears to be using the Ukrainian retreat to try and strengthen his hand in talks with the Trump administration about pausing the hostilities.

President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine on Saturday accused Russian forces of massing along the border and attempting to cut off and trap Ukrainian troops in Kursk by pushing into the neighboring Sumy region. The claims could not be independently verified.

Now, Ukrainian soldiers say, they are determined to stop the Russians from pushing toward Sumy.

Oksana Pinchukova, a 44-year-old volunteer living in Sumy, said she is worried about what the weeks ahead will hold.

“Living under constant strikes and shelling — not everyone can handle that,” she said.

Reporting was contributed by Yurii Shyvala, Liubov Sholudko, Maria Varenikova and Constant Méheut.

Marc Santora has been reporting from Ukraine since the beginning of the war with Russia. He was previously based in London as an international news editor focused on breaking news events and earlier the bureau chief for East and Central Europe, based in Warsaw. He has also reported extensively from Iraq and Africa. More about Marc Santora

A version of this article appears in print on March 17, 2025, Section A, Page 1 of the New York edition with the headline: Russia Forces Ukraine Out of Kursk Territory Once Seen as Leverage. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe

See more on: Russia-Ukraine War, Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump, Volodymyr Zelensky

7. Whether Korea-Japan warming survives Seoul turmoil is up in the air

I will continue to hope for increased warming of trilateral reparations, JAROKUS. But beware of the other trilateral relationship: China, Japan, and South Korea.

Excerpts:

Some Koreans see Ishiba as a particularly good potential partner, given his greater willingness to deal with history issues and his support for improved relations with China and other Asian nations.

“Ishiba is really interested in trilateral relations – China, Japan, Korea,” says Kim Joon-hyung, a progressive member of the National Assembly and a former senior Foreign Ministry official. “He is willing to approach China. I wish Ishiba survives longer.”

In some circles in Seoul, there is even talk of forging a strategic relationship with Japan to balance, if not counter, a Trump-led US.

“Under the Biden administration we had some reason to work together on a trilateral basis because we had to deal with a rising China,” says Wi, a former senior foreign ministry official who was recently elected to the National Assembly. “That issue remains but now we have under the Trump administration new uncertainties and unpredictability that affect trade and bilateral relations and could affect both Japan and Korea.”

One idea that is quietly discussed in Seoul – with an eye toward Tokyo – is to use the expansion of the CPTPP (the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership) to counter Trump’s tariff and trade wars. Korean application for membership could be accelerated and even linked to the European Union.

It may, however, be premature to talk of an anti-Trump alliance, some say.

“I am not sure Seoul and Tokyo policy makers have the incentive to work together” against Trump, says Wi, who is likely to play a prominent role if Lee wins a presidential election. “Some Europeans like [French President Emmanuel] Macron or the Germans may try to launch this kind of idea with Asian nations. But Asian responses to that will be careful.”

That caution, however, may be blown away by Trump himself as he continues to assail the postwar international system.

Whether Korea-Japan warming survives Seoul turmoil is up in the air - Asia Times

But some don’t completely rule out further warming: a strategic relationship with Japan using CPTPP to balance a Trump-led US

asiatimes.com · by Daniel Sneider · March 17, 2025

This was supposed to be a year to celebrate the improvement of relations between South Korea and Japan. However, amid the turmoil in South Korea – and across the ocean in the United States – the fate of relations between South Korea and Japan is increasingly uncertain.

On my recent visit to Seoul, the streets of the South Korean capital city were filled on weekends with rival gatherings of fervent demonstrators.

In the boulevard leading from City Hall to the grand Gyeongbokgung Palace, rightwing supporters of the impeached President Yoon Suk Yeol, most of them pensioners, waved Korean and American flags. They proudly wore red baseball caps imitating the pro-Trump MAGA movement in the US.

Over by the National Assembly building, across the Han River, dense crowds of mostly younger people, many of them women, sang K-pop songs and marched in support of democracy and against the attempted martial law coup.

The decision of the Korean Constitutional Court on impeachment will not end these deep divisions in South Korea. But hopefully it will put set the country back on the road, through a new national election, toward forming a government capable of ruling the polarized country.

This could not come too soon. Korea is beset by twin threats.

One one side, there is a nuclear-armed North Korea, strengthened by its military alliance with Russia and the ongoing support of China.

On the other, there is a new danger in the form of an unpredictable isolationist Trump regime in the US, which could potentially withdraw the American armed forces that help protect South Korea and impose tariffs that could seriously damage the trade-dependent Korean economy.

Korea and Japan – strategic partners?

The year 2025 includes milestones that could have doubled as occasions for celebrating the progress in relations that had been made under the conservative governments of President Yoon and former Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, who left office in September 2024. This year marks both the 60th anniversary of the treaty to establish diplomatic relations, and the 80th anniversary of the end of the war, which Koreans celebrate as a moment of liberation from Japanese colonial rule.

Instead, Yoon is effectively removed, impeached after his failed coup and facing potential imprisonment. Barring his unlikely return to office if the court fails to uphold impeachment, an election within two months seems poised to bring to power the progressive Democratic Party, headed by populist politician Lee Jae-Myung.

President Yoon Suk Yeol (R) heads into his first sit-down meeting with Democratic Party opposition leader Lee Jae-myung on April 29, 2024, at the presidential office in Seoul’s Yongsan District. Photo: X Screengrab

The Democrats have been deeply critical of Yoon’s Japan policy and Lee personally has been an unabashed spokesman for those who believe Japan has failed to confront the crimes of its colonial rule.

“Given Lee’s past record – his views, his arguments on Korea-Japan relations – a rollback of relations is quite predictable,” a former Korean ambassador to Japan, Shin Kak-soo, told me in Seoul.

In a separate conversation, a conservative former senior official with long experience in foreign affairs predicted that Lee will be “very adversarial” toward Japan. “He may not rattle the boat but basically Lee Jae-myung has a negative approach to Japan. He is more forthright about China and more critical of the US.”

That somewhat pessimistic prediction is easy to find in Tokyo as well. But Lee’s close advisors point to his pragmatic, rather than ideological, character to suggest that he will not seek to reverse the progress that was made and will be supportive of the US security alliance.

Ambassador Cho Hyun, a former senior Foreign Ministry official who was deeply engaged in shaping Korea-Japan relations during the previous progressive government of Moon Jae-in, laid this out over breakfast in Seoul.

“We will not change what has been agreed upon between Korea and Japan,” Cho said, while acknowledging that he had opposed the Comfort Women agreement reached in 2015 between Park Geun-hye and the late Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

“Our relationship has two bookends. On one end, we share enemies, a sense of threat – and are both allies to the United States. But at the other bookend, Japan did so many horrible things and denies doing it. They fail to educate their young people. On our part there is a sense of wounded nationalism. Diplomacy must operate between these two bookends.”

Cho and other progressive foreign policy advisors pointed to the failure of the Japanese government to reciprocate the unilateral decision of Yoon to create a fund to compensate the former forced laborers who worked in Japanese mines and factories during the wartime period. Japanese firms, who employed the workers, should now add to the fund, with the support and encouragement of the Japanese government, Cho and others suggest.

“Some people in the leadership of the Minjudang [Democratic Party] are fully aware of what went wrong,” Cho said. “They are willing to change their position. They would keep the unilateral announcement of Yoon regarding forced labor and maintain trilateral security cooperation. I hope the Japanese government may allow companies to join the funding. I have been arguing to Japanese friends that they need to talk to progressives.”

Some Japanese foreign policy experts share this cautious optimism. Hitoshi Tanaka, the former senior Foreign Ministry official who was a key architect of the outreach to North Korea under former Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, voiced that to this writer in a recent interview.

“Even if the opposition takes power, we may still have a chance to preserve the improvement in relations,” Tanaka said. “The Democrats are against Japan and the US, the latter because of its support of the military regimes in Korea. But Japan-Korea relations and trilateral relations are the natural result of the current situation.”

The Trump factor enters the picture

Korean thinking about Japan has also now shifted due to the Trump factor. The angry exchange between the American leader and the Ukrainian President in the Oval Office had a similar shock effect in Seoul as in Tokyo.

Korean discussion of the need to develop an independent nuclear capability has spread from the right – where such a move, long opposed by the US, has long been advocated – to the progressive camp.

The new watchword among Koreans is “nuclear latency,” to follow the Japanese in creating a full nuclear fuel cycle. In that way, South Korea could move to reprocess spent fuel from its large number of nuclear power plants or create a uranium enrichment facility. A stockpile of fissile material would then allow South Korea to move toward nuclear weapons very quickly.

For now, Korean officials, like their counterparts in Japan, continue to talk confidently about their ability to offer sufficient concessions to keep the worst from happening. They point to the visit of Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba to Washington as a model for Korea to follow.

Assemblyman Wi Sung-lac, who was the chief foreign policy advisor to Democratic party leader Lee in the last presidential election, believes the best they can hope for in the US is a non-confrontational meeting that, as happened during Ishiba’s Washington visit, at least reaffirms the alliance along the lines of previous statements with the Biden administration.

Wi Sung-lac, a lawmaker of the main opposition Democratic Party of Korea (DPK), speaks during an interview with The Korea Times at his office in Seoul. Photo: Shim Hyun-chul

“The Japanese still believe they will try to deal with Trump just as Abe did,” Wi said in an interview in his National Assembly office. “The joint statement has a preventative effect. When we come to that moment [of a summit], at minimum we hope we can have a similar document. It won’t be easy creating personal rapport between the two leaders, but we are going to try that. If we are not successful, then Japan, Korea and the Europeans will have to think this through.”

Sign up for one of our free newsletters

Some Koreans see Ishiba as a particularly good potential partner, given his greater willingness to deal with history issues and his support for improved relations with China and other Asian nations.

“Ishiba is really interested in trilateral relations – China, Japan, Korea,” says Kim Joon-hyung, a progressive member of the National Assembly and a former senior Foreign Ministry official. “He is willing to approach China. I wish Ishiba survives longer.”

In some circles in Seoul, there is even talk of forging a strategic relationship with Japan to balance, if not counter, a Trump-led US.

“Under the Biden administration we had some reason to work together on a trilateral basis because we had to deal with a rising China,” says Wi, a former senior foreign ministry official who was recently elected to the National Assembly. “That issue remains but now we have under the Trump administration new uncertainties and unpredictability that affect trade and bilateral relations and could affect both Japan and Korea.”

One idea that is quietly discussed in Seoul – with an eye toward Tokyo – is to use the expansion of the CPTPP (the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership) to counter Trump’s tariff and trade wars. Korean application for membership could be accelerated and even linked to the European Union.

It may, however, be premature to talk of an anti-Trump alliance, some say.

“I am not sure Seoul and Tokyo policy makers have the incentive to work together” against Trump, says Wi, who is likely to play a prominent role if Lee wins a presidential election. “Some Europeans like [French President Emmanuel] Macron or the Germans may try to launch this kind of idea with Asian nations. But Asian responses to that will be careful.”

That caution, however, may be blown away by Trump himself as he continues to assail the postwar international system.

Daniel Sneider is a lecturer on international policy at Stanford. This article was originally publilshed by The Oriental Economist (Toyo Keizai). It is republished with kind permission.

Thank you for registering!

An account was already registered with this email. Please check your inbox for an authentication link.

asiatimes.com · by Daniel Sneider · March 17, 2025

8. Chinese media, Hun Sen celebrate White House order to close US-funded news outlets

I do not know whether to laugh or cry. And this is such an "own goal" and we have really shot ourselves in the foot. Do we really want Chinese, Russian, Iranian, and north Korean propaganda to dominate the information in authoritarian regime occupied areas?

But RFA is soldiering on. As of 18 March (today) it is still publishing articles online (please do not let the DOGE wiz kids know). I am not sure if its transmitters are still broadcasting into north Korea because I have not spoken to anyone from RFA since the order to shut it down. However, the last postings on the VOA Korean service are from 16 March. No updates since.

Here is a statement from the social media of my friend from north Korea (English translation follows).

Hyunseung Lee

n ·

VOA와 RFA의 역사와 그들의 미션의 중요성으로 볼 때 이 두 언론은 존경받을 만 하다. 또한 그들의 역사와 공적, 그리고 수많은 기자들의 헌신적인 노력이 결코 폄하되어서는 안 된다. 개인적으로도 두 언론사를 좋아하며 한국어 서비스에 지난 몇 년간 각각 100건, 80건이 넘는 북한 관련 코멘트를 제공해왔다. 북한 문제에서 두 언론의 한국어 서비스는 가뭄의 단비와 같은 역할을 해왔으며, 심지어 한국 내부 문제에서도 좌경화된 언론보다 더 균형 잡힌 뉴스를 제공하는 경우도 적지 않았다.

그러나 역사와 공적이 개혁이 필요 없음을 의미하지는 않는다. 기업이든 국가든 효율성은 가장 중요한 요소 중 하나이며, 비효율성은 부패와 나태를 불러온다. VOA와 RFA 내부에도 이미 많은 문제가 존재하는 것은 공공연한 사실이다. 미국의 준공무원으로 일하면서도 독재국가보다 미국의 정책을 더 비판하거나 심지어 반미적 태도를 보이는 행위들, 기사,영상, 라디어 조회수들이 일반 유튜버나 블로거보다 못한 운영, 창의적이고 열심히 일하는 기자들보다 소극적인 태도를 보이는 이들이 많아지는 현실이다. 정보 전달의 속도와 방식이 변화하는 시대에, 이들 언론의 과거 방식만의 운영은 이들의 존속 위기를 초래할 수 밖에 없었다고 본다.

하지만 비효율성을 개선할 대신 VOA, RFA 의 필요한 서비스들을 없애는 것은 심각한 정책적 오류라고 본다. 효율성을 기준으로만 본다면 비판 받아 마땅하지만, 이들이 생산하는 무형의 가치들, 진실’과 ‘자유민주주의’는 독재와 고립 속에서 살아가는 수많은 이들에게 희망과 용기를 준다. 무엇보다 가장 큰 우려는 한국어 서비스가 폐지될 경우, 북한의 선전과 위선, 거짓을 대응할 대체 언론이 사실상 존재하지 않는다는 점이다. 특히 반미를 국가의 기본 정책과 주민 교육으로 삼는 북한 정권의 반미정책이 미국과 미국민의 안보와 국익에 위협이 되는 것이 사실이기에 이에 진실로 맞서야 하는 정당성도 가지고 있다.

VOA·RFA가 과거의 유산으로만 남을지, 아니면 여전히 자유와 진실을 지키는 언론으로 남을지는 미국 정치의 선택에 달려 있다. 하지만 독재와 공산주의, 위선과 선전에 맞서는 한국어 서비스와 일부 언어 서비스들은 효율성을 높여가며 반드시 그들의 미션을 지속해야 한다. 외부 세계와 단절된 이들에게 VOA·RFA는 단순한 뉴스 채널이 아니라 자유를 향한 희망을 주는 창이기도 하다.

These two media outlets deserve respect for the history of VOA and RFA and the importance of their mission. Also their history, publicity, and the dedicated efforts of countless journalists should never be underestimated. Personally, I like the two journalists and have provided over 100 and 80 North Korean-related comments to the Korean Service over the past few years. The Korean-language services of the two media outlets have played the same role as the counterpart of the drought, and even in the internal affairs of Korea, they have not often provided more balanced news than the lessened media.

But history and publicity doesn't mean there's no need for reform. Efficiency is one of the most important factors, whether it is a company or a nation, and inefficiency brings corruption and corruption. It's a public fact that there are already many problems within the VOA and RFA. It is a reality that there are more people who work as a part-time civil servant in the United States who criticize American policies or even show anti-American attitude than a dictatorial country, articles, videos, and radars who run worse than a regular YouTubers or bloggers, and show petty attitudes than creative and hard-working journalists. In an era where the speed and method of information is changing, I see that their media operation in the past has only led to a crisis of their existence.

But instead of improving inefficiency, removing necessary services of VOA, RFA is seen as a serious policy error. They deserve criticism if you see efficiency only as a basis, but the intangible values they produce, 'truth' and 'liberal democracy' give hope and courage to countless people living in dictatorship and isolation. The biggest concern is that if the Korean-language service is abolished, there will be virtually no alternative media to respond to North Korea's propaganda, hypocrisy, and lies. Since it is true that the anti-American policy of the North Korean regime, especially which uses anti-American as the basic policy of the country and citizen education is a threat to the security and national interest of the United States and the American citizens, so it also has the right to face it.

VOA·RFA will remain a legacy of the past, or it will still remain a press that protects freedom and truth depends on the choice of American politics. However, Korean-language services and some language services, which stand against dictatorship, communism, hypocrisy and propaganda, must increase efficiency and continue their mission. VOA·RFA is not just a news channel, but also a window of hope towards freedom to the outside world.

Chinese media, Hun Sen celebrate White House order to close US-funded news outlets

Asian dissidents, activists voice dismay over funding freeze to Radio Free Asia.

By RFA Staff

2025.03.17

https://www.rfa.org/english/asia/2025/03/17/rfa-hun-sen-china/

Radio Free Asia Tibetan service director Kalden Lodoe, right, prepares to present a newscast at the RFA studio, Jan. 18, 2023. (Gemunu Amarasinghe/RFA)

Representatives of closed Asian societies without free press on Monday welcomed the U.S. administration’s decision to halt broadcasts by Voice of America and freeze funding to Radio Free Asia, while democracy activists and dissidents expressed disbelief and dismay.

China’s state-backed Global Times published an editorial focusing on VOA which it called “a lie factory” and “a thoroughly biased propaganda poison.”

“The so-called beacon of freedom, VOA, has now been discarded by its own government like a dirty rag,” it said.

In a Facebook post, former Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen, who is Senate president and the father of the current premier, called the closure of U.S.-funded “propaganda” outlets “a major contribution to eliminating fake news, disinformation, lies, distortions, incitement, and chaos around the world.”

Hun Sen attends a press conference at the National Assembly after a vote to confirm his son, Hun Manet, as Cambodia's prime minister in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, August 22, 2023. (Cindy Liu/Reuters)

Meanwhile, human rights activists in some of the world’s most repressive countries spoke out in support of what they see as “beacons of hope” and upholders of the truth.

“There’s something I will remember forever … When my mother was told I’d be released after having served my sentence, she was sitting outside on the patio the whole day to wait for me. The first sound of my voice she heard was on Radio Free Asia and that made her cry out loud,” Le Quoc Quan, a Vietnamese dissident lawyer who served 30 months in prison and who now lives in the United States, recalled on Facebook.

‘Significant setback for the democracy’

Another Vietnamese democracy activist, who spent seven years in jail on subversion charges, said RFA and Voice of America had freed his thinking from the strictures of communist rule before he was imprisoned.

“These two stations played a pivotal role in helping me break free from the propaganda and indoctrination of the Communist Party of Vietnam, shaping my beliefs and actions,” Nguyen Tien Trung wrote from exile in Germany.

The discontinuation of RFA and VOA “represents a significant setback for the democracy and human rights movements in Vietnam, China, Asia, and globally,” he wrote.

“Communist parties in China and Vietnam will dominate narratives unchallenged, preventing Asian audiences from hearing alternative perspectives – stories of democratic progress, freedom, and the dignity that comes from respecting human rights.”

The control room of a Radio Free Asia TV studio as Tibetan language service director Kalden Lodoe presents a newscast in Washington, Jan. 18, 2023. (Gemunu Amarasinghe/RFA)

An executive order issued by U.S. President Donald Trump late Friday called for the reduction of non-statutory components of the United States Agency for Global Media, or USAGM, the federal agency that funds RFA, VOA and several other independent global news organizations that broadcast in more than 60 languages.

VOA Director Michael Abramowitz wrote Saturday that virtually the entire staff had been placed on administrative leave.

Staff at RFA were still working Monday and the Washington-based news organization has yet to announce how the funding freeze would impact operations.

Elaine Pearson, Asia director at Human Rights Watch, said it was “devastating to lose Radio Free Asia from the media landscape in Asia.”

“RFA has many courageous reporters who shone a light on rights abuses that authoritarian governments would prefer to hide,” she said in a social media post. “This is a gift to abusive governments in the region.”

RFA reporter in Myanmar, undated. (RFA)

RFA covers some of the countries in Asia where press freedom is the most restricted, including China, North Korea, Myanmar, Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. It sends news in 10 languages through text, social media, radio and television.

Chinese journalist and human rights activist Gao Yu said in a post on X that authorities had warned her against talking to VOA and RFA.

“This made me realize that these two American media outlets are what the Chinese Communist authorities fear the most,” she said. “This is undoubtedly a moment that the Chinese Communist regime will celebrate.”

A fan of RFA’s Cantonese service, the main language spoken in Hong Kong, where opposition politicians and Western governments say political freedoms have been severely curtailed, expressed disappointment about the possible closure.

“I read your RFA Cantonese news every day. You’re doing a great job! It’s such a pity for it to end like this. I hope there’s a turnaround. Keep going!” said the poster, identified as Lukacat Lime.

Messages of support from Cambodians, Burmese

Thousands of messages of support for RFA and VOA flooded Khmer-language internet forums, with readers and listeners expressing their dismay.

“Khmer people need help because if there is no RFA or VOA we don’t know which news we can listen to,” a woman named Sokra wrote.

The United States and other countries have criticized the suppression of democracy in Cambodia in the years since the U.N.-organized an election in 1993, hoping to heal the decades of conflict and genocide after Cambodia became embroiled in the Vietnam War.

“The news of the potential shutdown is devastating,” said Viriya Lim, another RFA Khmer listener.

“Your reporting has been a crucial source of truth and information for so many. Please know that your efforts have made a real difference, and we are incredibly grateful for your service,” Lim wrote on RFA Khmer’s Facebook.

In Myanmar, where successive generations have struggled to throw off military rule, people expressed their appreciation for RFA.

“Because my father listened to RFA early in the morning and late at night since I was young, so I knew about the dictatorship, democracy, civil society organizations and different countries,” Moe Aung wrote on Facebook.

“I will always give thanks to RFA. I pray you continue to stand.”

In South Korea, Ha Tae-kyung, a three-term lawmaker and vocal critic of North Korea’s woeful human rights record, said it felt as if Washington was undermining its standing by shutting RFA and VOA.

“These organizations have been dedicated to North Korean human rights and democratization for decades,” said Ha. “It takes decades to build a well-constructed tower but only a single day to bring it down.”

Beijing’s criticism

The Chinese government did not immediately react to Friday’s executive order. But the Global Times editorial took aim at VOA, claiming that its independence and credibility “have long been questioned and criticized.”

“Known for stirring up conflicts, inciting social divisions, and even participating in regime change efforts, VOA is widely recognized as Washington’s carefully crafted propaganda machine for peaceful evolution, earning itself a notorious reputation on the global stage,” the Global Times said.

It mentioned RFA and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, too, saying that the organizations’ primary function is “to serve Washington’s need to attack other countries based on ideological demands.”

Shahrezad Ghayrat, a journalist with RFA's Uyghur language service, left, live-streams a Uyghur demonstration outside the Thai embassy in Washington, May 5, 2023. (Gemunu Amarasinghe/RFA)

Hu Xijin, a top Chinese propagandist and former Global Times editor, praised the decision, calling RFA “malicious toward China” and the funding cut “greatly satisfying.” He shared his remarks on his WeChat channel, which quickly spread across Chinese state-owned media outlets like iFeng.com and other Chinese social media platforms.

Those remarks were amplified on social media by China’s army of nationalistic “little pink” commentators, who have started targeting VOA’s Chinese and Taiwanese journalists, posting their photos and accusing them of doing “dirty work” and being “yellow-skinned with white hearts.”

On Monday, an op-ed from Beijing Daily, a state-owned media outlet, mocked the shutdown of RFA, RFE, and VOA declaring, “The ‘beacon of freedom’ has collapsed.” and “U.S. hegemony will eventually perish under global condemnation.

Some journalists working for Chinese media, such as Andy Boreham at the state English-language newspaper Shanghai Daily, said the prospect of RFA having to lay off staff over funding cuts was “excellent news.”

The New Zealand-born journalist labelled RFA “one of the U.S.’s most insidious anti-China propaganda outlets.”

RFA is funded by the U.S. Congress but retains full editorial independence from the government. All editorial staff are expected to conduct themselves professionally and ethically and promote the highest standards of journalism.

Edited by RFA staff.

9. South Korean Government: “Strengthening Resident Control” at North Korea’s ‘National People’s Committee Meeting’

Again, RFA is soldiering on.

This is a Google translation.

South Korean Government: “Strengthening Resident Control” at North Korea’s ‘National People’s Committee Meeting’

https://www.rfa.org/korean/in-focus/2025/03/18/north-korea-control-labor-force/

hando@rfa.org

2025.03.18

The 3rd National People's Unit Leaders' Conference was held in Pyongyang, North Korea on the 16th and 17th.

Anchor: North Korea held a National People's Unit Leaders' Conference for the first time in about 18 years since 2007. The South Korean government has determined that the purpose of the conference is to strengthen North Korean authorities' control over its citizens and mobilize labor. Reporter Han Do-hyung reports from Seoul.

North Korea's state-run media reported on the 18th that the 3rd National People's Unit Leaders' Conference was held in Pyongyang on the 16th and 17th, and that "specific practical measures to reform neighborhood and people's unit work to meet the demands of the new era were discussed."

According to North Korean media reports, Vice Premier Kim Myong-hun emphasized in his meeting report that “the People’s Unit is a grassroots organization of social life that connects the people and the people’s government organs and is a stronghold of the people’s lives,” and urged “to thoroughly establish a socialist moral atmosphere and vigorously carry out the struggle against anti-socialism and non-socialism as a mass struggle.”

The National People's Unit Leaders' Zealous Conference, which brings together exemplary and enthusiastic people's unit leaders across the country, was previously held in November 1994 and January 2007.

Regarding North Korea's holding of the 3rd National People's Unit Leaders' Conference, a South Korean Unification Ministry official evaluated it that day as "an attempt to strengthen mobilization and control of residents."

A Ministry of Unification official also explained, “The People’s Unit Organization and Operation Law was first enacted at the Supreme People’s Assembly in November 2023,” adding, “This law was created with the dual purpose of strengthening control and surveillance of residents and mobilizing labor.”

The People's Unit is the smallest administrative unit in North Korea. The head of the People's Unit leads the People's Unit and performs duties such as monitoring the members and reporting on their activities.

North Korea appoints a people's unit leader for each household of 20 to 40, and it is known that people with good loyalty are mainly appointed as people's unit leaders.

The People's Unit Organization Operation Law stipulates that the People's Unit leader convenes a People's Unit meeting at least once a month, guides its members to live in accordance with the socialist lifestyle and moral norms, and checks on their living conditions and health.

According to the Chosun Sinbo, which represents North Korea's position, on April 8th of last year, the People's Unit Organization and Operation Law also includes provisions requiring preferential treatment for the People's Unit leaders.

[Eun-Kyung Kwon] The Light and Darkness of the ‘People’s Anti-Organization Operation Law’

“Possibility of Korea-US-Japan and Korea-China-Japan Foreign Ministers’ Meeting in March”

South Korean Foreign Minister Park Jin, Japanese Foreign Minister Yoko Kamikawa, and Chinese Foreign Minister and Politburo member Wang Yi attend the South Korea-China-Japan Foreign Ministers' Meeting in November 2023.

Meanwhile, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced on the 18th that the foreign ministers of South Korea, China, and Japan will meet in Tokyo on the 22nd to discuss cooperation measures.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesperson Lee Jae-woong explained at a regular press briefing that day that the foreign ministers of South Korea, China, and Japan, including Minister Cho Tae-yeol, Wang Yi, Director of the Foreign Affairs Office of the Communist Party of China Central Committee and Minister of Foreign Affairs, and Japanese Foreign Minister Takeshi Iwaya, plan to broadly exchange opinions on regional and international situations among the three countries.

The Korea-China-Japan Foreign Ministers’ Meeting will be the first in about 1 year and 4 months since the last meeting in Busan in November 2023. The Korean government plans to use this meeting as an opportunity to pursue bilateral talks between Korea, Japan, and Korea, China. These are the words of Spokesperson Lee Jae-woong.

[Lee Jae-woong, Spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Korea] We plan to evaluate the progress made in trilateral cooperation since the 9th Korea-Japan-China Summit held in May of last year, and broadly exchange opinions on the future direction of trilateral cooperation and regional and international situations.

Ministry of Unification: “Preparing to resume Panmunjom tour program”

In addition, the Ministry of Unification announced plans to resume the Panmunjom tour program that had been suspended on the 18th.

A Ministry of Unification official explained, “We are making preparations to operate the program with the goal of resuming tours of Panmunjom next month,” and “We plan to resume ‘special tours’ targeting policy customers first, and then expand to ‘general tours’ that anyone can apply for once we determine that operation is stable.”

The Panmunjom tour program was discontinued in November 2023 when North Korea responded to the government's decision to suspend the September 19 Inter-Korean Military Agreement by declaring its complete termination.

A Unification Ministry official added, “We will closely consult with relevant organizations, including the United Nations Command, regarding the resumption of tours of Panmunjom while taking into consideration the safety of the people and the state of inter-Korean relations.”

This is Han Do-hyung from RFA Free Asia Broadcasting in Seoul.

10. Salmon Report: “46% of North Koreans Estimated to be Malnourished”

This is a Google translation of an RFA report.

We must be aware of the internal indicators of possible instability.

Salmon Report: “46% of North Koreans Estimated to be Malnourished”

https://www.rfa.org/korean/in-focus/2025/03/18/un-rapporteur-north-korea-malnutrition/

Seoul-Hong Seung-wook hongs@rfa.org

2025.03.18

North Korean children suffering from malnutrition

North Korean children suffering from malnutrition rest at a hospital in Haeju, South Hwanghae province, October 2011. (Reuters)

Anchor: A UN human rights report has revealed estimates that nearly half of North Koreans suffering from persistent food shortages are malnourished. The US Ambassador to South Korea reaffirmed that the US administration's goal is to achieve North Korea's denuclearization. Hong Seung-wook reports from Seoul.

A report recently submitted to the UN Human Rights Council by Elizabeth Salmon, UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in North Korea.

According to this, it is estimated that close to half of the population in North Korea, where chronic food insecurity has continued, is suffering from malnutrition.

The report cited data from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and others, explaining that the prevalence of malnutrition in North Korea averaged 45.5% over the three years since 2020, and that 11.8 million people were believed to have suffered from malnutrition during the same period.

The analysis shows that this phenomenon occurred despite North Korea's efforts to increase food production, and that it is the result of a combination of factors including outdated production facilities, poor technology, lack of investment, and natural disasters.

In particular, he added, “It appears that the food shortage has worsened as North Korea has restricted private commercial activities such as markets and reestablished a state monopoly over the distribution of essential goods such as rice and corn.”

It is pointed out that health and hygiene conditions are not improving either.

The report cited the World Health Organization (WHO) designating North Korea as one of 30 countries with a “ high burden of drug-resistant tuberculosis, ” meaning that the high incidence of tuberculosis puts a significant strain on health systems, and said, “There are reports that malnutrition and exposure to extreme cold are increasing tuberculosis.”

He also emphasized that while the national vaccination rate in North Korea was over 96% before the COVID-19 pandemic, it had fallen to below 42% by mid-2021, and that not a single child had been vaccinated against major diseases, including tuberculosis, in 2022.

It was only in August of last year that the country was able to vaccinate more than 800,000 children and 120,000 pregnant women with support from the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF).

Domestic and international experts have pointed out that the essential vaccination system that North Korea has been proud of is collapsing as the health environment in North Korea has worsened before and after the coronavirus outbreak. These are the words of Professor Lee Yo-han of Korea University College of Medicine on the 8th.

[Professor Lee Yo-han, Korea University College of Medicine (Discussion held on the 8th)] One of the things North Korea has been proud of is the rate of essential vaccinations for children, which we can applaud as well. If you think about why North Korea gave up even that, it means that they closed their borders and blocked all supplies and personnel from coming in. It was an opportunity to think again about the fact that North Korea closed its borders for such a long period of time, giving up enormous economic losses and even the basic health services that they had been promoting.

The report found that 52% of households in North Korea dispose of excrement in unsanitary conditions, which has serious implications for public health, including causing diarrhea.

'Unsanitary facilities' include both conventional toilets and improved facilities that are not functioning properly and make it unsafe to dispose of excrement.

As human rights, economic development, and peace and security are interrelated, there have also been assessments that extreme militarism, which invests available resources in weapons development and military operations, and the lack of international cooperation are worsening the lives of North Korean residents.

Since the second half of last year, some embassies in North Korea, including those in Cuba, India, Poland, and Sweden, have resumed operations, but it has been reported that humanitarian aid agency staff, including those from the United Nations, are still unable to enter North Korea.

Regarding the dispatch of North Korean troops to Russia, he pointed out that the conditions of service may in some cases constitute a violation of human rights, and that the fact that North Korea was involved in the war should not have a spillover effect on peace on the Korean Peninsula.

“Behind North Korea’s ‘Health Revolution’ Confidence Is ‘North Korea-Russia Cooperation’”

Joseph Yun: “North Korea’s Denuclearization is a Clear Goal… Continued ROK-US-Japan Cooperation”

US Ambassador to Korea: “US Administration Will Commit to Denuclearization of North Korea”

Meanwhile, on the 18th, Chargé d'Affaires Joseph Yoon of the United States to South Korea reaffirmed at a symposium jointly hosted by the American Chamber of Commerce in Korea (AMCHAM) and the U.S. Embassy in South Korea that there is no doubt that the U.S. administration is committed to denuclearization.

Joseph Yoon, Chargé d'Affaires of the United States to Korea, speaks at a special meeting hosted by the American Chamber of Commerce in Korea (AMCHAM) held at the Four Seasons Hotel in Jongno-gu, Seoul on the 18th.

Deputy Ambassador Yoon said the U.S. administration will “begin engaging with North Korea sooner or later” and that U.S. President Donald Trump wants to negotiate and reach an agreement with North Korea.

This is the same position that the U.S. administration has expressed several times regarding its direction toward North Korea's denuclearization.

[Acting U.S. Ambassador to Korea Joseph Yoon (Sejong Institute discussion on the 11th)] The Trump administration has reaffirmed that the denuclearization of North Korea is the goal of all approaches to North Korea. Denuclearization is a goal that can never be ruled out and is an element that can never be removed from U.S. policy toward North Korea.

Deputy Ambassador Yoon emphasized that there was absolutely no possibility of “Korea Passing,” or South Korea being excluded from US-North Korea talks, as some had suggested at the time.

This is Hong Seung-wook of RFA's Free Asia Broadcasting in Seoul.

Editor Yang Seong-won

11. S. Korea's sensitive country listing 'not a big deal,' says acting U.S. envoy

It is a good thing we have Ambassador Yun in the acting envoy position.

The alliance should be grateful to the Biden administration for having the forthrought to put him in place during these turbulent times in South Korea until a new Ambassador can be appointed (we still do not have a nomination yet). And the Trump administration should be very grateful as well.

(LEAD) S. Korea's sensitive country listing 'not a big deal,' says acting U.S. envoy | Yonhap News Agency

en.yna.co.kr · by Chang Dong-woo · March 18, 2025

(ATTN: UPDATES with more details in paras 10, 13-18; ADDS photo)

By Chang Dong-woo

SEOUL, March 18 (Yonhap) -- The designation of South Korea as a sensitive country by the United States was due to "mishandling of sensitive information" during exchanges between science research institutions under the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the acting American ambassador to Seoul said Tuesday, calling it "not a big deal."

According to the DOE last week, South Korea was placed in the "lowest" category of the department's "sensitive and other designated countries list" (SCL) in early January.

The designation made recent headlines in South Korea, as it was made during the final weeks of former U.S. President Joe Biden's administration and shortly after President Yoon Suk Yeol imposed martial law in December.

Some observers in Seoul had speculated that the decision may have been influenced by recent discussions in South Korea's political circles calling for Seoul's nuclear armament.

Joseph Yun, the acting U.S. ambassador to Seoul, suggested that the DOE listing was not a serious matter affecting bilateral relations, saying "this whole thing got out of control" and the matter was "not a big deal."

"And I've been trying to find out exactly what it is. Essentially the sensitive country list is confined to DOE laboratories. As you know, the DOE has a number of laboratories," Yun said at a business conference hosted by the American Chamber of Commerce in Korea (AMCHAM).

Joseph Yun, the acting U.S. ambassador to South Korea, speaks at a business forum hosted by the American Chamber of Commerce in Korea at a hotel in Seoul on March, 18, 2025. (Yonhap)

According to Yun, there were over 2,000 Korean students, researchers and government workers visiting these laboratories last year, some of which have sensitive material.

The acting ambassador explained that Seoul was put on the DOE list due to "some mishandling of sensitive information" that should not be taken out of laboratories but stopped short of elaborating further.

Yun said the DOE list issue was something he had "never heard of" before and only found out about it a few days ago himself.

In addition, the acting ambassador highlighted that South Korea and the U.S. agreed to cooperate as a tier 1 country in fields of advanced science, and stressed that suggesting the listing as having implications in practical research cooperation was "simply wrong."

On Monday, Seoul's foreign ministry said South Korea's placement on the SCL was because of security issues related to DOE-affiliated research institutions rather than a broad foreign policy decision.

The U.S. government is said to have told the ministry that South Korea's SCL inclusion was imposed due to violations of security regulations during South Korean researchers' visits to DOE laboratories or participation in joint research projects.

Joseph Yun (R), acting U.S. ambassador to South Korea, and James Kim, chairperson of the American Chamber of Commerce in Korea, attend a meeting of officials of the American business body at a Seoul hotel on March 18, 2025. (Yonhap)

According to a report from the DOE's Office of the Inspector General (OIG) to Congress, a contract worker at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) was terminated between Oct. 1, 2023, and March 31, 2024, after the person attempted to board a flight to South Korea with export-controlled information on nuclear reactor design software.

Regarding Pyongyang, the acting ambassador said he believes U.S. President Donald Trump "wants to negotiate and reach a deal with North Korea," saying Trump "has never said a bad thing" about North Korean leader Kim Jong-un.

"I have no doubt he wants to (reach a deal with North Korea). How he does it is still up in the air," Yun said, while noting that key positions at the state and defense departments that handle Korean affairs need to be filled under the current U.S. administration to engage with Pyongyang in earnest.

He also touched on the topic of Trump's tariff policies, saying the measures will "create new opportunities for people bringing goods and services from America" to South Korea, especially in the agriculture, digital and services sectors.

The envoy suggested Seoul take proactive measures, such as opening up particular sectors or reducing non-tariff barriers, to respond better against Washington's country-by-country reciprocal tariffs, expected to be rolled out in April.

He also pointed to the shipbuilding sector as being the field "that's going to be huge" for South Korean companies in the U.S. in the near future, highlighting Hanwha Ocean's recent purchase of an American shipyard in Philadelphia and the company's maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) deal with the U.S. Navy.

(END)

en.yna.co.kr · by Chang Dong-woo · March 18, 2025

12. (Sensitive Countries List) If this continues, it will really be 'Korea passing'... "Political circles should refrain from immature nuclear armament theories" [view]

This is a Google translation of a JoongAng Ilbo article.

If this continues, it will really be 'Korea passing'... "Political circles should refrain from immature nuclear armament theories" [view]

https://www.joongang.co.kr/article/25321146

JoongAng Ilbo

input 2025.03.17 00:49

Update 2025.03.17 03:51

See more update information

Reporter Kim Hyung-goo

Energy Secretary Chris Wright speaks to reporters at the White House in Washington, D.C. on May 26 (local time). AP=Yonhap News

The background of the U.S. government's 'designation of Korea as a sensitive country' is still unclear, and the repercussions are spreading as it becomes a topic of political strife between the ruling and opposition parties. Concerns are growing that 'Korea passing' is becoming a reality, as Korea is omitted from the Indo-Pacific region tour of Pete Hegseth, the first Secretary of Defense under the second term of Donald Trump.

According to JoongAng Ilbo's comprehensive coverage of local South Korean and US diplomatic authorities, current and former government officials, and think tank personnel in Washington on the 16th (local time), the decision to designate a sensitive country in early January is likely to have been a hasty measure by the Joe Biden administration amid a complex mix of factors, including the political chaos of martial law and impeachment, the growing debate over self-nuclear armament following President Trump's election, and the timing of the change of power in the US and the power vacuum in South Korea.

“The Department of Energy is the ‘technology control’ agency for nuclear nonproliferation”

A government source told JoongAng Ilbo, “Since the Department of Energy, which is in charge of ‘technology control’ for nuclear nonproliferation, designated it as a sensitive country, it is possible to infer that it is related to the nuclear armament theory in South Korea.” Evans Revere, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, also analyzed, “As public support for the independent nuclear armament theory is rapidly spreading, related remarks by some political leaders and President Yoon Seok-yeol seem to have raised concerns among U.S. policymakers.”

President Yoon Seok-yeol speaks at the '2023 Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of National Defense Work Report' held at the Blue House guest house on January 11, 2023. Photo: Office of the President

Since the Yoon Seok-yeol government came to power, discussions on self-nuclear armament have become active, and the Biden administration, concerned about the global nuclear domino effect, has been keeping a close eye on this and has sounded several warnings. The trigger was President Yoon’s remark at the Ministry of National Defense and Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ business report on January 11, 2023, that “we can also possess our own nuclear weapons.” Although he added the premise that “if North Korea’s nuclear threat intensifies,” the remark by a sitting president suggesting the possibility of possessing nuclear weapons caused a stir. The next day, the U.S. State Department immediately expressed its wariness, saying, “Denuclearization is the core of the ROK-U.S. alliance.”

Later, on April 26 of the same year, during President Yoon’s visit to the U.S., South Korea and the U.S. agreed to strengthen the integrated extended deterrence through the “Washington Declaration.” However, on August 21, immediately after the South Korea-U.S.-Japan trilateral summit held at Camp David on August 18 of that year, National Intelligence Service Director Cho Tae-yong announced his intention to pursue a revision of the “South Korea-U.S. Atomic Energy Agreement,” and following President Trump’s election in November of last year, calls for nuclear armament boiled over among major presidential candidates. A government official said, “In this context, the statement that ‘everything, including South Korea’s nuclear armament, must be on the table’ came from Elbridge Colby, the nominee for Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, and I wonder if it influenced the Biden administration’s decision to designate South Korea as a sensitive country at the end of its term.”

Absence of summit diplomacy… “US will not rush”

The key is whether the designation of a sensitive country can be lifted before the April 15th enforcement date. There are concerns that it will be difficult to have substantive and binding negotiations in a situation where the normal diplomatic control tower is not functioning properly. A government official said, “From the U.S. perspective, there is no reason to rush.” Rather, it cannot be ruled out that the Trump administration may use the removal of the sensitive country designation as a leverage maximization card to demand major concessions from Korea in negotiations such as tariffs.

Graphic image of the 25 countries in total, according to the U.S. Department of Energy's 'Sensitive and Other Designated Countries'.

However, many point out that we should mobilize all available diplomatic power to accurately understand the intentions of the U.S. government and move to resolve the issue. A government official said, “Even if top-level communication is difficult, we should continue to maintain contact between working-level officials of Korea and the U.S. and secure a stable communication channel.”

“Stopping nuclear armament talks would help solve the problem”

In particular, there are opinions that the political circles’ immature nuclear armament argument should be restrained at least until the desired result of lifting the designation of a sensitive country is achieved. Bruce Bennett, a senior researcher at the RAND Corporation, emphasized that “it would be realistically helpful for the fundamental resolution of the situation if the two major political parties in Korea stopped discussing their own nuclear armament.” This means that discussions of nuclear armament for strategic purposes should be handled with the utmost caution and that external messages should be closely managed so as not to cause misunderstandings in the international community, including the United States.

Some voices warn against over-interpreting or politically abusing this incident. A senior government official with experience working with the U.S. Department of Energy said, “The Department of Energy’s decision to designate a sensitive country is nothing more or less than a step toward strengthening ‘preliminary review’ at the exchange and cooperation stage.” He added, “If we do not calmly assess the situation and respond accordingly, the possibility of making a mistake increases.”

However, it is required to move as quickly as possible to resolve the situation so that cracks do not form in the foundation of the ROK-US alliance. David Maxwell, deputy director of the Asia Pacific Strategy Center and former operations staff officer of the ROK-US Combined Forces Command, said, “We must work with the Trump administration to correct the problem as soon as possible so that trust in the ROK-US alliance does not weaken.”

Washington = Correspondent Kim Hyeong-gu kim.hyounggu@joongang.co.kr [출처:중앙일보] https://www.joongang.co.kr/article/25321146

13. Acting president stresses need for strong joint defense posture with visit to CFC command post

Good to see the acting president in the bunker at CP Tango.

Anyone know what TANGO stands for? (IYKYK)

(LEAD) Acting president stresses need for strong joint defense posture with visit to CFC command post | Yonhap News Agency

en.yna.co.kr · by Lee Minji · March 18, 2025

(ATTN: RECASTS dateline; CHANGES photo; ADDS remarks)

SEJONG/SEOUL, March 18 (Yonhap) -- Acting President Choi Sang-mok stressed the importance of maintaining a strong joint defense posture Tuesday while making a visit to a command post of the South Korea-U.S. Combined Forces Command currently undergoing an annual springtime joint military exercise.

Choi visited the Command Post Theater Air Naval Ground Operations (CP Tango) in Seongnam, just south of Seoul, to inspect the Freedom Shield exercises, set to finish Thursday following an 11-day run, and encourage South Korean and U.S. military officers, according to his office.

"Joint exercises and drills are the symbol of the strong combined defense posture and are essential for enhancing deterrence against North Korea," he said.

"The CP Tango is well-equipped with facilities for commanding and controlling the South Korean and U.S. Army, Navy and Air Force assets ... and seeing South Korean and U.S. service members working side by side, I can truly feel the strength of the South Korea-U.S. alliance," he added.

Choi also highlighted that the alliance has played a crucial role in South Korea's development from the ashes of the 1950-53 Korean War to become a donor nation providing assistance to other countries, the finance ministry said.

During the visit, Gen. Xavier Brunson, Commander of the United Nations Command, Combined Forces Command and U.S. Forces Korea (USFK), welcomed Choi and provided a mission briefing, the USFK said in a separate release.

"By building readiness, training, and interoperability through exercises like Freedom Shield 25, we ensure we are fully prepared to deter aggression and, if necessary, defeat any adversary," Brunson was quoted as saying.

Acting President Choi Sang-mok (C) visits CP Tango, a key U.S.-controlled wartime command bunker complex, on March 18, 2025, where he is briefed by Gen. Xavier Brunson (R), Commander of the United Nations Command, Combined Forces Command and U.S. Forces Korea, on the annual Freedom Shield exercise between the allies under way, in this photo provided by South Korea's finance ministry. (PHOTO NOT FOR SALE) (Yonhap)

nyway@yna.co.kr

(END)

en.yna.co.kr · by Lee Minji · March 18, 2025

14. South Korea's 'sensitive country' designation linked to attempted leak of U.S. reactor design software

Hmmm... What is the rest of the story? What is the real story?

South Korea's 'sensitive country' designation linked to attempted leak of U.S. reactor design software

U.S. cites security concerns, including reactor software leak, while South Korean opposition links designation to nuclear armament

https://www.chosun.com/english/national-en/2025/03/18/ZD5GHPXVIVEMNB5HZTMPXBYZDQ/

By Kim Eun-joong (Washington),

Kim Mi-geon

Published 2025.03.18. 14:56

A view of the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) under the U.S. Department of Energy. /DOE

The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) designation of South Korea as a “sensitive country” has ignited domestic controversy, with a recent revelation further fueling the debate. It has emerged that two years ago, a contract employee at a DOE-affiliated research lab was caught attempting to take nuclear reactor design software to South Korea. While discussions in South Korea have largely focused on political and policy-related implications—including calls from conservative factions for nuclear armament and broader political tensions such as emergency martial law and impeachment debates involving President Yoon Suk-yeol—U.S. authorities have reportedly cited multiple security incidents involving South Korea as a key justification for the designation. South Korea has never officially declared an intention to develop nuclear weapons nor communicated such plans to the United States through diplomatic channels.

According to a report submitted to Congress in the first half of last year by the DOE’s Office of Inspector General (OIG), a contractor employee at Idaho National Laboratory (INL), a DOE-affiliated facility, was apprehended while attempting to take reactor design software to South Korea. The incident occurred between Oct. 1, 2023, and Mar. 31, 2024, and was listed as the first case in the report. The official account of the incident is detailed in the U.S. Department of OIG Semiannual Report to Congress for the period ending Mar. 31, 2024. The report states that the employee was caught at an airport attempting to board a flight to South Korea while in possession of export-controlled, proprietary reactor software owned by INL. The employee was subsequently terminated, and investigations by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) remain ongoing.

The OIG further reported that a search of the employee’s government emails and chat records revealed awareness of export control restrictions and communications with a foreign government. While the report did not specify which government was involved, the attempt to take reactor design materials to South Korea strongly suggests it was the South Korean government.

A diplomatic source familiar with the issue stated, “Following the controversy over South Korea’s designation as a sensitive country, U.S. authorities have pointed to this case, among others, as part of their concerns regarding security risks.” On Mar. 17, South Korea’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said, “It has been determined that South Korea was included in the lowest category of the sensitive country list due to security concerns rather than diplomatic policy issues.” In response to the designation, high-level discussions are being arranged between U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright and South Korean Minister of Trade, Industry and Energy Ahn Duk-geun.

Excerpt from a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Inspector General report submitted to Congress in early 2023. /DOE

The sensitive country list is managed internally by the DOE’s Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence (OCI) for reasons including national security, counterterrorism, nuclear nonproliferation, and regional stability. When asked about the issue on Mar. 10, the U.S. Department of State said it had no involvement and directed inquiries to the DOE, suggesting the designation was made independently of broader diplomatic or security policy considerations. A source familiar with the matter noted that even DOE officials overseeing South Korea-related affairs were unaware of the designation in advance.

The “other designated countries” category within the sensitive country list includes close U.S. allies such as Israel and Taiwan, both key partners in the Indo-Pacific region. The DOE has officially confirmed that South Korea has been added to its Sensitive and Other Designated Countries List, placing it in the lowest category. Despite this designation, a DOE spokesperson emphasized that there are no new restrictions on bilateral cooperation in science and technology between the two nations. The DOE also expressed its intention to continue collaborating with South Korea on mutual interests.

The Biden administration’s decision to implement the designation between December 2024 and January 2025 came at a time when nuclear armament discussions in South Korea had largely faded amid political turmoil over martial law and impeachment debates involving President Yoon. Nevertheless, opposition politicians in South Korea have condemned the designation as a diplomatic failure, linking it to past discussions on nuclear armament. Lawmaker Wi Sung-lac, a Democratic Party foreign and security expert, stated, “The U.S. likely harbored deep concerns over nuclear armament discussions in South Korea.” Kim Joon-hyung, a lawmaker from the minor progressive Rebuilding Korea Party (RKP), added, “Reckless advocacy for nuclear armament has played a key role in creating this situation.” Former Vice Foreign Minister Choi Jong-kun criticized the Yoon administration, stating, “The U.S. could not trust a government driven by the twisted ambition of pursuing independent nuclear armament.” A former senior South Korean diplomat dismissed such claims, arguing, “It is nonsensical to suggest that a democratic ally would be sanctioned simply because some politicians, scholars, or media outlets have discussed nuclear armament.”

While the Biden administration remains firmly opposed to measures exceeding extended deterrence—such as redeploying U.S. tactical nuclear weapons to the Korean Peninsula or introducing a NATO-style nuclear-sharing arrangement—debates in Washington have evolved. Under the Trump administration, some policymakers and analysts began exploring the possibility of a nuclear option for South Korea in response to North Korea’s advancing nuclear and missile capabilities. Republican Senators James Risch, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Roger Wicker, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, have both advocated for considering the redeployment of U.S. nuclear weapons to South Korea. Elbridge Colby, nominee for deputy undersecretary of defense for policy and a close aide to Vice President J.D. Vance, has also argued that “all options, including independent nuclear armament for South Korea, should be on the table to maintain military balance with China.” Additionally, the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation recently proposed deploying B61 nuclear bombs—the only known U.S. tactical nuclear weapons—to Osan and Gunsan in South Korea as a response to nuclear threats from North Korea, China, and Russia.

15. Surveillance mandate breeds discontent among N. Korean party ranks

What does this portend for the future?

Can this result in resistance potential?

Surveillance mandate breeds discontent among N. Korean party ranks - Daily NK English

"The honor of being a party member is gradually diminishing, and some even regret joining," a source claimed

By Seon Hwa - March 18, 2025

dailynk.com · by Seon Hwa · March 18, 2025

North Korean students listening to a lecture at a university in early 2024. (Rodong Sinmun, News1)

The North Korean authorities have ordered crackdowns on the distribution of “impure” South Korean media and foreign electronic documents, while pushing party members to increase surveillance of each other. This has caused discomfort among some members.

According to a Daily NK source in South Hwanghae province recently, Haeju’s party committee directed party cells and lower-level organizations in early March to block “impure recordings” and outside electronic documents, making surveillance a priority party activity for the month.

The city’s party committee warned members that people in families, workplaces and villages might not be following party doctrine. It instructed members to “keep a keen eye on such people with party consciousness and eagle-eyed vision, spot problems and report them.”

All party members were assigned the “shared task” of closely monitoring coworkers and neighbors for unusual behavior. They were also required to engage in mutual criticism by selecting targets from among themselves.

The committee threatened “political blame and criticism” for members who performed superficial criticism or evaded their duties. Essentially, they were asked to suspect, watch, and denounce those closest to them.

With these surveillance directives, some party members have expressed frustration at being turned into “party spies.”

“People are very sensitive about mutual criticism nowadays,” the source said. “Shared party tasks traditionally meant dividing economic responsibilities or project work among members. But with the party now telling them to be spies, many members question why they worked so hard to join the party.”

“The honor of being a party member is gradually diminishing, and some even regret joining,” he added. “People are beginning to think that while it’s good to become a party member, it’s even better not to be one.”

Despite harsh crackdowns on accessing outside media following laws like the 2020 “Reactionary Ideology and Culture Rejection Act” and 2021 “Youth Education Guarantee Act,” public consumption of foreign content hasn’t decreased.

“The fact that blocking impure videos and outside documents became a party project shows just how widespread this material is,” the source said. “No matter how much surveillance intensifies, such behavior won’t disappear completely.”

Read in Korean

dailynk.com · by Seon Hwa · March 18, 2025

16. Beyond denuclearization: S. Korea's case for conditional nuclear armament

Excerpts:

If we were to establish principles regarding 1) North Korean nuclear weapons, 2) U.S. relations, 3) nuclear policy, and 4) transforming North Korea, we should consider the following:

First, North Korea must never be officially recognized as a nuclear state, regardless of circumstances. However, we must pragmatically treat North Korea as a “virtual nuclear state” when formulating our response strategies.

Second, close cooperation with the United States—both before and after any actions—is essential. Prior coordination with Washington is particularly crucial to prevent “Korea-passing.”

Third, South Korea must seriously consider adopting a “nuke for a nuke” response policy as the North Korean nuclear threat intensifies. While strengthening Washington’s extended deterrence commitment, we should explore all options: redeploying U.S. tactical nuclear weapons to the Korean Peninsula, expanding South Korea’s peaceful nuclear energy rights, or developing our own nuclear deterrent.

Fourth, we must persistently pursue North Korean liberalization. We should continuously explain to North Koreans why Kim Jong Un’s “two hostile states theory” is fundamentally flawed and promote the flow of outside information into North Korea. This includes maintaining offers for dialogue, exchanges, and humanitarian aid, regardless of Pyongyang’s response.

Beyond denuclearization: S. Korea's case for conditional nuclear armament - Daily NK English

South Korea shouldn't see Trump's approach as simply negative or something to fear

By Gil-sup Kwak - March 18, 2025

dailynk.com · by Gil-sup Kwak · March 17, 2025

President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un shake hands at the 2018 U.S.-North Korea summit. / Image: Kevin Lim/THE STRAITS TIMES

The world recently witnessed the United States suspending military aid to Ukraine after President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance publicly berated Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to his face.

This scene starkly illustrates how the world is rapidly returning to great power politics and neo-imperialism governed by the law of the jungle. Meanwhile, South Korea finds itself floundering, mired in a political crisis following the presidential impeachment and emergency declaration of martial law.

A Call for Conditional Nuclear Armament

When Trump took office for his second term in January, I proposed that Prime Minister Han Duck-soo—an experienced security and economic expert with strong U.S. connections who was impeached without proper justification—should be reinstated quickly. South Korea could then proactively lead discussions with the United States based on our shared values and, if necessary, play the “conditional nuclear armament” card.

Unfortunately, South Korea’s president—or acting president—who should be leading the nation has been absent, unable to even call Trump once. It’s frustrating and infuriating to hear talk of “Korea-passing”—the possibility that Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un might engage in direct negotiations without South Korean involvement.

We must approach this rationally. South Korea needs to quickly resolve its leadership vacuum and shift to a strategy that strengthens our preparedness rather than clinging to the clearly limited “North Korean denuclearization” policy based on international norms and goodwill from our adversaries.

We cannot ignore several critical factors:

The North Korean threat has intensified to unprecedented levels
The relationship between redeploying tactical nuclear weapons and Trump’s strategy to contain China
Japan’s existing authority to reprocess used nuclear fuel and enrich uranium
Near-unanimous public support in South Korea for developing our own nuclear arsenal

As I emphasized in January: “South Korea must consider an ‘independent nuclear arsenal’ based on self-defense provisions in Article 10 of the NPT as the North Korean nuclear threat continues to escalate. However, we should publicly discuss ‘conditional nuclear armament’ where South Korea would return to non-nuclear status if North Korea abandons its weapons. This approach would also strengthen our position when negotiating with the United States on North Korea policy, security, and trade issues.”

Four Key Principles for Policy Toward North Korea and the U.S.

If we were to establish principles regarding 1) North Korean nuclear weapons, 2) U.S. relations, 3) nuclear policy, and 4) transforming North Korea, we should consider the following:

First, North Korea must never be officially recognized as a nuclear state, regardless of circumstances. However, we must pragmatically treat North Korea as a “virtual nuclear state” when formulating our response strategies.

Second, close cooperation with the United States—both before and after any actions—is essential. Prior coordination with Washington is particularly crucial to prevent “Korea-passing.”

Third, South Korea must seriously consider adopting a “nuke for a nuke” response policy as the North Korean nuclear threat intensifies. While strengthening Washington’s extended deterrence commitment, we should explore all options: redeploying U.S. tactical nuclear weapons to the Korean Peninsula, expanding South Korea’s peaceful nuclear energy rights, or developing our own nuclear deterrent.

Fourth, we must persistently pursue North Korean liberalization. We should continuously explain to North Koreans why Kim Jong Un’s “two hostile states theory” is fundamentally flawed and promote the flow of outside information into North Korea. This includes maintaining offers for dialogue, exchanges, and humanitarian aid, regardless of Pyongyang’s response.

Adapting to a Changing World

The global order is transforming rapidly. Trump is completely upending international norms, actively courting Russian President Vladimir Putin to join his China containment strategy while pursuing maximum economic benefits globally, including from Ukraine. This exemplifies his “America First” approach.

South Korea shouldn’t see Trump’s approach as simply negative or something to fear. We must wisely adapt to changing circumstances. In this era of unlimited national competition where no one will back you up unconditionally, a conceptual shift is vital. Like Trump, South Korea should position itself to participate in the massive post-war reconstruction projects in both Russia and Ukraine after their conflict ends.

The same strategic thinking applies to our diplomacy with the United States, China, and Japan. We shouldn’t hesitate to question established frameworks that have long supported South Korea, such as the NPT regime and traditional foreign policy approaches. We must boldly craft plans A, B, and C based on “Korea First.”

Read in Korean

dailynk.com · by Gil-sup Kwak · March 17, 2025

17. I moved to South Korea without knowing anyone. A family of strangers took me in, and we're still in touch 18 years later.

The Korea I know and love.

I moved to South Korea without knowing anyone. A family of strangers took me in, and we're still in touch 18 years later.

Business Insider · by Nick Adams Pandolfo

Travel

Essay by Nick Adams Pandolfo

2025-03-16T21:03:01Z

Facebook Email X LinkedIn Copy Link Impact Link

Read in app

The Kims took in the author and made him feel less lonely. Courtesy of the author

I moved to South Korea when I was 24 to teach English.
I was lonelier than I had ever been when I met a local family.
We are still in touch 18 years later, and their daughter is the age I was when I met them.

My life in Korea got off to a rough start.

Six days after settling into suburban Seoul to teach English, I arrived at my apartment to find my key didn't work. Strange, I thought. The key had worked that morning when I left.

I walked to the school and found all my belongings in garbage bags. The owner informed me that he didn't have a job for me after all and then loaded my stuff into the school van. He was passing me along to a friend on the other side of Seoul who needed a teacher. Without much agency, I fell in line.

The new apartment was nestled at the end of a rundown alley. It was small, musty, and filled with sterile fluorescent light. The new town was on the very outskirts of an expanding metropolis, the last stop on the newest subway line. To fill the time, I signed up for taekwondo in the evenings. I was the only adult in a dojo full of small children, some of whom I taught during the day. It was like that episode of Seinfeld where Kramer takes karate. I Skyped home often from dark and smoky PC bangs (internet cafés) to connect to the people who knew me.

I was lonelier than I had ever been. Then I met the Kims.

They asked me to teach their daughter English

They owned the restaurant at the end of my alley. It was called The Pig House and served exactly what you'd expect from a restaurant with that name. Winding aluminum ducts snaked down like tentacles to the grills at each table.

One day, a woman approached me. It was a friend of theirs who spoke English who said the Kims asked if I would tutor their daughter, Eujin, who was six. I agreed. I gave Eujin lessons on the heated floor of a small room in the back of the restaurant, often while her dad, Byungdong, watched Korean soap operas beside us.

Soon, I was having dinner there most nights after taekwondo. Eujin's mom, Myungjoo, bought an English phrase book that she used as a tool in our nightly conversations. Once, frustrated with each other and eager to practice English, I witnessed an argument using the book. Myungjoo searched for the right insult.

"Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall," she over-enunciated.

Byungdong grabbed the book, flipping pages for the proper retort. A full minute passed.

"You don't know what you are talking about," he clapped back, his face contorting as it always would when he tried to pronounce English words.

They were what I needed

Our relationship deepened. They took me to noraebangs (karaoke rooms) with their extended family. I spent Chuseok, Korean Thanksgiving, with them. On weekends, sometimes we would pile into Byungdong's taxi and go hiking in places I never would have found. Other times I took them into Seoul to explore the neighborhoods I was discovering because they rarely went into the city.

I realized throughout all of this my loneliness was melting away. But it was more than that. As an only child of a divorced family, spending time with the Kims was like therapy I never knew I needed.

I left Korea after seven months but never lost contact with the Kims. Today, Eujin is 24, the age I was when we met. I have kids of my own who are roughly the ages she and her brother Woonghee were back then. Eujin's English is great, and we Skype regularly. She sends my kids Christmas gifts. I give her interview advice. We talk about the Squid Game and share recipes.

The Kims want to come to the US, and we've told them they will always have a place to stay. After all, that's what family's for.

Essay
Health

Business Insider · by Nick Adams Pandolfo

De Oppresso Liber,

David Maxwell

Vice President, Center for Asia Pacific Strategy

Senior Fellow, Global Peace Foundation

Editor, Small Wars Journal

Twitter: @davidmaxwell161

Phone: 202-573-8647

email: david.maxwell161@gmail.com

De Oppresso Liber,

David Maxwell

Vice President, Center for Asia Pacific Strategy

Senior Fellow, Global Peace Foundation

Editor, Small Wars Journal

Twitter: @davidmaxwell161

email: david.maxwell161@gmail.com

If you do not read anything else in the 2017 National Security Strategy read this on page 14:

"A democracy is only as resilient as its people. An informed and engaged citizenry is the fundamental requirement for a free and resilient nation. For generations, our society has protected free press, free speech, and free thought. Today, actors such as Russia are using information tools in an attempt to undermine the legitimacy of democracies. Adversaries target media, political processes, financial networks, and personal data. The American public and private sectors must recognize this and work together to defend our way of life. No external threat can be allowed to shake our shared commitment to our values, undermine our system of government, or divide our Nation."

Access NSS HERE

Company Name | Website

America’s Allies Are Shaken, and Now They’re Taking Action

North Korea makes new US military demands of Trump

Why It Matters

What To Know

What People Are Saying

What Happens Next

South Korea’s Hanwha Takes Stake in Australian Shipbuilder Austal

Hanwha plans to engage with Austal about board representation

North Korea rejects G7 call for denuclearization, vows to 'strengthen' nuclear forces

Related

What to do with North Korean POWs in Ukraine? Kyiv, Seoul discuss

Ukraine says it has captured North Korean soldiers in Russia’s Kursk region. Thousands more are thought to have been killed or injured

https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/east-asia/article/3302763/what-do-north-korean-pows-kyiv-seoul-discuss?module=perpetual_scroll_0&pgtype=article

How Ukraine’s Offensive in Russia’s Kursk Region Unraveled

How the tide turned

Russia’s breakthrough moment

Fears of a new front

Whether Korea-Japan warming survives Seoul turmoil is up in the air - Asia Times

Sign up for one of our free newsletters

Hyunseung Lee

Chinese media, Hun Sen celebrate White House order to close US-funded news outlets

Asian dissidents, activists voice dismay over funding freeze to Radio Free Asia.

‘Significant setback for the democracy’

Messages of support from Cambodians, Burmese

Beijing’s criticism

(LEAD) S. Korea's sensitive country listing 'not a big deal,' says acting U.S. envoy | Yonhap News Agency

(LEAD) Acting president stresses need for strong joint defense posture with visit to CFC command post | Yonhap News Agency

South Korea's 'sensitive country' designation linked to attempted leak of U.S. reactor design software

Surveillance mandate breeds discontent among N. Korean party ranks - Daily NK English

Beyond denuclearization: S. Korea's case for conditional nuclear armament - Daily NK English

I moved to South Korea without knowing anyone. A family of strangers took me in, and we're still in touch 18 years later.

They asked me to teach their daughter English

Related stories

They were what I needed