Quotes of the Day:

"The aim of the wise is to serve, not to rule."

– Aristotle

“Do not fear making mistakes; fear not learning from them.”

– Epictetus

"Youth ages, immaturity is outgrown. ignorance can be educated, and drunkenness sobered, but stupid lasts forever."

– Aristophanes

1. As a North Korean defector, why I oppose the impeachment of the South Korean president.

2. Why the left in South Korea may regret removing President Yoon

3. US, South Korea resume some live-fire drills after accidental bombing

4. Why US labeled South Korea ‘sensitive,’ and what’s at stake

5. What's behind delay in Yoon Suk Yeol verdict?

6. North Korea's bitcoin reserve thought to be 3rd largest in world: report

7.  N. Korea urges fight against anti-socialism at meeting of heads of 'neighborhood units'

8.Hegseth Skips South Korea Visit as Leadership Vacuum Takes Toll

9. What Korea Means for Ukraine

10. North Korean human rights groups affected by Trump's aid freeze

11. North Korean troops key to Russian advances in Kursk, says Ukraine

12.  North Korea orders parents to give children names that reflect revolutionary spirit

13. “North Korea intends to spread ‘North Korea’s denuclearization impossibility theory’ through Russia”

14. Ukraine says it destroyed three North Korean artillery guns in Russia’s Kursk

15. Rare North Korean event gathers heads of ‘people’s units’ that spy on citizens

16. UN gives WHO the green light to send $63K in vaccine assistance to North Korea

17. S. Korea making list of items to import from U.S. for tariff negotiations: trade minister

18. U.S. confirms S. Korea's inclusion on DOE list unrelated to nuclear buildup call: FM

1. As a North Korean defector, why I oppose the impeachment of the South Korean president.

A powerful essay from a friend and a colleague at the Center for Asia Pacific Strategy, Ms. Jihyun Park.

Conclusion:

Therefore, the political stability and solution for South Korea is, above all, to once again establish liberal democracy. As a defector from North Korea, I know well how precious freedom and democracy are in South Korea and how much effort is needed to protect them. South Korea must now establish politics that prioritizes national security and the freedom of the people, with a single voice that transcends ideological or partisan conflicts, on the foundation of true democracy.

To resolve this situation, first, politicians must act with the security and liberal democracy of the country as their top priority. Second, the people must be able to make the right choices to protect freedom and democracy without being swayed by ideology. Third, it is time to overcome political conflict and join forces for the future of South Korea. As a defector who is speaking out against impeachment, I hope that South Korea can once again protect the values of democracy and freedom. It is time for us to work together to realize true democracy where the freedom and rights of the people are guaranteed throughout this entire process.

게시판

As a North Korean defector, why I oppose the impeachment of the South Korean president.

https://m.blog.naver.com/freedom88-/223802444801

freedom88-

3시간 전

 이웃추가

본문 기타 기능

You seem to be oppose Yoon’s impeachment. Could you explain why?

The impeachment that occurred in South Korea is not simply the impeachment of an individual, but a threat to the freedom democratic system of South Korea. As a defector from North Korea and someone who looks at South Korea from a third country, I cannot help but see this issue differently.

Currently, South Korean society is divided into ‘pro-Yoon’ and ‘anti-Yoon’ groups. While there are those who advocate impeachment amid this division, I oppose the impeachment of President Yoon Seok-yeol in order to protect the values of freedom democracy and the stability of South Korea.

In particular, the Yoon Seok-yeol government is that clearly distinguishes North Korea as a totalitarian dictatorship and is fighting against it. The Yoon Seok-yeol government has established the ‘North Korean Defectors’ Day’, has informed the international community of the human rights of North Korean residents, and has raised its voice in criticism of the North Korean dictatorship. This position does not ignore the suffering and pain of North Korean residents, but rather, as a freedom democratic country, actively acts for the liberation of North Korean residents.

In addition, the Yoon Seok-yeol government has pursued a foreign policy that upholds important diplomatic principles internationally and strengthens the ROK-US-Japan alliance. This was a measure to further strengthen the security of the country and to be more vigilant about relations with North Korea, Russia, and China, and it was an essential direction for the security of the Republic of Korea.

However, it is questionable that the issue of foreign exchange crimes presented in the impeachment motion was eventually removed from the impeachment motion after receiving international criticism. I think this suggests that the impeachment motion was distorted for political purposes. Therefore, I strongly oppose the impeachment of President Yoon Seok-yeol because it goes beyond the problem of a single politician and could threaten the free democratic system of the Republic of Korea and the security of the country. In order to protect the Republic of Korea, we must ensure that such impeachment attempts do not harm freedom democracy and the interests of the country.

You are an accomplished advocate for democracy. Yet, some actions by Yoon during his declaration of martial law were undemocratic. For instance, the martial law dictated that "all media and publishing [be] under the control of Martial Law Command.” How do you reconcile your advocacy for democracy and support for martial law?

As a defector from North Korea and someone who cherishes South Korea’s freedom democracy, I see President Yoon Seok-yeol’s declaration of martial law from a different perspective. The Constitution of the Republic of Korea stipulates that the president can declare martial law in times of emergency. This is an important authority to protect the country and its people. Considering the external threats and internal security instability that South Korea faces, I believe that the decision to declare martial law was an inevitable measure to protect the freedom and stability of the country.

As a defector, my perspective on this issue goes beyond mere theoretical discussion and is that of someone who has experienced North Korea’s oppressive system and the suffering it causes. I was born and raised in North Korea. In North Korea, social control and oppression are practiced on a daily basis, not martial law. Everything is under the control of the state, and even trivial matters cannot be freely spoken or expressed without the government’s permission. As someone who has lived in this environment, being able to live freely in South Korea is very precious to me.

That is why I am keenly aware of how important it is to protect South Korea’s freedom and democracy. However, in reality, South Korea is currently in a very dangerous situation. North Korea still regards South Korea as its main enemy, and China is also carrying out various manoeuvres that threaten democracy on the Korean Peninsula. For example, as Xi Jinping mentioned South Korea as a vassal state of China when he met with President Trump during his first term, China’s destruction and suppression of South Korea’s freedom democracy is deepening day by day. I believe that urgent measures are needed to ensure the stability of the country, as such external threats can pose a great threat to South Korea. There may have been controversy over media control at the time of the declaration of martial law. However, compared to what I experienced in North Korea, I think that South Korea’s martial law was very limited and a temporary measure to manage the situation. In North Korea, the state controls all media and completely suppresses the thoughts of its citizens. There is no free press in North Korea, and anyone who expresses an opinion opposing the government is immediately punished. However, in South Korea, even during martial law, soldiers maintained order without actually using force, and less than 300 soldiers were mobilized. I think that the government’s measures to control the situation were not excessive, but the minimum measures to protect the country from crisis.

In addition, regarding President Yoon Seok-yeol’s declaration of martial law, some people are calling for it to be an internal rebellion and impeachment. However, I would like to make this point clear from the perspective of a defector from North Korea. The Constitution of the Republic of Korea clearly states that the president has the authority to declare martial law to protect the country and its people.

Rather than abusing the government’s power or using martial law to suppress the people as in North Korea, martial law in the Republic of Korea should be viewed as a measure to protect the country in accordance with the law and procedures.

As a defector from North Korea, I have fought step by step to protect freedom democracy. After escaping from North Korea, I have lived dreaming of a free and peaceful freedom democracy. Therefore, I cannot help but support emergency measures to protect the freedom and democracy of the Republic of Korea and the safety of the country. Although there may be temporary restrictions in the process, sacrifices made in the process of protecting freedom are ultimately for greater freedom and democracy.

In your recent post, you say that “There are two types of protests in South Korea today. One consists of people who, out of their own free will, sense the nation’s crisis and take to the streets with Taegeukgi in hand to save the country. The other consists of those mobilized through propaganda and indoctrination.” What do you mean by this?

The reason I said that there are two types of protests in South Korea is because the current protests are largely divided into two types in terms of their nature. One is a protest organized by propaganda and agitation, like North Korea, that is, a protest led by people who follow anti-American and anti-democratic ideologies. The other is a protest that individuals sponsored take part in to protect freedom democracy, feeling the crisis of the country. Among the protests that we often see, the ones in favour of impeachment are mainly reported, but in reality, the protests against impeachment are larger, and more people are taking to the squares holding the Taegeukgi to protect freedom democracy. These protests are not simply political, but stem from the voluntary will of the people who are concerned about freedom, democracy, and the future of South Korea. As a defector from North Korea, I deeply understand the meaning of these voluntary protests. Democracy is always in crisis. Dictatorship can mobilize people through suppression and oppression, but democracy is a system in which individuals voluntarily fight, so it comes with more risks and challenges. In that sense, the voices of the people who are trying to protect the freedom of South Korea are very valuable, and their struggle is an effort to realize true democracy. However, other protests currently taking place in South Korea are organized movements based on propaganda and agitation. Organized protests are led by forces that, like North Korea, drive people to anti-American and anti-democratic ideologies and mobilize them to achieve political goals. In fact, they are far removed from the values of democracy and are distorting the essence of the democratization movement. As a defector from North Korea, I clearly understand that democratization and democracy are not the same thing, and the difference is clear. Historically, democratization movements such as the Prague Spring in the Czech Republic were the result of desperate efforts to achieve democracy under the oppression of communism. At the time, the Czech people had a deep understanding of what communism was, and so they were able to successfully lead democratization. On the other hand, the democratization movement called the “Seoul Spring” in Korea is different in one important way. Koreans do not have a direct experience with communism and dictatorship, so they do not know much about the nature of communism and its dangers. The dictatorships they experienced were the governments of Syngman Rhee, Park Chung-hee, and Chun Doo-hwan, but they were not dictatorships. They were simply politics with a different character from the oppression of communism. Therefore, democratization and democracy are completely different concepts. Democratization refers to the process of transitioning from a dictatorship or authoritarian system to a democratic system. However, in this process, democracy is often not realized in practice. ‘Formal democratization’ is when a country appears to follow a democratic system on the outside, but in reality, an authoritarian or dictatorial system still exists. On the other hand, ‘substantial democratization’ is the process of moving toward a society where true sovereignty of the people is guaranteed and power is checked. Some political forces in South Korea advocate democratization, but their goal is actually to pursue communist ideology. The ‘democratization’ they seek to create is not a true democracy that guarantees freedom and equality, but rather a transition to an ideological system. As a defector from North Korea, I have watched this process and deeply understand that democratization does not necessarily lead to democracy. Some politicians, including the Democratic Party of Korea, claim to have participated in the democratization movement in the 1980s, but the democratization they pursued is merely an attempt to move toward a new dictatorship and communist ideology. In the end, we must learn from history that even if it is called democratization, it does not necessarily lead to democracy. That is why I think we must clearly distinguish between the two types of protests taking place in South Korea now and understand their differences. One is an organized protest that still supports communism and dictatorship, and the other is a spontaneous protest by citizens who have come out to the plaza holding the Taegeukgi to truly protect liberal democracy. As a defector from North Korea, I am raising my voice against impeachment together with those who are fighting to protect freedom and democracy in South Korea.

What do you think is needed for the current political situation in South Korea to be resolved and stabilized?

South Korea has already experienced impeachment once, and at that time, the country experienced great confusion and loss of self-esteem. The impeachment at that time was not simply a problem of one person, but a major incident that threatened South Korea's freedom democratic system. A leader who throws away democracy is no different from betraying the country, and as a result, trust in South Korea has fallen significantly among world leaders. I have met various leaders in the UK, and I do not oppose them if they prioritize politics for the people and national security, but the important thing in the process is to protect the core value of 'Freedom Democracy’. However, the Korean Peninsula is still a divided country, and the external threat we face is clear. South Korea's biggest enemy is the totalitarian dictatorship of North Korea, and the current politicians, especially the opposition party, do not seem to properly recognize this reality. They are showing that they are colluding with forces that threaten the system, despite their duty to protect South Korea's freedom democracy. This is a very dangerous act that results in undermining the security of the country and the freedom of the people. If impeachment is carried out, South Korea will have its first ‘president isolated from the world.’ Lee Jae-myung is currently on trial on charges of remittance to North Korea, which is a serious problem that violates UN sanctions against North Korea. The UN Security Council’s resolution on North Korea is part of international efforts to block North Korea’s nuclear and missile development, and violating it would greatly damage South Korea’s international credibility. In particular, remittance to North Korea is not simply a political issue for one country. It could result in lowering trust in the ROK-US-Japan alliance and putting South Korea on the international sanctions list. During the 2018 Pyeongchang Olympics, former President Moon Jae-in violated sanctions against North Korea by inviting Kim Yong-chol and Kim Yo-jong, who were on the UN sanctions list, to South Korea. As a result, South Korea lost trust in the international community and was branded as a country that violated the Constitution and international norms. This situation should not be repeated. In particular, South Korea’s position of giving hope to the North Korean people and pursuing freedom and peace should not be undermined.

North Korean people have the right to live in a free and peaceful world. Trampling on their hopes is absolutely unacceptable. Therefore, the political stability and solution for South Korea is, above all, to once again establish liberal democracy. As a defector from North Korea, I know well how precious freedom and democracy are in South Korea and how much effort is needed to protect them. South Korea must now establish politics that prioritizes national security and the freedom of the people, with a single voice that transcends ideological or partisan conflicts, on the foundation of true democracy.

To resolve this situation, first, politicians must act with the security and liberal democracy of the country as their top priority. Second, the people must be able to make the right choices to protect freedom and democracy without being swayed by ideology. Third, it is time to overcome political conflict and join forces for the future of South Korea. As a defector who is speaking out against impeachment, I hope that South Korea can once again protect the values of democracy and freedom.

It is time for us to work together to realize true democracy where the freedom and rights of the people are guaranteed throughout this entire process.

2. Why the left in South Korea may regret removing President Yoon

Conclusion:

In sum, the liberal wing of South Korean politics could win the battle by removing Yoon -- only to find that it overplayed its hand to lose the figurative war. Withdrawing from the case may prove to be the best move.

Voices March 18, 2025 / 2:07 PM / Updated at 7:42 PM

Why the left in South Korea may regret removing President Yoon

https://www.upi.com/Voices/2025/03/18/south-korea-yoon-removal-attempt/7031742308807/

By Morse Tan

South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol attends a January hearing for his impeachment trial at the Constitutional Court in Seoul in connection to his short-lived imposition of martial law. File Photo by Yonhap/EPA-EFE

March 18 (UPI) -- At first blush, removing President Yoon Suk Yeol might seem like a triumph for liberals in South Korea, if it transpires. As the saying goes, though, "be careful of what one wishes for."

Removing Yoon may trigger Section 7008 punishments from the United States government, which can include the elimination of: Bilateral Economic Assistance (III), International Security Assistance (IV), Multilateral Assistance (V), and Export and Investment Assistance (VI).

Yoon is the duly elected president of South Korea; thus, his presidency expresses the will of the South Korean people. Seizing him by force "ultra vires" (Latin for an act that requires legal authority but is done without it) by surrounding the presidential residence with thousands of armed agents and throwing him into solitary confinement should count as a coup d'etat if Yoon is ultimately removed from office.

The elimination of Yoon from office may bring the growing popular support for conservatives to a floodtide. Already, Yoon's approval ratings have shot up multiples of times from where they were in December. Large rallies of hundreds of thousands of energetic Yoon supporters have sprung up around the country, including the very large gatherings on March 1, the anniversary of the launch of Korea's Independence movement.

There is much ire among the Korean people over the impeachment attempts by the opposition against about 30 officials in the executive branch who were seeking to investigate or expose the malfeasances and corruption for which leftists especially seem to fear exposure.

In the event that Yoon is removed from office, the conservatives would have a considerable wave of momentum that could be focused around their strongest candidate. If that happens, there would be another conservative president for another five-year term, rather than Yoon serving out the rest of his term, which would be shorter than the time he had already served.

There is surely no guarantee that Lee Jae Myung, the liberal leader and likely candidate in an emergency presidential election, would win. There are reports that the Chinese Communist Party is already thinking about a replacement for Lee.

Additionally, Lee already qualifies for U.S. and U.N. sanctions based on the alleged pouring of millions and millions of dollars' worth of money into North Korea, which runs counter to the existing sanctions of the U.N. and United States against North Korea. With two of his close associates already convicted for doing so, Lee's prospects for exoneration look dim.

If Lee or others like him "succeed" in turning South Korea into something more like North Korea -- or worse yet, hand over the country to the communist North -- then he will have turned a thriving market economy and democracy over to the poorest, most unjust, most corrupt totalitarian dictatorship in the world. For that is what North Korea has been. Plunging South Korea into that darkness would hardly be a cause for celebration.

Furthermore, if Korea unites under North Korea, then it would naturally fall under the domination of the Chinese Communist Party. Consider that more than 90% of North Korea's economic interaction is with China. About one-fourth of South Korea's exports already go to China, its largest trading partner. A Korea united under North Korea and then placed under the boot of the Chinese Communist Party would be a part of the eventual domination of the region and the world, which is the CCP's strategic aim.

The extension of the CCP's techno-totalitarianism (a neologism that I coined), organ harvesting by murdering living people, genocide and crimes against humanity could not possibly be good for the oppressed. As the one who initiated, supported and saw through the mass atrocity determinations for crimes against humanity and genocide against the CCP, I have an extensive basis of support for these determinations.

As no legitimate legal basis for removing Yoon exists, such a decision would rightfully draw the condemnation of those inside of South Korea, as well as those around the world who are watching. Removing the duly elected president, who merely exercised his constitutional powers under Article 77 of the Constitution to awaken the South Korean people to a growing leftist tyranny, fails as a legitimate legal decision.

Basing a decision on perjury and subornation of perjury also would deserve harsh denunciation. Failing to investigate and receive relevant and material evidence also constitutes a dereliction of judicial duty.

Rushing to a decision before Lee Jae Myung's expected convictions that would make him ineligible as a presidential candidate is unacceptably politicized and would vindicate the most cynical observations. The thinly veiled pretense of the color of law over this coup d'etat should be ripped away.

In sum, the liberal wing of South Korean politics could win the battle by removing Yoon -- only to find that it overplayed its hand to lose the figurative war. Withdrawing from the case may prove to be the best move.

Morse Tan served as the U.S. ambassador at large for global criminal justice and dean of the Liberty University School of Law. He currently is the senior executive director of the Center for Law and Government at Liberty. He has published and contributed to a wide range of media and in scholarly outlets, such as the Cornell International Law Journal.

Read More

• South Korea President Yoon Suk Yeol's release draws mixed reactions
• Impeached President Yoon Suk Yeol home after release from detention
• Korean court rules suspended President Yoon Suk Yeol must be freed from detention

3. US, South Korea resume some live-fire drills after accidental bombing

When you fall off your horse you have to get right back on.  

Although this seems counterintuitive to some, this is why we train. The only way to prevent these accidents is to conduct more training (and yes I know the only way to 100% guarantee there will be no accidents is simply to NOT train - but then we violate the adage - "To lead an untrained people to war is to throw them away" - Confucius )

US, South Korea resume some live-fire drills after accidental bombing

Stars and Stripes · by David Choi · March 18, 2025

South Korean soldiers stand guard during a Freedom Shield drill at a training center in Dongducheon, South Korea, March 13, 2025. (Jameson Harris/U.S. Army)

SEOUL, South Korea — U.S. and South Korean troops resumed live-fire drills with small arms Tuesday after a 12-day pause prompted by an accidental bombing that injured 38 people earlier this month.

South Korea’s Ministry of National Defense, following a military-wide safety assessment, approved the resumption of training with 5.56 mm rounds “to maintain readiness,” it said in a news release Tuesday.

The South Korean military’s primary assault rifle, the K2, uses 5.56 mm rounds, the same caliber as the U.S. military’s M-16.

U.S. Forces Korea, which oversees 28,500 American troops on the peninsula, is in daily communication with the defense ministry and will follow its live-fire guidance, Army Col. Ryan Donald said by phone Tuesday.

Live-fire training remains suspended in Pocheon, about 20 miles south of the Demilitarized Zone, as the South Korean air force continues working on “measures to prevent recurrence” of the incident, according to the release. The military will resume tank and artillery live-fire drills at a later date, the ministry said.

The policy change comes nearly two weeks after two South Korean KF-16 fighter jets dropped eight free-fall bombs on a residential area outside a practice range in Pocheon, injuring 38 people.

A preliminary investigation by the South Korean military found that the pilots mistakenly input incorrect bombing coordinates and did not visually confirm the target before releasing the bombs. Both pilots have been charged with criminal negligence, according to the ministry.

On Monday, the South Korean military paused some unmanned aerial vehicle operations after a drone collided with a stationary helicopter at an army airfield in Yangju, about 15 miles north of Seoul.

The drone deviated from its course “for unknown reasons” as it attempted to land, striking a parked helicopter, army spokesman Col. Bae Seok-jin said during a news briefing Tuesday.

No injuries were reported, but the drone was destroyed, and the helicopter was damaged by a fire, according to the ministry.

The drone loss did not create a gap in surveillance, and Seoul continues to monitor North Korea using a variety of reconnaissance assets, South Korean army Lt. Col. Yang Seung-kwan, a Joint Chiefs of Staff spokesman, told reporters Tuesday.

Yang declined to discuss the drone’s mission at the time of the crash or the status of the military’s UAV assets, citing operational security.

The latest mishap comes amid the 10-day Freedom Shield military exercise between the United States and South Korea. The large-scale training, which began March 10, involves 19,000 South Korean troops and an unspecified number of U.S. personnel throughout the country.

As part of the exercise, a Navy F-35C Lightning II from the aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson, which docked in South Korea on March 2, joined a joint air drill Thursday alongside two F-35As from the U.S. and South Korean air forces, according to a 7th Air Force news release that day.

David Choi

David Choi

David Choi is based in South Korea and reports on the U.S. military and foreign policy. He served in the U.S. Army and California Army National Guard. He graduated from the University of California, Los Angeles.

Stars and Stripes · by David Choi · March 18, 2025

4. Why US labeled South Korea ‘sensitive,’ and what’s at stake

I think this is going to be a litmus test for the Trump Administration and how it handles this issue that the Biden Administration left it. It may define the ROK/US alliance going forward. The Administration has an out. If it wants to strengthen the alliance it can remove the ROK from the list and blame the Biden Administration. If the Administration distrusts the ROK it will leave it on the list and that will have significant repercussions.

Excerpts:

“Should South Korea be designated, the US will closely monitor our actions and review every exchange of information. Every single activity of ours will be reported (to DOE authorities), and if they detect concrete actions, restrictions for Korea could be further strengthened,” Lee said.

“In other words, the US has set the groundwork for tighter controls. What matters is not being at the lowest level of the list but the fact that we’re on the list by itself is where the problem begins.”

Adam Mount, director of the Defense Posture Project at the Federation of American Scientists, told The Korea Herald on Tuesday, said, “We should expect continued South Korean interest in nuclear proliferation to have consequences for the bilateral relationship, including technical cooperation.”

Yeo, however, suggested that if acting US Ambassador Yun’s remarks are taken at face value, South Korea’s designation on the list may really not be that significant and could be lifted if Seoul addresses security concerns.

“In that case, I would expect the Trump administration and the ROK government to take the necessary steps to remove the ROK from the SCL to enable scientific cooperation to move forward without obstacles,” Yeo said.

“However, if the ROK remains on the list, or if Trump officials decide to use the ROK’s designation on the SCL as a bargaining chip or leverage related to negotiations over trade or security issues, this could lead to mistrust between the two allies," he said.

Why US labeled South Korea ‘sensitive,’ and what’s at stake

koreaherald.com · by Ji Da-gyum · March 19, 2025

Observers fear 'sensitive country' designation may hinder Seoul’s bid for spent fuel reprocessing technology, key to its nuclear reactor exports

The reflection the flag of the U.S. Department of Energy is seen on its building on March 18, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Getty Images via AFP)

The US designation of South Korea as a “sensitive country” — a move made in early January but only revealed by Korean media last week — has triggered shock waves through Seoul, provoking a reckoning over why Washington tacitly applied such a classification to its treaty ally.

The controversy has intensified, with rival parties engaging in a blame game at the National Assembly, clashing over its causes and ramifications, while the US Department of Energy has remained silent on the rationale behind the designation.

At the heart of the dispute is whether discussions in South Korea about nuclear armament and nuclear latency, along with the shock of President Yoon Suk Yeol's short-lived Dec. 3 martial law declaration, were the deciding factor in Washington's decision.

The inclusion of South Korea — a US treaty ally — on the list, which also includes US adversaries such as China, Iran, Russia and North Korea, has left Seoul shocked. It is highly unusual for a treaty ally to appear on such a restricted list, and the decision, discovered around two months after it was made, caught South Korea off guard.

Foreign Minister Cho Tae-yul told the National Assembly last week that the government learned of the designation just a few days before Hankyoreh newspaper reported it on March 10 through unofficial channels, and had never been officially notified by Washington.

“It is not common for US allies to be placed on the sensitive countries list. The closest equivalents would be Israel and India, neither of which are treaty allies but are close partners of the United States,” Troy Stangarone, deputy director of the Indo-Pacific Program at the Woodrow Wilson Center, told The Korea Herald on Tuesday. “However, South Korea was previously on the sensitive country list from 1981 to 1994, so this is not unprecedented.”

Andrew Yeo, the SK-Korea Foundation Chair at the Brookings Institution's Center for East Asia Policy Studies, seconded the view.

“Some close partners such as Taiwan and Israel also appear on the list as well. But there are no treaty allies included, so it does seem unusual for South Korea to have been included on the SCL,” Yeo told The Korea Herald on Wednesday.

Foreign Minister Cho Tae-yul speaks during a parliamentary session of the Legislation and Judiciary Committee at the National Assembly in Yeouido, Seoul, on Wednesday, addressing lawmakers' questions regarding the U.S. Department of Energy's designation of South Korea as a "sensitive country." (Yonhap)

Concerns are mounting over its broader consequences, particularly for bilateral cooperation in science and technology, with the list set to take effect on April 15. The South Korean government has pledged to spare no effort to have the country removed from the list before mid-April.

At the same time, a reckoning is unfolding in Seoul over the potential long-term repercussions of continued public advocacy for nuclear armament and the pursuit of nuclear latency — especially in fields such as nuclear energy, advanced technology and nuclear reactor exports.

Seoul's Foreign Ministry said Monday night that the South Korean government had “identified after contacting the US side that the decision stemmed from security-related issues involving research institutes under the auspices of the Department of Environment, rather than foreign policy issues.”

The ministry also said the US side has confirmed that South Korea’s listing “will not have a significant impact on bilateral technology cooperation, including joint research.”

The DOE, which is responsible for energy policy, nuclear security, energy security and nuclear nonproliferation efforts, operates 17 national laboratories in nuclear energy and other cutting-edge scientific research such as AI and quantum technology, making it a key partner for South Korea in such cooperation.

Joseph Yun, charge d'affaires ad interim at the US Embassy in Seoul, according to a Yonhap report Tuesday downplayed concerns over South Korea’s designation on the DOE’s sensitive country list, stating that it was due to the “mishandling of sensitive information” during exchanges involving Korean students, researchers and possibly some government workers at national laboratories under the DOE.

“The revelation that the Biden administration placed the ROK on the sensitive list was as much of a surprise to me as it was to others,” Yeo told The Korea Herald via email, referring to South Korea by its official name, the Republic of Korea. “Acting Amb. (Charge d ’Affaires) Joe Yun’s comment that South Korea’s designation was due to mishandling of sensitive information among researchers was meant to defuse anxiety in Seoul, although it doesn’t explain why South Korea seemed unaware of the designation until recently.”

Acting US Ambassador to South Korea Joseph Yun speaks during a meeting with James Kim, chairperson of the American Chamber of Commerce in Korea, and other officials of the American business body at a Seoul hotel on Tuesday. (Yonhap)

Skepticism building

Observers believe that the Foreign Ministry's explanation is reasonable and acceptable, and the DOE's designation likely has a technical basis. However, many find it difficult to accept this explanation at face value. Without a clear statement from the DOE, the possibility that other factors did not influence the decision cannot be ruled out.

“Based on information provided to Congress by DOE, it appears that an attempt to take sensitive information from the Idaho National Laboratory to South Korea was the triggering factor for DOE’s move to designate South Korea. There are indications that there may have been other failures to comply with protocol in US labs,” Stangarone said.

According to a May 2024 DOE Inspector General report, a contractor was terminated for attempting to board a flight to South Korea with export-controlled nuclear reactor design software. The termination took place at Idaho National Laboratory under the DOE between Oct. 1, 2023 and March 31, 2024.

“Until the US government gives a full accounting of why the move was taken to place Korea on the sensitive countries list we cannot be sure other factors did not contribute as well," Stangarone added.

Olli Heinonen, a distinguished fellow with the Korea program at the Stimson Center and 38 North, said, “Since the list is maintained by the Department of Energy and not by the US State Department, the reasons might be primarily technical in nature.”

Heinonen pointed out the US might detect indications of South Korea seeking to develop nuclear technologies for dual use have both civilian and military applications. Some of the most important examples are reprocessing spent fuel and uranium enrichment, which can be applied to nuclear power but also to weapons production.

The South Korean authorities have asked the US to ease restrictions under the civil nuclear cooperation agreement — or 123 Agreement — prohibiting such activities.

“If the ROK is going to develop such capabilities, the activities would start with relevant R&D scientists, and the DOE may have noticed such signs, or the US may want to block such activities from the very beginning,” Heinonen told The Korea Herald on Tuesday.

“However, the recent debates in South Korea about having its independent nuclear deterrence — and certainly the attempt by President Yoon to implement martial law —could have also impacted the decision," he continued.

US President Joe Biden and South Korea's President Yoon Suk Yeol attend an Indo-Pacific Economic Framework event at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in San Francisco on Nov. 16, 2023. (File Photo - Reuters)

Heinonen’s remarks align with broader concerns voiced by other experts, who noted that while technical problems may have been a primary reason, South Korea's political environment cannot be overlooked.

“It is possible that the South Korean Foreign Ministry’s explanation — that the decision was unrelated to these policy issues and instead stemmed from security concerns regarding research institutes under the Department of Energy — holds some truth,” Lami Kim, a professor of Security Studies at Daniel K. Inouye Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies, a US Department of Defense institute, told the Korea Herald on Tuesday.

Though speculative at this stage without a clear explanation from the DOE, Kim pointed out that the range of contributing factors for the DOE’s designation remains broad.

“There are many possible reasons, ranging from prominent South Korean politicians and experts repeatedly advocating for nuclear armament to concerns over the stability brought about by Yoon’s self-coup, particularly amid rising speculation that he sought to provoke North Korea into a military conflict. However, South Korea’s broader security vulnerabilities also present legitimate reasons for concern,” Kim said.

“In the end, all of these factors likely played a role in the DOE’s decision.”

The Barakah-1 nuclear reactor in the United Arab Emirates . ( Korea Electric Power Corp.)

Implications for nuclear energy cooperation, exports

Experts warned of the far-reaching consequences of South Korea’s designation, particularly for nuclear energy cooperation between the allies and, further, for South Korea’s nuclear reactor exports.

“South Koreans will be subject to additional scrutiny on projects with DOE going forward, but the designation could also make it less likely that the United States would agree to allow South Korea to engage in the recycling of spent nuclear fuel or uranium enrichment given the higher level of scrutiny,” Stangarone said.

Echoing this sentiment, Lee Chun-geun, an honorary fellow at the Korea Institute of S&T Evaluation and Planning, warned that South Korea's addition to the sensitive country list will raise another barrier to its effort to acquire technology for reprocessing spent fuel — key for further developing its nuclear reactor exports.

South Korea is one of the few nuclear reactor exporters in the world. Nuclear reactor importers expect a comprehensive package, from the management to the recycling of spent fuel, and therefore greater autonomy in the nuclear fuel cycle is crucial for South Korea as an exporter.

Unable to pursue conventional spent fuel reprocessing, South Korea has instead sought to develop pyroprocessing technology, which differs from PUREX (Plutonium Uranium Redox Extraction) in that it does not produce separated weapons-usable plutonium.

Seoul and Washington are conducting joint research on pyroprocessing — the core of the updated Korea-US civil nuclear cooperation agreement signed in 2015.

Lee pointed out, “Even in the ongoing joint research on pyroprocessing, experiments are conducted using US spent nuclear fuel, not South Korea’s, and take place in US facilities.”

Lee explained this was why South Korea’s designation matters for joint research.

“We are seeking to develop this technology while striving to gain recognition that it 'has nothing to do with nuclear weapons' in order to strengthen our independent position through nuclear reactor exports. But the US has been reluctant to approve it, raising concerns over its potential nonproliferation risks,” Lee said. “If South Korea is designated as a sensitive country, it will create yet another hurdle for reactor exports in the long run.”

The Idaho National Laboratory, located in Idaho Falls, Idaho, is one of 17 national laboratories in the US Department of Energy complex, dedicated to nuclear research, integrated energy systems, and security solutions. (Idaho National Laboratory)

Lee underscored that South Korea shouldn't deem the DOE designation “as a single event — it’s just the beginning.”

“Should South Korea be designated, the US will closely monitor our actions and review every exchange of information. Every single activity of ours will be reported (to DOE authorities), and if they detect concrete actions, restrictions for Korea could be further strengthened,” Lee said.

“In other words, the US has set the groundwork for tighter controls. What matters is not being at the lowest level of the list but the fact that we’re on the list by itself is where the problem begins.”

Adam Mount, director of the Defense Posture Project at the Federation of American Scientists, told The Korea Herald on Tuesday, said, “We should expect continued South Korean interest in nuclear proliferation to have consequences for the bilateral relationship, including technical cooperation.”

Yeo, however, suggested that if acting US Ambassador Yun’s remarks are taken at face value, South Korea’s designation on the list may really not be that significant and could be lifted if Seoul addresses security concerns.

“In that case, I would expect the Trump administration and the ROK government to take the necessary steps to remove the ROK from the SCL to enable scientific cooperation to move forward without obstacles,” Yeo said.

“However, if the ROK remains on the list, or if Trump officials decide to use the ROK’s designation on the SCL as a bargaining chip or leverage related to negotiations over trade or security issues, this could lead to mistrust between the two allies," he said.

dagyumji@heraldcorp.com

koreaherald.com · by Ji Da-gyum · March 19, 2025

5. What's behind delay in Yoon Suk Yeol verdict?

I thought they might release the ruling during the recent snowstorm which might have had the effect of limiting the protests.

What's behind delay in Yoon Suk Yeol verdict?

koreaherald.com · by Son Ji-hyoung · March 19, 2025

Experts say delay in court's decision suggests disagreement among justices

This photo taken in central Seoul shows views of a statue of Haechi, a mythical animal believed to have distinguished good and evil, and Gwanghwamun, a main gate of Gyeongbokgung, on Wednesday. (Yonhap)

The Constitutional Court's deliberation on the motion to impeach President Yoon Suk Yeol is taking longer than expected, as more than three weeks have passed since hearings ended in late February.

Deliberations in the impeachment cases of former presidents Park Geun-hye and Roh Moo-hyun concluded within two weeks.

Although Justice Cheong Hyung-sik, who presides over the case, stressed in December a speedy ruling on the case of Yoon and his short-lived martial law imposition, the court bench has yet to announce the date for its final verdict as of press time. The court typically announces verdict dates at least two or three weekdays in advance, meaning without an announcement Wednesday, it will likely be delivered next week.

Speculations abound over why the court's decision is being delayed. The court only told reporters that it would announce the verdict date after it notifies both the parliament and Yoon's representatives.

Representing the National Assembly in the impeachment trial of Justice Minister Park Sung-jae on Tuesday, Democratic Party of Korea Rep. Jung Chung-rae, asked the court to "swiftly confirm the date of President Yoon's impeachment ruling."

A majority opinion of at least six of eight justices is required to uphold an impeachment.

Kim Seon-taek, a professor of law at Korea University who specializes in constitutional law, said the amount of time it was taking suggested a lack of consensus among the justices.

"The court should have already completed writing its opinion given the time it takes to do so," he told The Korea Herald.

Kim suggested that even if at least six justices agree to uphold Yoon's impeachment, one or two justices who oppose the president's impeachment may delay finalizing their dissenting opinions.

Conversely, if at least three of the eight justices oppose impeachment, those in favor might be stalling until left-leaning appointee Ma Eun-hyuk is confirmed, he said. Acting President Choi Sang-mok has so far refused to approve the appointment, despite a court ruling that found his inaction unconstitutional.

Protesters engage in intermittent fasting in front of Gwanghwamun in Seoul on Wednesday, to protest President Yoon Suk Yeol's martial law declaration last December. (Yonhap)

Rep. Yoo Sang-bum of the ruling People Power Party told reporters Wednesday that he believed justices at the court "have conflicting opinions between themselves while deliberating on the case," given the verdict is being delayed by more than a week compared with previous cases.

Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon also thinks there is likely disagreement on the bench, telling TV Chosun Monday that "some circumstances have arisen that make it difficult to reach a consensus." He added that some of the right-leaning justices at the court might have diverged from the majority.

Oh is one of the potential conservative contenders if an early presidential election is held.

However, Kim Dong-yeon, governor of Gyeonggi Province and former deputy prime minister, said Tuesday the court's delay was due to "its process to reach a unanimous decision to minimize social division."

Rival parties are spinning the Constitutional Court's delay in their favor.

Ruling party lawmaker Rep. Jang Dong-hyeok told reporters Tuesday that there is "no reason for (the court's) acting chief justice Moon Hyung-bae to delay the ruling if it secured the minimum (of six justices) that have concurring opinions."

But Rep. Jeon Hyun-heui of the main opposition Democratic Party of Korea told MBC Monday that she believed the Constitutional Court "had already reached a conclusion to uphold the impeachment" while the court is internally working to narrow differences with dissenting justices.

Whatever the date of the Yoon impeachment verdict, authorities in South Korea are bracing for any crowd violence amid deepening social division. Acting President Choi Sang-mok has urged citizens to peacefully accept the verdict.

Police will mobilize some 20,000 riot police officers nationwide on the impeachment ruling date, and are working to empty the 100-meter radius around the Constitutional Court. Also, Anguk Station of Seoul subway line No. 3 will be temporarily shut down from the Yoon ruling date.

In March 2017, four people died on the day of former President Park's verdict amid fierce protests against the court decision.

consnow@heraldcorp.com

koreaherald.com · by Son Ji-hyoung · March 19, 2025

6. North Korea's bitcoin reserve thought to be 3rd largest in world: report

Wow.

Perhaps the US and north Korea have something in common. Deals over doctrine. (note sarcasm)

North Korea's bitcoin reserve thought to be 3rd largest in world: report

koreaherald.com · by Yoon Min-sik · March 18, 2025

Through illicit hacking and theft, Norea Korea is now believed to have amassed 13,562 BTC, which is valued at $1.14 billion. (123rf)

With authorities identifying North Korean hackers to be behind multiple recent cryptocurrency hackings, the totalitarian communist state is now thought to have a bigger bitcoin stash than any other nation in the world besides the United States and the United Kingdom.

Binance News, a news platform of global cryptocurrency exchange business firm Binance, recently reported that North Korea's allegedly state-run hacker syndicates are believed to have accumulated 13,562 BTC, valued at $1.14 billion. It cited Arkham Intelligence, a Dominican Republic-based company that provides data about blockchain transactions to help identify money laundering and other suspicious activity.

North Korea-affiliated hacking groups including the Lazarus Group were pinpointed to be culprits behind a string of cyber attacks in 2024 that stole $659 million in cryptocurrency, according to a joint statement by South Korea, the US and Japan made in January. The US Federal Bureau of Investigation last month released a public statement that North Korea is responsible for the theft of approximately $1.5 billion worth of virtual assets, the biggest hacking incident so far, which occurred last month.

Much of the stolen virtual assets were Ethereum coins, a substantial portion of which are thought to have been converted into bitcoins.

It was reported last week that the Lazarus Group converted at least $300 million of their stolen crypto into unrecoverable funds.

Lazarus Group and other hacking groups are alleged to be run by the North Korean government, and are thought to be an important source of income for it. North Korea is currently under multiple sanctions placed by the international community, as punitive actions for developing its nuclear weapons program.

A significant portion of the profits from North Korea's illegal activities are thought to be used to fund its ballistic missiles programs and nuclear tests.

If confirmed, North Korea's bitcoin reserve will be only behind US' 198,109 BTC and the UK's 61,245 BTC, according to the Binance's estimates. It would be more than 10,635 BTC of Bhutan and El Salvador’s 6,117 BTC.

El Salvador government officially declared the use of bitcoin as legal tender in 2021, though it walked back the measure this year. Bhutan is actively engaging in bitcoin mining on a national level.

minsikyoon@heraldcorp.com

koreaherald.com · by Yoon Min-sik · March 18, 2025

7. N. Korea urges fight against anti-socialism at meeting of heads of 'neighborhood units'

Yes. Because defeating "anti-socialism" is a higher priority than food for the people. But you cannot eat ideology. This is all about keeping Kim in power. Ideological purity, and thus loyalty to Kim, is paramount even if he people suffer and die. And of course if you do not eat you cannot resist and revolt.

N. Korea urges fight against anti-socialism at meeting of heads of 'neighborhood units'

koreaherald.com · by Yonhap · March 18, 2025

This image, published on Tuesday, shows a meeting of neighborhood leaders held in Pyongyang from March 16-17. (Korean Central News Agency)

North Korea has convened a nationwide meeting of heads of the most basic administrative unit and urged a fight against anti-socialism, state media reported Tuesday, in what is seen as a measure to heighten state scrutiny and control over the general public.

North Korea held the meeting of heads of "neighborhood units" Sunday and Monday in Pyongyang to discuss measures to implement and renovate such units in line with "demands of the new era," according to the Korean Central News Agency said.

A neighborhood unit, the most basic administrative unit in North Korea, comprises 20 to 40 households, effectively monitoring its members on behalf of the state and keeping the regime informed about their neighborhoods.

Reporting to the meeting, Vice Premier Kim Myong-hun urged the participants to "thoroughly uphold the ethos of socialism" and "vigorously engage in a public fight against anti-socialism," calling them the foundation linking the public with the regime.

The KCNA said he also presented "a desperate task" to renovate the projects of neighborhood leaders but did not specify details.

The latest meeting is believed to be aimed at strengthening state scrutiny and monitoring of civilians. North Korea's parliament enacted a new law involving neighborhood leaders in late 2023, legally bolstering their authority and responsibilities.

An official at South Korea's unification ministry said the law requires neighborhood units to convene at least once a month, and provide support for military, agricultural, construction and other key projects.

"The clear goal of this law ... is believed to be to strengthen control and monitoring of the general public and the mobilization of their efforts," the official said.

The latest gathering is the third meeting of neighborhood unit heads, following the two previous sessions held in 1994 and 2007, the official said. (Yonhap)

koreaherald.com · by Yonhap · March 18, 2025

8. Hegseth Skips South Korea Visit as Leadership Vacuum Takes Toll

Yes the leadership vacuum is a proper excuse but also politically sensitive issues such as the sensitive countries list and others for which the new SEDEF may not be prepared to address. He has not had time to get up to speed on Korea issues. Does he even have an Asia policy team in place to properly advise and prepare him since he has absolutely no Asia or Korea experience?

But it would have made a very positive statement had he visited during the ROK/US combined exercises. It is an information opportunity that was missed.

Hegseth Skips South Korea Visit as Leadership Vacuum Takes Toll

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-03-19/trump-says-us-doesn-t-want-russia-china-moving-closer-together?sref=hhjZtX76

Pete HegsethPhotographer: Kent Nishimura/Bloomberg

By Soo-Hyang Choi

March 17, 2025 at 1:48 AM EDT

Save

Translate

Listen

3:29

Takeaways

NEW

Hide

• Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has postponed a visit to Seoul due to scheduling issues on the US side, amid political uncertainty in South Korea following President Yoon Suk Yeol's martial law declaration.
• Summary by Bloomberg AI
• The US has added South Korea to the lowest category of the Department of Energy's Sensitive Country List, which will take effect next month, sparking concerns about the impact on bilateral energy cooperation.
• Summary by Bloomberg AI
• The developments come as South Korea faces a leadership vacuum, with President Yoon's impeachment trial ongoing, and North Korea accelerates its nuclear ambitions while strengthening ties with Russia.
• Summary by Bloomberg AI

Watch

• 5:15
• Indian Billionaire Bajaj On Insurance Sector Outlook

More Like This

• Industries
• Roche Scraps Global DEI Leadership Targets After Trump Pressure
• Industries
• Businesses Expect More Pain for Europe From Trump’s Deregulation

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has pushed back a Seoul visit he has been eyeing for as early as this month as political uncertainty continues in South Korea after President Yoon Suk Yeol’s shock martial law declaration.

“His South Korea visit had been under discussion between the two countries but its postponement was unavoidable due to scheduling on the US side,” South Korean Defense Ministry spokesperson Jeon Ha-gyu said during a regular briefing Monday, referring to the Pentagon chief.

The postponement of Hegseth’s trip to Seoul gives the impression that Donald Trump’s administration may be reluctant to engage with South Korea while a leadership vacuum continues there. The nation is waiting for a decision over the coming days in Yoon’s impeachment trial and whether he will return to his presidential duties or if an election will take place.

Hegseth’s skipping of Seoul is another setback for South Korea after Washington’s unforeseen designation of the Asian ally as a “sensitive country” for energy cooperation.

“There’s no point in any diplomatic efforts if your counterpart doesn’t acknowledge you,” said Kim Jung, a political science professor at the University of North Korean Studies in Seoul, referring to the limitations Acting President Choi Sang-mok faces. “A certain degree of diplomatic fallout is inevitable for South Korea.”

The postponement of the trip follows a decision by the previous Biden administration in January to add South Korea to the lowest category of the Department of Energy’s Sensitive Country List, a move that will go into effect next month, according to South Korea’s Yonhap News.

South Korea’s Foreign Ministry said it is taking the development very seriously and is in close communications with the US over the matter.

The DOE website says countries on the list are given “particular consideration” in the approvals process for access by their nationals and may be added to the list for national security, nuclear nonproliferation or terrorism support reasons.

It’s not immediately clear what led to the US decision to add South Korea to the list. But it comes after more South Korean politicians called for the nation to move closer to the threshold of producing its own nuclear weapons after Trump’s election victory.

South Korea’s addition to the list is a blow to the country whose alliance with the US has been touted as the “linchpin” of security in the region.

South Korea’s top diplomat, Cho Tae-yul, said his government didn’t get a prior notice on the decision until it reached out to the US after learning of the move via an “unofficial channel.”

Choi, the interim leader of South Korea, ordered the country’s industry minister to meet with Energy Secretary Chris Wright for consultations this week and other government agencies to actively reach out to the US to minimize any impact on their bilateral energy cooperation.

• Read More on US-South Korea relations:South Korea Braces for Market Disruptions After Trump Tariffs
• US, South Korea Drills to Reflect North Korea-Russia Threat
• Trump Puts Spotlight on Korea for ‘Higher-Than-China’ Tariff

The back-to-back blows come after Yoon was impeached and suspended from duties for his short-lived martial law declaration in December. The Constitutional Court has yet to announce when it will deliver a ruling to decide his fate.

While South Korea remains in limbo without a clear policy direction, North Korea has been accelerating its nuclear ambitions with leader Kim Jong Un emerging as a key ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin and his war in Ukraine.

Over the weekend, multiple warplanes from Russia entered an air identification zone maintained by Seoul, underscoring the security challenge Seoul faces while Kim bolsters ties with Moscow.

The air zone is an area where aircraft are supposed to identify themselves as they draw near it. The Russian jets did not enter South Korea’s territorial air space and said they were conducting exercises, according to South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Follow all new stories by Soo-Hyang Choi

9. What Korea Means for Ukraine

Korea and the Korean War and its aftermath continue to be relevant to security issues around the world.

Perhaps we should spend a little more effort in studying and understanding it.

What Korea Means for Ukraine 

G. Patrick Lynch

The Korean War provides an unappreciated look at some of the dynamics of US foreign policy playing out today.

lawliberty.org · by G. Patrick Lynch · March 17, 2025

As the Russian invasion of Ukraine drags into its third year, there are reports from credible sources that North Korean troops are fighting for Russia. Russian President Putin has consciously avoided imposing the full costs of this conflict onto the upper and middle classes of his country, particularly in Moscow and St. Petersburg. He has chosen instead to call in favors from his allies for cannon fodder, and this has trickled in all the way from the outlying parts of Russia and now from arguably the worst country on earth and one long beholden to Russia, North Korea.

Military cooperation between Moscow and North Korea dates back to the end of World War II when the Soviets re-armed their comrades in the northern part of the peninsula, which helped precipitate the Korean War. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, we now know that Stalin and the Soviets were not only arms suppliers to the North Koreans; they were also encouraging the regime to attack and continue the war, extending its violence and destruction to fit the USSR’s global goals and ends.

So it is not at all a coincidence that North Koreans are now dying for another Russian geographic expansion, but I think that it might be very useful for the West to consider the case of Korea when we think about the conflict in Ukraine. The fallout from the US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, both of which are now widely viewed as failures, have tainted the case of American intervention abroad, and of course the shadow of Vietnam still looms large over American foreign policy. But interestingly, Korea is rarely mentioned by hawks or doves, even though it bears a remarkable resemblance to the Ukraine conflict, and offers a different lesson than those widely cited as foreign policy failures.

Similar to the conclusion of the Korean War, in Ukraine it increasingly looks as if both sides will have to accept something neither wanted—a divided country (although one can perhaps argue Russia will get more of what it desired albeit several significant, embarrassing failures along the way). This division will obviously come at an extremely high material, psychological, and existential cost to Ukraine and Ukrainians, but it will end the war. And perhaps most importantly, it will give Ukraine the opportunity to achieve the same economic and political miracle that South Korea accomplished while living side-by-side with a totalitarian regime.

Beginning with Washington’s Farewell Address, there has been a long line of American political thought that argues for a much less active US foreign policy. And certainly our recent experiences in places like Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan to steer previously totalitarian, anti-American regimes towards freer and more open societies have much to do with that now increasingly popular view. Those interventions were in countries that lacked the popular will or basic capacity to improve their governance and economic performance. And yet the US is not very much involved in Ukraine, albeit without boots on the ground. If we wish to avoid a similar embarrassment to the one the US experienced as we rushed out of Afghanistan, we might well consider whether there is any hope of making Ukraine a better place in the long term, considering the enormous economic resources we have invested there.

We all bring an ideological lens to these discussions, and if one clips the data from Vietnam to the present, it does look as if the US is unable to do much good by intervening. World War II is one of those cases that still stands the test of time (despite Tucker Carlson’s best efforts). But what exactly are we to make of Korea?

South Korea is an undeniable success in the history of American foreign policy. That should give us hope for Ukraine.

The ground-level contexts look strikingly similar. The Korean peninsula and the Ukraine/Russian frontier and cultures were both historically fluid and without sharp distinctions. Odessa was and is neither Russian nor Ukrainian, and even today, many on both sides of the 38th parallel would like to see a unified Korea; they have essentially shared languages and had long-standing religious and ethnic ties. Pushing the comparison even further, throughout Korea there were many individuals in the south and north who supported the idea of a collective society, just as in Ukraine there was much more sympathy for Russia prior to the invasion.

One side in each conflict had recently gone through an extensive military upgrade and sensed weakness in their targets. The North Koreans had received Soviet armor and aircraft giving them a technological advantage over their cousins to the South. In the lead up to the Ukraine invasion, the Russians had recently completed a very public project of allegedly modernizing their military, which they seemed anxious to display to the world against a target.

Globally, the East and West were both sending very mixed and easily mistaken signals to each other prior to the Korean and Ukraine wars. Recall the various analysts, journalists, and politicians who swore Russia would not invade Ukraine even as troops were massed on the border? Advocates of non-interventionism now claim that the US had been provocative, but many in the US were bewildered to discover that the Russians believed this. Clearly not everyone was on the same page.

The same was true in Korea. The US had internally and publicly spent little time worrying about a communist action on the peninsula and the US was in the midst of winding down its military, although a hawkish wing of the foreign policy establishment was looking for a reason to reverse that stance. They were about to be given a strong argument for rearmament.

Both wars began in a similar fashion with the aggressors enjoying early and seemingly invincible successes. The Russians marched to Kiev and the North Koreans punched past the 38th parallel conquering Seoul and essentially isolating the remnants of the South Korean military and the initial flow of US troops in a tiny area on the southern tip of Korea. In both instances, the conventional wisdom was that the winning side would complete its victory in no time and resistance was both futile and wasteful.

And yet, neither conflict has ended as it began. From the moment President Zelensky in Ukraine (who shares a number of personality traits with former South Korean president Syngman Rhee) uttered his famous line about not needing a ride but a gun and some ammunition, the Russians began to suffer numerous public setbacks. In Korea, the audacity of General MacArthur, along with Western aid and military assistance, eventually stemmed the North Korean advances, along with bravery and tremendous sacrifices by the two nations that were attacked. While the initial resistance of the South Korean military was feeble and futile as the war progressed, they became more professional and stouter. Surprisingly, the South Korean military today is widely viewed as superior to the conventional forces in the North.

Over the past several years, we have seen the Ukrainian military and intelligence forces essentially revolutionize modern warfare. Whether it was their early, wildly successful embrace of drone warfare or their bold strikes into Russia itself, the Ukrainians have shown themselves to be worthy, if outnumbered, adversaries.

Intervention should be a last resort, but we have to accept that US support for regimes fighting off totalitarianism has had some success.

While both the Ukrainians and international forces in South Korea would reverse their initial losses and push well into the captured territory and even into the aggressor’s land, both wars have settled into bloody grinds. In the remarkably sad case of Korea, this coincided with a protracted negotiation over prisoner exchanges and the specifics of the settlement to the conflict. That delay cost tens of thousands of lives.

Of course, merely identifying parallels and comparisons doesn’t really tell us much about how the Ukraine conflict will end or how the next several decades will go for its social, political, and economic future. But because of the stunning natural experiment between North and South Korea, we can say a few things.

First, it’s entirely possible that Ukraine can regroup, rebuild, thrive, and prosper. Negotiating for its safety and autonomy will be critical, and either NATO or the US will have to guarantee that security for this to work. That’s no small ask, but the case of Korea shows that it is possible. Korea has grown into a mature, albeit quirky, democracy and a showcase for economic development and cultural success. Ask any young person to name their favorite K-Pop band or K drama and you’ll be surprised by the diversity of the answers. South Korea is an undeniable success in the history of American foreign policy. That should give us hope for Ukraine.

Second, Ukraine may have had a shared and somewhat warm view of Russia throughout its history, but today those feelings are buried in the rubble of destroyed buildings and the blood shed by its people. The war has made Ukraine a more unified nation, and one that needs a chance to recover and see what it can do unburdened by a war against a much larger and more powerful neighbor. While the US may want this war to end, we did lengthen it. I would argue Ukraine has earned the right to at least try to build a freer, democratic, pro-market country under the rule of law. The Ukrainians have sacrificed more than enough for that opportunity.

And while many of us who support liberty are right to be skeptical about the ability of the US and its military to reshape the world, in some instances, it has made things “better.” World War II was catastrophic for Europe and Japan, and yet those two parts of the world have been lynchpins for freedom and the Western way of life. In Korea, the South is clearly a successful experiment, especially when compared to the prison camp on its northern border. Even the former Yugoslavia is now peaceful after the US and UN helped facilitate a complicated, bloody transition.

It’s not clear how well Ukraine will do after this war ends, and how long its current leadership will survive. But with some sort of a security commitment from the West, reconstructing Ukraine might very well work. We’ve seen it work under equally challenging circumstances. Intervention should be a last resort, but we have to accept that US support for regimes fighting off totalitarianism has had some success. Even direct military intervention is not always a messy failure. We shouldn’t ignore all of the evidence merely to satisfy our priors. We do so at the risk of errors and the costs of millions who would otherwise live under tyranny and oppression. That’s an empirical, not a normative statement. Using a more rational approach might help us stem the bloodshed and promote the development of a better regime in Europe. The war should end, but perhaps that really is just the beginning.

lawliberty.org · by G. Patrick Lynch · March 17, 2025

10. North Korean human rights groups affected by Trump's aid freeze

The Committee for Human Rights in North Korea (HRNK) and the North Korean Young Leaders Assembly (focused on preparing the north Korea diaspora for leadership in a future free and unified Korea) have never received any funding from NED. HRNK has not received any funding from DRL at State since 2020 yet State has continued to use HNRK research reports for submission of its periodic human rights review.

North Korean human rights groups affected by Trump's aid freeze

The Korea Times · March 19, 2025

A North Korean flag flutters at the North Korean village of Kijong-dong within the demilitarized zone separating the two Koreas, July 19, 2022. Reuters-Yonhap

By Kwak Yeon-soo

U.S. President Donald Trump's push to freeze foreign aid is putting North Korean human rights organizations at risk, with some expressing concerns that they may need to seek alternative funding sources.

In January, the U.S. Department of the Treasury, under pressure from Elon Musk, froze all funding of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which has been a critical source of funding for many NGOs working on North Korean issues and human rights, including Transitional Justice Working Group (TJWG), the Database Center for North Korean Human Rights and the Citizens' Alliance for North Korean Human Rights.

"North Korean human rights organizations have heavily relied on U.S. government funding. Thankfully the U.S. administration has restored partial funding, which allows NED to begin stabilizing operations and resume grant making, but there is still a lot of uncertainty. The temporary budget freeze prompted us to look for ways to diversify funding," said Ethan Hee-seok Shin, a legal analyst at TJWG.

The NED is estimated to have spent about $5 million to support North Korea-focused human rights organizations in 2023. The U.S. State Department’s Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL) bureau is estimated to have spent roughly $5 million annually to help improve the human rights situation in North Korea, according to Sejong Institute.

“The (DRL) and the (NED) have suspended support for North Korean human rights organizations, which will likely deal a major blow to human rights abuse documentation and advocacy efforts,” Peter Ward, a research fellow at Sejong Institute, said in a recent report.

“The South Korean government should consider providing emergency relief and find ways to help North Korean human rights groups survive medium to long term.”

Ward noted that while the Ministry of Unification’s budget increase for supporting private organizations' efforts to promote North Korean human rights is a positive development, it still falls short of the level of assistance provided by the U.S.

Shin pointed out that South Korea’s funding is about one-fifth of U.S. funding. “The government funding doesn’t cover overhead costs like office rent expenses, administrative staff and accounting,” he said.

The unification ministry allocated 2.9 million won ($2 million) for North Korean human rights groups in 2025, up 61.7 percent from the year before.

“We are communicating closely with North Korea human rights groups. We are currently in grant review process after receiving applications. We will do our best to ensure that these civic groups and their activities are supported to the fullest,” a senior unification ministry official said.

Trump’s move to stop financing Voice of America and Radio Free Asia, which have been receiving support from the U.S. government to inform the public about the reality of human rights in North Korea and to inform North Koreans about freedom and democracy, have also raised concerns among activists.

The Korea Times · March 19, 2025

11. North Korean troops key to Russian advances in Kursk, says Ukraine

AI summary of comments to this article:

The involvement of North Korean troops in Kursk has introduced a foreign element to the conflict, with many commenters suggesting that this reflects Russia's desperation. Some argue that North Korea's participation is part of a broader strategy by autocrats like Putin, Xi, and Kim to destabilize global order. There is significant criticism of Donald Trump for allegedly undermining U.S. support for Ukraine, which some believe aids Russia and North Korea. The presence of North Korean troops is seen as a double standard, as Ukraine is not similarly supported by foreign troops.

Excerpts:

Though a combination of factors ultimately hastened Ukraine’s retreat‚ including the loss of supply routes and control of the airspace, the reappearance of North Korean troops — who had withdrawn from the battlefield in January to regroup amid heavy losses — had a “painful effect,” said a lawmaker connected to the Ukrainian military and Korean affairs.

“We are talking about well-trained and well-motivated soldiers in one particular place,” said the lawmaker, who isn’t authorized to speak publicly about the matter. “I cannot say that the Kursk current situation happened because of North Koreans, but the effect of their participation is quite substantial.”

Moscow and Pyongyang have both denied the deployment of troops from North Korea to the battlefield, despite evidence indicating otherwise, including Ukraine’s capture of two soldiers who are now in detention in Kyiv. Last week, a spokesman for the Ukrainian army, Dmytro Likhovy, said that North Korean troops were “one of the main attacking forces of Russian troops in Kursk” and were operating with greater effectiveness than they had over the winter, when they incurred heavy losses.

The return of foreign troops to the front lines in Russia comes as Russian President Vladimir Putin continues to argue against the deployment of foreign peacekeepers to Ukraine, describing it as a threat to Russia.:

North Korean troops key to Russian advances in Kursk, says Ukraine

Superior numbers and attacks on supply lines slowly choked off the Ukrainian forces holding the town of Sudzha and forced their retreat.

UpdatedMarch 18, 2025 at 9:15 a.m. EDTyesterday at 9:15 a.m. EDT

8 min

130

Ukrainian Territorial Defense Forces operate a 120mm mortar aimed at Russian positions on March 9 in the Sumy region of Ukraine. (Diego Fedele/Getty Images)

By Lizzie Johnson, Kostiantyn Khudov and Catherine Belton

KYIV — A fresh supply of North Korean troops, command of the air and a crushing superiority in numbers helped Russia last week retake the town of Sudzha, Ukraine’s last stronghold in western Russia, according to interviews with Ukrainian soldiers and officials familiar with the battles of the last few weeks.

Get concise answers to your questions. Try Ask The Post AI.

Russia’s heavy use of North Korean troops and equipment to retake nearly all of the Kursk region after seven months of Ukrainian control demonstrated the Kremlin’s desire to reclaim the land at any cost and prevent Kyiv from forcing a territorial exchange as part of future negotiations. Russia occupies around 20 percent of Ukrainian territory.

By Monday, Ukrainian troops had almost entirely withdrawn from Kursk, said a soldier familiar with drone operations in the region — who like the others interviewed for this story wasn’t authorized to speak publicly — describing the parts of Kursk still under Ukrainian control as “a tiny patch, practically nothing. Just some border zones.”

On a map from Deep State, a Ukrainian volunteer project that tracks changes on the front line, Ukrainian troops are now shown occupying about 10 percent of the more than 500 square miles that they once held.

“Without North Korean troops, Russia cannot even hold onto its own territories with its own army,” said Ruslan Mykula, the co-founder of Deep State. “These were massive waves of reinforcements, much larger than our group. And the harsh reality is, we simply didn’t have enough ammunition and drones to eliminate them all.”

Following World news

Following

Though a combination of factors ultimately hastened Ukraine’s retreat‚ including the loss of supply routes and control of the airspace, the reappearance of North Korean troops — who had withdrawn from the battlefield in January to regroup amid heavy losses — had a “painful effect,” said a lawmaker connected to the Ukrainian military and Korean affairs.

“We are talking about well-trained and well-motivated soldiers in one particular place,” said the lawmaker, who isn’t authorized to speak publicly about the matter. “I cannot say that the Kursk current situation happened because of North Koreans, but the effect of their participation is quite substantial.”

Moscow and Pyongyang have both denied the deployment of troops from North Korea to the battlefield, despite evidence indicating otherwise, including Ukraine’s capture of two soldiers who are now in detention in Kyiv. Last week, a spokesman for the Ukrainian army, Dmytro Likhovy, said that North Korean troops were “one of the main attacking forces of Russian troops in Kursk” and were operating with greater effectiveness than they had over the winter, when they incurred heavy losses.

The return of foreign troops to the front lines in Russia comes as Russian President Vladimir Putin continues to argue against the deployment of foreign peacekeepers to Ukraine, describing it as a threat to Russia.

While the arrival of North Korean troops last fall prompted the United States to allow Ukraine the use of guided missile systems known as ATACMS, their reappearance has not prompted any new action among Ukraine’s allies.

Military analysts said that Ukraine losing its foothold in Kursk resulted in a retreat that at times bordered on chaotic — but which was better organized than previous withdrawals, such as from Avdiivka last year.

“Kursk was always going to be difficult to hold,” said Michael Kofman, senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “It was simply a matter of time before Russia could take back the salient.”

Death from above

The beginning of the end came when Ukraine lost the sky.

As December tipped into January, Russian drones peppered the skies above Kursk — piercing the calm that Vitalii Ovcharenko had previously experienced that fall on the front line. Ovcharenko, who had arrived with his unit in August, said that on New Year’s Eve drones swarmed six Ukrainian military vehicles as they entered Sudzha, quickly destroying them.

The Russians “moved not just troops but their best UAV operators to this part of the front line,” he said. “We did not have enough artillery shells or missiles to hit their rear.”

Entering and leaving the region became more challenging — even at night — as massive numbers of Russian troops began flanking the rear of Ukraine’s operation, further narrowing their territory and attempting to sever Ukrainian supply routes into Sudzha, cutting off the delivery of ammunition and reinforcements and the evacuation of the dead and wounded.

Ekaterina Panova, 35, second from left, with a child, and Yelena Sudzhenko, 63, second from right, walk with a Red Cross volunteer in Fatezh, Kursk region, on Sunday after evacuating the village of Martynovka. (Tatyana Makeyeva/AFP/Getty Images)

“Russia controlled Ukrainian logistic lines going into Kursk,” said Konrad Muzyka, director of the Poland-based Rochan defense consultancy. “So for the past couple of months, Russians were able to … [make] it incredibly difficult for Ukrainians to sustain their presence in the region.”

The soldier — familiar with drone operations in the Kursk region — described how Russian troops had “superiority in manpower and weaponry,” relying on powerful glide bombs and unjammable fiber-optic drones to disrupt logistics. But they never managed to completely encircle Ukrainian troops, as President Donald Trump falsely claimed in a post on TruthSocial last week, echoing claims made by Putin, according to battlefield maps and military analysts.

“We held on for as long as we could,” the soldier said, describing escape routes that fell under heavy fire. “Once the left flank started collapsing, all efforts should have been focused on holding it. … It’s just heartbreaking to see so much effort wasted, so many lives lost, and now we’re losing ground again.”

Once logistics were cut off, “it became clear that an army without supplies would suffocate. And that’s exactly what happened,” Mykula of Deep State said. “Ukraine didn’t lose the battle on the battlefield. Our forces weren’t driven out. They were simply put in a position where remaining in that salient, with that number of troops and those conditions, became impossible.”

Better prepared

Then, early last month, the North Koreans returned.

While they’d initially operated as simple rifle units, these new brigades included the 91st and 92nd Special Forces and now had their own command structures and attack plans sharpened by previous missions.

Operating in small groups on either flank, they joined elite Russian forces and outnumbered the Ukrainians by a ratio of about 2 to 1 — helping seize the key stronghold of Sverdlikovo near Ukraine’s main logistics routes.

“We’ve found their maps: hand-drawn, extremely detailed,” said Artem, a soldier in Sumy who is familiar with the Kursk operation. “Every movement was written down by hand, perfectly marked. Nobody does that anymore. It felt like something from a bygone era — like a Soviet-style, ultra-structured military approach. Each line was meticulously drawn, as if by someone who had spent their entire life training for this.”

The North Korean soldiers were well equipped with gear that made it difficult to spot them with night-vision goggles, said Oleksandr, 40, an officer who has overseen intelligence operations in the Kursk region since August.

They “made a difference,” he said. “Russians have strong and good allies. They came just in time. … Our infantry is not as fast as it was at the beginning of the war. … Both of our armies are tired.”

Now on the retreat, Oleksandr says he feels only relief.

While some have questioned whether the Kursk operation was worth it, at a meeting with journalists last week President Volodymyr Zelensky said that it had “fulfilled its task” by diverting Russian troops from other fronts, including Pokrovsk and Kharkiv. Still, he admitted that conditions in the region were “very difficult.”

Next steps

The nearly complete Russian operation in Kursk comes at a very symbolic moment — just ahead of the 80th anniversary of Russia’s Victory Day, marking the Soviet Union’s triumph over Nazi Germany, celebrated on May 9.

A Ukrainian official expected a “major concentration of Russia’s efforts” to finish the operation before the big day, which will see world leaders such as China’s Xi Jinping and India’s Narendra Modi attending the celebrations in Moscow. Russian Defense Minister Andrei Belousov went as far as to invite North Korean troops to participate in the May 9 parade.

Chinese President Xi Jinping, left, welcomes Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Qingdao in eastern China's Shandong Province on June 10, 2018. (Alexander Zemlianichenko/AP)

As Russian troops approach the Ukrainian border of its Sumy region, what happens next “will depend on how Russian leadership sets its priorities,” said Mykula of Deep State.

“They will have to choose: Either they focus on establishing a buffer zone, securing some kind of political victory, or they reinforce their existing offensive axes to increase the territory they control and use that as leverage in negotiations,” he said.

Though he didn’t know what would happen next, Oleksandr said, Sumy had been well fortified with trenches and infantry. Plus, he added: “All the experienced guys in Kursk will be waiting for them on Ukrainian soil.”

What readers are saying

12. North Korea orders parents to give children names that reflect revolutionary spirit

RFA continues to soldier on and produce content for our national security mission.

I think north Korea has its own "culture war" against South Korea.

North Korea orders parents to give children names that reflect revolutionary spirit

Residents say that they think it is because the government wants to crack down on South Korean sounding names.

https://www.rfa.org/english/korea/2025/03/18/north-korea-children-names/

By Kim Jieun for RFA Korean

2025.03.18

Social media sharing button

Students attend class in North Korea, April 2, 2018. (KCNA via Reuters)

Read a version of this story in Korean

North Korea has ordered that parents give their children names that reflect the country’s revolutionary spirit -- and in some cases has even told people to change their names if they sound too South Korean, residents told Radio Free Asia.

It’s another example of pushback against what authorities in Pyongyang view as an infiltration of South Korean capitalist culture.

But it also reinforces recent declarations that South Korea is no longer considered part of the same country, and that in fact South Koreans are no longer part of the same race of people, residents said.

Almost every Korean name has a specific meaning, and in the South, parents have the freedom to choose any name without much interference from the state.

But in the North, the government prefers that children be given names that convey loyalty to the state, sound militaristic or express personal virtues.

Recently, it’s become trendy in North Korea to give children names that have good meanings and are easy to pronounce, a resident from the northern province of Ryanggang told RFA Korean on condition of anonymity for safety reasons.

For girls, they include Su Bin (outstanding brilliance), Da On (all good things coming), A Ri (noble and precious), or Si A (righteous and pure character).

For boys, there’s Do Yun (inner strength), Ha Yul (the word of God), Ji U (close, similar-minded, friend), and Min So (good citizen).

But these have now somewhat fallen out of favor according to the order -- and residents think it might be because the government is implying they sound kind of South Korean.

Instead, the government has suggested names that convey the party’s eternal love for the people, like Eun Hye (grace), Eun Dok (benevolence), and Haeng Bok (happiness). Or names that reflect loyalty to the party, like Chung Song (loyalty), Chung Sil (Sincerity) and Chung Bok (Devotion).

The resident said that if names sounded too South Korean, people would be required to change them, but didn’t provide any examples of that happening.

Commitment to the revolution

The new naming rules are meant to reinforce commitment to the revolution, the resident said.

“The party’s directive is to name children in a way that preserves Juche ideology and national identity,” she said, referring to the country’s founding ideology of self-reliance.

“This essentially means that children’s names should never be given in a way that could allow the South Korean puppets to be considered as fellow compatriots.”

(The North Korean government often uses the derogatory term “puppets” to refer to South Koreans, implying that the South is a U.S. puppet state.)

The government hopes that if North Koreans have patriotic names, then fewer will share names with South Koreans, the resident said.

Related Stories

Ordinary people are not happy with the order, she said.

“Some people are expressing discontent, saying, that naming a child should be the parents’ decision, not the party’s,” she said. “The authorities are forcing this revolutionary name changes, controlling every aspect of our lives.”

‘Not Loyal’

In some cases, people with a perfectly acceptable given name are made to change it because of their family name, a resident of the northwestern province of North Pyongan told RFA.

“One resident named their child Chung Song (loyalty), but had to change it because their surname is An,” he said.

“An” means peace, but it has the same pronunciation as the word that means “not.”

“The name An Chung Song therefore means ‘not loyal,’ so the authorities ordered the name to be changed,” the second resident said.

When people heard this, they sarcastically started suggesting negative names for people with the name An, he said.

“Maybe Chung Song should change his name to Byon Jol (treacherous), so he’d be An Byon Jol (not treacherous),” the second resident said. “They are laughing at the authorities' behavior.”

He said that most residents consider the order baffling, because the parents chose these names with hopes for their children’s success, and shouldn’t have to change simply because the government thinks they are South Korean.

“If socialism can be shaken by just a name, where is the so-called invincibility of the North Korean system?”

Translated by Leejin J. Chung. Edited by Eugene Whong and Malcolm Foster.

13. “North Korea intends to spread ‘North Korea’s denuclearization impossibility theory’ through Russia”

It is 19 March and RFA is still producing content.

This is a Google translation.

“North Korea intends to spread ‘North Korea’s denuclearization impossibility theory’ through Russia”

hando@rfa.org

2025.03.19

https://www.rfa.org/korean/in-focus/2025/03/19/north-korea-russia-penuclearization-trump/

An image of North Korean General Secretary of the Workers' Party of Korea Kim Jong-un and Russian President Putin.

North Korean Workers' Party General Secretary Kim Jong-un and Russian President Putin. (Yonhap)

Anchor: Experts have analyzed that North Korea intends to spread the idea of 'North Korea's denuclearization is impossible' to the international community through Russia. Reporter Han Do-hyung reports from Seoul.

A report titled 'Analysis of the Implications of the Russian-Russian War Armistice Negotiations on North Korea' released on the 18th by Sung Ki-young, a senior researcher at the Institute for National Security Strategy (INSS), a research institute under the National Intelligence Service of Korea.

Senior Researcher Sung diagnosed in the report that, “It is highly likely that North Korea will focus its diplomatic strategy on strengthening relations with Russia for the time being even after the end of the Ukraine War.”

Senior Researcher Sung continued, “Even if North Korea-U.S. talks open at some point after the end of the Ukrainian War, North Korea will likely try to exclude the ‘denuclearization’ issue from the agenda by using Russia’s mouth to make the ‘impossibility of denuclearization’ an established fact to the international community.”

Senior Researcher Sung analyzed that North Korea is likely planning to escape diplomatic isolation and secure a certain share within the anti-Western camp by joining Russian President Putin's grand strategy of creating a multipolar international order from a longer-term perspective.

In his report titled “Analysis of the Possibilities and Conditions for US-North Korea Dialogue in the Second Term of the Trump Administration” in December of last year, Senior Researcher Sung also stated, “Even if the Russian-Russian War enters its final stages, the North Korea-Russia alliance will continue, and this will act as a factor that will make it less urgent for North Korea to engage in dialogue with the United States.”

Regarding the possibility that North Korea-Russia relations may weaken after the end of the Russo-Japanese War, Senior Researcher Sung said in a phone call with Radio Free Asia (RFA) on the 19th that even after the end of the war, there are areas where the interests of both countries overlap, such as Russia’s grand strategy (such as overcoming a single system centered on the United States) and North Korea’s escape from diplomatic isolation, and that there is a high possibility that North Korea-Russia closeness will continue for the time being.

[Seong Ki-young, Senior Researcher, Institute for National Security Strategy (INSS)] The war has lasted longer than expected, and North Korea has even deployed a second troop. In addition to the troop deployment, they are currently creating an all-out cooperation structure in various areas such as economy, energy, and culture. Looking at the increased exchanges and close atmosphere between the two countries, I think the Russia-Russia New Treaty is a turning point, and the close structure between North Korea and Russia is likely to continue for some time even after the war.

Related Articles

“North Korea Seeks to Rebuild ‘US Relations’ After Strengthening ‘North Korea-Russia Relations’”

Choi Sun-hee meets with Russian Vice Foreign Minister… Possibility of discussing ‘ceasefire negotiations’

In addition, Senior Researcher Sung said that the case of Ukraine, which lost territory to Russian invasion after giving up its status as a nuclear state, may have served as an opportunity to further strengthen North Korea's obsession with nuclear weapons.

Senior Researcher Sung added that it is quite predictable that North Korea will increase the frequency and intensity of various military training exercises, including joint North Korea-Russia exercises, in order to modernize its military doctrine based on the combat experience it gained through dispatching troops to the Russian-Russian War.

“North Korea to adjust level of criticism against US for the time being”

In addition, Senior Researcher Sung predicted that North Korea will adjust the level of its criticism of the U.S. to avoid creating an unnecessarily hostile relationship with the Trump administration in the future.

On the 4th, Vice Department Director Kim Yo-jong of the Workers' Party of Korea stated regarding the deployment of the US nuclear aircraft carrier Carl Vinson to the Korean Peninsula, "We also plan to seriously consider the option of increasing revolutionary actions." Senior Researcher Sung stated that this statement is interpreted as emphasizing a gradual and step-by-step response rather than an immediate response.

Senior Researcher Sung also expected that North Korea would recognize that there is no need to cause unnecessary military tensions in South Korea, where political instability persists.

Meanwhile, Jeong Seong-yoon, a senior researcher at the Korea Institute for National Unification (KINU), a government-funded think tank under the Prime Minister's Office, also predicted on the 12th in his report titled "Trump's Rush and Inter-Korean Relations" that North Korea will prioritize strengthening relations with Russia as its foreign policy focus this year.

Senior Researcher Jeong said in the report, “From North Korea’s perspective, it is not too late to decide whether to rebuild relations with the U.S. after achieving some results in advancing nuclear capabilities and neutralizing sanctions against the North,” adding, “At least for this year, the keynote of North Korea’s foreign policy is likely to be ‘strengthening North Korea-Russia relations first, then seeking relations with the U.S.’”

The Korean Central News Agency reported on the 16th that North Korean Foreign Minister Choe Son-hui met and spoke with a delegation from the Russian Foreign Ministry the previous day.

The Korean Central News Agency reported on the 16th that North Korean Foreign Minister Choe Son-hui met with a delegation from the Russian Foreign Ministry the previous day and spoke. (Yonhap)

North Korea and Russia appear to have been holding high-level contacts recently.

On the 15th, North Korean Foreign Minister Choe Son-hui and Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Andrei Rudenko met in Pyongyang, and on the 27th of last month, Workers' Party Secretary Ri Hyong met with Russian President Putin in Russia.

North Korea's state-run media outlet, Korean Central News Agency, reported on the 18th that a North Korean government economic delegation led by Minister of Foreign Economic Affairs Yun Jong-ho and a working-level delegation from the Ministry of Health led by Vice Minister of Health Jeon Seol-ryong left Pyongyang the previous day to visit Russia.

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

Editor Yang Seong-won

14. Ukraine says it destroyed three North Korean artillery guns in Russia’s Kursk

Ukraine says it destroyed three North Korean artillery guns in Russia’s Kursk

Footage purportedly shows Russian using Koksan weapons in successful counteroffensive against Ukraine

https://www.nknews.org/2025/03/ukraine-says-it-destroyed-three-north-korean-artillery-guns-in-russias-kursk/

Anton Sokolin March 19, 2025

Ukrainian drone footage purporting to show a strike on a DPRK-made Koksan self-propelled gun in Russia's Kursk in March 2025, and a Koksan during a firing drill in April 2014 (inset) | Images: Ukraine's 14th Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Regiment, KCNA, edited by NK News

Ukraine says it has destroyed three North Korean Koksan self-propelled guns in Russia’s Kursk region, releasing the first evidence that not only DPRK infantry but also artillery supported Russia’s successful counteroffensive in the border region.

Ukraine’s 14th Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Regiment released a video on Tuesday purportedly showing a HIMARS system striking three closely positioned 170mm Koksan units with “high-explosive fragmentation and cluster warheads” in the Kursk region.

The video showed the three artillery units positioned in a wooded area, and the Ukrainian regiment explained that enemy forces had attempted to conceal them by using camouflage nets and installing anti-drone cope cages designed to prevent aerial strikes.

One Russian war blogger attributed the strike to poor camouflaging and visible mud tracks leading to their positions, while claiming that the Koksans sustained only “fragmentation damage.”

“It seems that the long-range firing capability has made the crews complacent, leading them to use and park in the same positions repeatedly.”

Footage purporting to show a Ukrainian HIMARS strike on three DPRK-made Koksan self-propelled guns in Kursk in March 2025 | Source: Ukraine’s 14th Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Regiment via Facebook

The release of the footage followed a similar attack on a Koksan in the Luhansk region of Donbas in February, which marked the first time this type of DPRK artillery was used in combat in Ukraine after multiple reports and videos showed the delivery of Koksans across Russia to the front line.

The attack also came as U.S. and Russian leaders Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin agreed that Moscow and Kyiv would refrain from strikes on energy facilities and infrastructure in Ukraine for 30 days, while initiating talks on maritime ceasefire as part of a larger peace process, according to the White House and Kremlin.

The Russian military, supported by thousands of North Korean troops, has successfully driven out most Ukrainian troops from Kursk since last week. Ukraine occupied large areas of the Russian border region in August, and the setback could weaken its negotiation position in peace talks.

‘RECKLESS’ TACTICS

Ukrainian Lieutenants Serhiy Lipko and Yevhen Nazarenko from Kyiv’s Army TV reviewed footage of the strike on the Koksans and described the position of the units so close together as an “outdated” approach.

Lipko said it was “reckless” to place the systems in an old-fashioned battery-style formation, explaining that it makes them easy targets for reconnaissance units and artillery.

Despite that, the officers suggested that the DPRK military is learning from the deployment of its artillery to the battle zone, pointing to the cope cages as “early attempts at protection against drones.”

“North Korea is making the most of this opportunity through Russia: deploying its weapons, analyzing, adjusting, making modifications and learning,” they concluded.

It is not immediately clear whether the systems were operated by North Korean or Russian personnel. 

Nazarenko suggested that the poor tactics used with the Koksans may be an indicator that inexperienced North Korean troops were controlling them.

Another possibility is that some DPRK commanders were present there just to observe and take notes on the operation that they could pass on to their commanding headquarters, Lipko added.

Kyiv previously assessed that North Korea has supplied roughly half of all the munitions that Russia has used against Ukraine, while providing hundreds of Koksan and 240-mm multiple rocket launch systems alongside ballistic missiles.

Koksan guns have some resemblance to Russian 2S7 Pion systems but have a distinct caliber normally not used in Russia. The system is capable of frequently firing conventional rounds up to 43 kilometers (27 miles) and rocket-assisted projectiles up to 54 kilometers (34 miles).

Edited by Bryan Betts

15. Rare North Korean event gathers heads of ‘people’s units’ that spy on citizens

Always keep in mind that Kim Jong Un is more afraid of the Korean people in the north than he is of the combined ROK and US militaries. This article reinforces that fact. It is why we need information capabilities to penetrate occupied and denied areas (occupied and denied by dictators).

Rare North Korean event gathers heads of ‘people’s units’ that spy on citizens

Meeting is first under Kim Jong Un’s rule and aligns with efforts to strengthen surveillance and ideological control

https://www.nknews.org/2025/03/rare-north-korean-event-gathers-heads-of-peoples-units-that-spy-on-citizens/

Seung-Yeon Chung March 18, 2025

The third national meeting of inminban heads was held in Pyongyang. | Image: KCNA (March 18, 2025)

The heads of North Korean neighborhood watch units tasked with spying on citizens gathered in Pyongyang for a “national meeting” this week, according to state media, in a rare event aimed at strengthening public surveillance and the regime’s ideological control.

“The third national meeting of active leaders of people’s neighbourhood units” — grassroots administrative groups known in the DPRK as inminban — took place from Sunday to Monday and drew hundreds of participants from around the country, with top officials like Premier Pak Thae Song attending.

The event was the first of its kind since leader Kim Jong Un took power over 13 years ago. Seoul’s unification ministry told NK News on Tuesday that North Korea previously held meetings of inminban heads in Nov. 1993 and Jan. 2007.

It notably came as the DPRK state has ramped up crackdowns on perceived violations of communist principles and the spread of outside information in recent years — regime priorities that officials referenced in speeches at the event.

Reviewing “deviations and lessons,” Vice Cabinet Premier Kim Myong Hun called on inminban heads to “thoroughly establish noble and civilized socialist moral discipline and vigorously carry out the struggle against anti-socialist and non-socialist elements as a mass movement,” according to the state-run Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).

All North Korean citizens must belong to an inminban, which may include all the residents in a given block or even a single building, typically consisting of 20-40 households. These neighborhood groups are responsible for mundane tasks like garbage collection, security and maintenance, but they are most notorious for monitoring even the most private aspects of North Koreans’ lives.

At this week’s meeting, Kim Myong Hun referred to them as “lower-echelon organizations of social life linking the inhabitants with people’s power organs and the base of inhabitants’ living.”

Hyun Inae, a North Korean defector and non-resident research fellow at the Ewha Institute of Unification Studies in Seoul, told NK News that the inminban serve as “the best place for surveillance,” relying on neighbors to monitor each other’s activities for unusual behaviors. 

“If people secretly watch [foreign] dramas or broadcasts, neighbors can hear it,” she said, emphasizing that inminban create an environment where so-called anti-socialist behaviors are easily detected due to the lack of privacy from close living quarters.

Inminban also function as a financial monitoring mechanism since suspicion will arise if residents’ expenses exceed their income, the expert said.

However, not everything that neighborhood watch groups do is nefarious.

This week’s meeting emphasized that inminban heads should care “for all households with the heart of a birth mother,” Hyun noted, explaining that inminban can address welfare gaps by identifying struggling households and providing assistance.

For instance, if inminban heads “knock on doors, see that a family is starving, then the unit might collect even just a kilogram of corn per household to give to them,” she said.

The expert described the inminban system as North Korea’s way to address insufficient state resources by “delegating to inminban leaders and members what the state cannot do.”

This week’s meeting comes after North Korea revised its Mass Reporting Law in 2022 and adopted the “Law on Organizing and Operating Neighborhood Units” in Dec. 2023. The latter law includes provisions for regular meetings and also stipulates that inminban head can receive unspecified preferential treatment, likely an incentive to control and surveil residents.

An official from the unification ministry told NK News that North Korea enacted the law “with the purpose of strengthening surveillance and control over residents and mobilizing inminban to strengthen labor mobilization,” adding that this week’s event “appears to be an attempt to reinforce mobilization and control by re-emphasizing this law.”

State media didn’t reveal the location of the meeting but it appears to be the April 25 House of Culture where the country usually hosts major party meetings. | Image: KCNA (March 18, 2025)

Edited by Bryan Betts

16. UN gives WHO the green light to send $63K in vaccine assistance to North Korea

But what does RFK, Jr think? Should we oppose this because these vaccines may cause autism and be harmful to the Korean people in the north? But I do not think we belong to the WHO any more. (Note my sarcasm attempt).

UN gives WHO the green light to send $63K in vaccine assistance to North Korea

Sanctions exemption for lab equipment comes as the DPRK continues to struggle with vaccine-preventable diseases

https://www.nknews.org/2025/03/un-gives-who-the-green-light-to-send-63k-in-vaccine-assistance-to-north-korea/

Jooheon Kim March 19, 2025

A medical worker holds a dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. | Image: Department of Defense photo by Lisa Ferdinando (Dec. 14, 2020)

The U.N. has granted the World Health Organization (WHO) a new sanctions exemption to send laboratory equipment to North Korea to help combat vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs).

The WHO will have until Feb. 2026 to transfer critical medical supplies and laboratory equipment to the DPRK under the exemption, according to a notice posted by the U.N. Security Council’s 1718 Sanctions Committee.

The purpose of the shipments is to enhance the regime’s capacity to diagnose and manage VPDs, including by equipping the DPRK’s National Laboratory with necessary tools to improve its public health infrastructure and support disease control programs targeting vulnerable populations, the notice states.

The WHO’s exemption request lists 20 different types of items that it seeks to send to North Korea, placing the total value of the equipment at US$63,236. The list includes a carbon dioxide incubator, centrifuges and PCR testing kits, among other equipment.

The WHO did not specify where it would send the aid shipment from, but it said that the equipment will enter the country through either the port of Nampho on the east coast or the border city of Sinuiju and be handed over to North Korea’s Ministry of Public Health.

The exemption for the WHO assistance comes as North Korea continues to struggle with vaccine-preventable diseases, particularly tuberculosis. According to the WHO’s 2024 Global Tuberculosis Report, the country has one of the highest rates of tuberculosis in the world, with an estimated 135,000 cases in 2023.

North Korea’s strict COVID-19 border controls in recent years also disrupted regular vaccinations for millions in the country, leading U.N. health organizations to launch a nationwide catch-up campaign that has targeted children and pregnant women. This has included deliveries of millions of doses of vaccines for diseases such as measles, rubella, tetanus, diphtheria, tuberculosis and hepatitis B.

The DPRK still hasn’t allowed international aid workers back into the country since the last ones left in March 2021. This situation makes it difficult to determine the situation on the ground in North Korea and means that U.N. staff cannot be physically present to oversee the shipment and administration of health assistance.

The sanctions exemption for the WHO is the first one that the U.N. has granted this year. The 1718 Sanctions Committee previously gave the green light to the FAO and UNICEF in December to deliver some $136,000 in assistance aimed at improving agricultural production and providing clean water.

Edited by Bryan Betts

17. S. Korea making list of items to import from U.S. for tariff negotiations: trade minister

S. Korea making list of items to import from U.S. for tariff negotiations: trade minister | Yonhap News Agency

en.yna.co.kr · by Kim Na-young · March 19, 2025

SEOUL, March 19 (Yonhap) -- South Korea is drawing up a list of items that can be imported from the United States, Trade Minister Cheong In-kyo said Wednesday, amid U.S. plans to impose "reciprocal" tariffs on its key trade partners with large trade surpluses against the U.S.

"We are continuing to make a list of items the government can encourage public entities to import from the United States," Cheong said in a special lecture for midsized firms on ways to survive in the global trade war.

"Someday, we will be negotiating with the U.S. with these numbers," he added.

His remarks come as Washington is poised to roll out new "reciprocal tariffs" on April 2, though its Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent noted the new tariff scheme may not go into effect on the date for some countries that reach a "pre-negotiated deal" with the U.S. or engage in negotiations.

"It would be a grave mistake to assume the U.S. will simply overlook things and let them slide," Cheong said, adding that Washington has been throwing questions at Seoul on how it will reduce the trade surplus with the U.S. both "directly and indirectly."

The government cannot make the private sector reduce their exports or increase their imports, so it is working to create a list of items that the public sector can import from the U.S., he explained.

This file photo, provided by the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy, shows Trade Minister Cheong In-kyo speaking in an interview with Yonhap News Agency in Belgium on March 10, 2025. (PHOTO NOT FOR SALE) (Yonhap)

Cheong also said the Donald Trump administration is well aware of the fact South Korea imposes less than a 1 percent tariff on U.S. goods under the countries' bilateral free trade agreement (FTA).

Cheong visited Washington last week and met with U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer to discuss tariff rates, which recently became an issue after Trump claimed South Korea's average tariff rate is four times higher than that of the U.S.

The trade minister, however, anticipated it will be difficult for South Korea to completely avoid the U.S. administration's "reciprocal tariff."

Fresh concerns mounted after the U.S. treasury secretary also hinted that new U.S. tariffs will likely be higher for what he called "Dirty-15" countries with high tariffs on U.S. goods.

South Korea posted the ninth-largest trade surplus with the U.S. in 2024, following China, the European Union, Mexico, Vietnam, Ireland, Germany, Taiwan and Japan.

This photo, released by EPA, shows Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent speaking to reporters outside the White House in Washington on March 13, 2025. (Pool photo) (Yonhap)

"Whatever the naming is, I think the general understanding is the U.S. believes it has to take measures with countries that have a trade surplus with the U.S.," a government official said on the condition of anonymity.

Cheong noted the U.S. will likely engage in tariff negotiations soon after it announces its new tariff rate by nation.

"This means the tariff to be imposed on April 2 is not final, and the rate could change depending on what package deal we prepare for negotiations," he said.

The government is also making preparations for negotiations on non-tariff barriers the U.S. may raise issues with, such as regulations on online platforms, according to the trade minister.

Greer reportedly brought up Seoul's sanitary and phytosanitary measures on U.S. agricultural products, a restriction on South Korea's geographic data for Google Maps and digital regulations during last week's talks with Cheong, raising concerns the U.S. will view such issues as non-tariff barriers and use them to pressure South Korea.

The South Korean government has been working to closely communicate with U.S. government officials to address any misunderstandings regarding the country's trade policies and to expand cooperation with Washington in shipbuilding, energy and other areas to create more bargaining chips for tariff negotiations.

Following last month's trip to Washington, Industry Minister Ahn Duk-geun plans to visit the U.S. again later this week to meet with the U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright and other officials.

This illustration depicts the Donald Trump administration's tariff plans. (Yonhap)

nyway@yna.co.kr

(END)

en.yna.co.kr · by Kim Na-young · March 19, 2025

18. U.S. confirms S. Korea's inclusion on DOE list unrelated to nuclear buildup call: FM

Did Westinghouse put pressure on the US over South Korean nuclear power exports overseas? 

U.S. confirms S. Korea's inclusion on DOE list unrelated to nuclear buildup call: FM | Yonhap News Agency

en.yna.co.kr · by Kim Seung-yeon · March 19, 2025

By Kim Seung-yeon

SEOUL, March 19 (Yonhap) -- The United States has confirmed that South Korea's inclusion on the Department of Energy (DOE)'s list of "sensitive" countries is unrelated to growing calls in Seoul to build up its own nuclear weapons, Seoul's top diplomat said Wednesday.

Foreign Minister Cho Tae-yul said Washington has also confirmed that the addition to the DOE list is not connected to speculation that the foreign policy stance of main opposition leader Lee Jae-myung, who is known to lean more toward China than the U.S., was a factor.

"The U.S. has confirmed that both are unrelated," Cho said during a parliamentary session, in response to a lawmaker's question about the reason for the U.S. placement of South Korea on the lowest category of the DOE's "sensitive and other designated countries list" (SCL) in early January.

The inclusion in the list has sparked concerns in Seoul over the bilateral alliance and the future of its partnership with Washington in nuclear cooperation and other advanced technology sectors amid the political uncertainty surrounding impeached President Yoon Suk Yeol.

Foreign Minister Cho Tae-yul speaks during a parliamentary session at the National Assembly in western Seoul on March 19, 2025. (Yonhap)

"Since the U.S. has publicly confirmed that this is a matter of technical security rather than issues like nuclear armament or industrial espionage, the most appropriate approach is to trust that and address the issue accordingly," Cho said.

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

Washington apparently told the ministry that it was related to violations of security regulations by South Korean researchers during their visits to DOE-affiliated laboratories or participation in joint research projects.

When asked why the government had not learned about it earlier, Cho said it was "natural" that they were unaware, as the inclusion was an internal matter not even shared among DOE officials.

Cho stressed the government is making all-out efforts to have South Korea removed from the list.

"We're doing our best and I wouldn't make any prejudgment," Cho said. "I believe the upcoming ministers' meeting will serve as an important occasion."

Cho appeared to be referring to the planned visit by Industry Minister Ahn Duk-geun later this week. Ahn is expected to hold talks with Energy Secretary Chris Wright, on a trip expected to focus on finding a way to reverse the designation before it comes into effect April 15.

elly@yna.co.kr

(END)

en.yna.co.kr · by Kim Seung-yeon · March 19, 2025

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