The Daily Signal - What to Know About Latest Russia-North Korea Alliance

Episode Date: October 31, 2024

Russia and North Korea have a long history of partnership, but it is unclear if the relationship “is a true alliance or more a marriage of convenience,” according to Bruce Klingner, a senior research fellow in the Asian Studies Center at The Heritage Foundation.   “The longer it goes on, it seems a bit more of an alliance,” Klingner says. “The two leaders, [Vladimir] Putin and Kim [Jong Un], signed a strategic partnership agreement earlier this year where they pledged to help defend each other, and Putin has sort of cited that as a reason for justifying North Korean troops being there because they're defending Russia against attacks by not only Ukraine, but he claims NATO,” Klingner explains.  The Pentagon announced Monday that North Korea has sent about 10,000 troops to Russia to aid in Russia’s fight against Ukraine.  In exchange for troops, Klingner says North Korea is receiving “funding, getting cash, both direct and indirectly, likely food deliveries, fuel deliveries, and what is particularly worrisome is concerns that it may also be getting military technology.”  Klingner joins “The Daily Signal Podcast” to discuss the relationship between Russia and North Korea and what the two countries' latest partnership means for the war in Ukraine. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is the Daily Signal podcast for Thursday, October 31st. I'm Virginia Allen. Earlier this week, the Pentagon announced that North Korea has sent an estimated 10,000 troops to Russia to aid in Russia's war against Ukraine. So what exactly is North Korea receiving from this, from sending their men to Russia to fight? And what does this development mean for the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine, and does it signal a new willingness for aggression from North Korea? Bruce Klinger is a senior research fellow in the Asian Studies Center at the Heritage Foundation, and he joins us in just a moment to answer those questions and more. Stay tuned for our conversation after this.

So what is going on with Ukraine? What is this deal with the border? How do you feel? about school choice. These are the questions that come up to conservatives sitting at parties, at dinner, at family reunions. What do you say when these questions come up? I'm Mark Geine, the host of the podcast for you. Heritage Explains brought to you by all of your friends here at the Heritage Foundation. Through the creative use of stories, the knowledge of our super passionate experts, we bring you the most important policy issues of the day and break them down in a way that is understandable. So check out Heritage Explains wherever you get your podcasts. Bruce Klinger, Senior Research Fellow in the Asian Studies Center at the Heritage Foundation,

joins us now. Bruce, thanks so much for being here. Well, thanks for having me. Well, I want to begin with this news that we received on Monday from the Pentagon, that there are 10,000 troops from Russia that have been sent to North Korea. What else do we know that North Korea may be sent to Russia? What do we know about this? Well, the sending of the troops is an escalation of, but also a continuation of an ongoing relationship between North Korea and Russia, particularly during the last two years. So U.S. intelligence, South Korean intelligence, and others have assessed that North Korea has probably sent 8 million rounds of artillery to Russia during the past year and a half or

two years. The artillery that North Korea has is sort of Soviet era, as well as things they're producing more recently, but it's compatible with the Russian artillery. So they've sent massive amounts of artillery. There were some reports that perhaps half of the artillery shells that Russia has been using in Ukraine are from North Korea. So certainly it's allowed Russia to continue, if not expand, its military operations against Ukraine.

In addition, North Korea has sent dozens of newer short-range ballistic missiles. Now, what's sort of a bit odd is that a lot of the artillery shells and the new missiles have failed, perhaps up to 50% of the missiles that are newly produced have not hit their target, and then there is apparently sort of a large dud rate amongst the artillery shells. So the questions about how effective they've been, however, given the massive amounts, it certainly allowed Russia to continue its operations against Ukraine. What North Korea is getting in return is the big question. Certainly funding, getting cash, both direct and indirectly,

likely food deliveries, fuel deliveries, and what is particularly worrisome is concerns that it may also be getting military technology. So some experts have kind of jumped to the idea that it could be the crown jewels of military technology, nuclear warhead design, reentry vehicle design, ICBMs. I think most of us think that that's too high a price that Russia may not be willing to pay, but it could be conventional weapon technology to improve North Korea's weapons or even military production technology to enable North Korea to produce them more effectively or more efficiently. So, but any improvement of North Korea's military technology is very worrisome because it would increase the threat to our allies,

South Korea and Japan, as well as U.S. forces and citizens stationed over there. On that nuclear side that you mentioned, have in the past Russia and North Korea shared some of that technology, or do they keep their nuclear programs completely separate? They keep them separate. And actually, the genesis of the North Korean nuclear program in the early 1960s was based on Pyongyang's view that it couldn't trust either of its superpower allies, that it had to have an indifference. nuclear weapons program. They felt that Russia had sold out its Cuban ally in the Cuban missile crisis of 1962 and that China did not share the information from its 1964

nuclear test. So North Korea felt like it had to have its own programs. The same with missiles. Even if they acquired missiles from Russia or elsewhere overseas, they then back-engineered them and produce them themselves. So North Korea has felt, you know, in its 5,000-year history that it's surrounded by larger powers and that even when the relationships with China and Russia or the Soviet Union were very good, North Korea still played off the communist superpowers against each other because they don't really treat any of their powerful neighbors. Okay. How long does the relationship go back between Russia and North Korea? How long have they had some form of partnership? Well, really, since the beginning of the creation of North Korea after World War II. So

the Soviets sort of engineered the ascension to power of Kim Il-sung, the founding father of North Korea, who's the grandfather of the current leader. But the relationship between North Korea and the Soviet Union and Russia, as the relationship between North Korea and China, have ebden flowed and flowed over the years. So North Korea, even though it's very small and both Russia and China are very large, North Korea is able to play off the two superpowers against each other, as well as sort of playing off the other neighbors, the South Korea, Japan, the United States,

in order to get benefits of different kinds, but maintaining a great deal of independence. So the current iteration of the Russia-North Korea relationship is really since the invasion of Ukraine two years ago. So after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the relationship was pretty much on ice for a number of decades. And then now North Korea sees the opportunity to gain a lot of benefits by helping Putin in Ukraine. Well, and one of those benefits that I've heard folks talk about is the fact that North Korean troops have not seen combat since the 1950s. And this is potentially an opportunity for their men to get a little bit of a real.

world training in the field of combat and weapons technology and that sort of thing. Have you been hearing similar commentary as to why maybe they're acting now? Right. Well, I think primarily it's a money-making operation for Kim Jong-a and the current leader in a number of ways. There were some estimates that North Korea has provided five and a half billion dollars worth of artillery shells. So whatever direct benefits are getting. Also, the North Korean soldiers are reportedly getting $2,000 a month, most of which will be garnished by the North Korean regime. That's very similar to when North Korean workers go to Far East Russia or China. The wages they get mostly go to the leadership.

So it's a number of ways that the regime is gaining money or various benefits from providing troops. There's a lot of questions about how effective these troops will be, even though some of them are said to be special forces. It's not special forces like we think of our green berets or seals. A number of them may just be basically infantry, but designated as special forces or given infiltration missions like special forces. So we think that they're likely to be used in combat rather than rear area support or logistics. But there's a lot of questions about how effective. they will be not only because they don't have combat experience, but they don't have very good weapons, and they may not be very exposed to modern warfare in the sense of drones and combined

arms operations, et cetera. There were even some intercepted communications of Russian soldiers saying, what are we going to do with these guys? You know, they're worthless. So we haven't seen them in combat. But on the upside for North Korea, they could get combat experience, which they can then bring back to North Korea and train other troops on the peninsula. The downside could be if they're not effective, then not only Russia will see that this offer by North Korea isn't worth much, but also the world at large will see that the North Korean troops aren't very good. Also, there's questions as to will many of the North Koreans try to defect? even before this influx of troops, you know, 18 apparently deserted or tried to desert.

And so one of the things that North Korean defectors or escapees have been traveling to Ukraine to gen up Psiops psychological operations to try to induce a number of the North Korean troops to defect. Oh, okay. That's a really interesting development. And that would certainly change things, I would say, for North Korea. And fascinating. That's really, really fascinating. What about South Korea? What are they, what are they saying in response to this development? Well, so far, South Korea has provided humanitarian assistance, pledges of rebuilding once, you know, combat is over. But they have refrained from any kind of direct provision of lethal aid. But they have provided indirect aid. So they backfilled U.S. artillery shipments to Ukraine. So South Korea provided 500,000 rounds of 155 millimeter artillery

to the United States as a backfill to what the U.S. had sent to Ukraine. South Korea also has a very robust defense industry, one of the biggest in the world. And they've had really massive arms sales to a number of countries, including Poland, which then enables Poland to sort of refurbish after they've provided their own weapons into Ukraine. And Poland used to be part of the Warsaw Pact with the Soviet Union, so they have a lot of sort of Soviet-compatible or Soviet-era weapons, as does Ukraine. So it's, they've been providing indirect aid, but there is growing pressure on South Korea to go ahead and provide direct lethal aid, now that North Korea is more directly involved in the conflict. And the UN administration,

administration initially, sort of said, yes, we will stand up, we will do a stronger response. But since then, it seems to be still being timid and saying, well, they'll send some personnel for interrogation, for translation services. In the future, they might send defensive weapons, such as surface-air missiles. And then if North Korea or Russia crosses an undefined red line, then they might provide direct lethal aid, where many are asking, South Korea to go ahead and do it now. Okay. Well, and I suppose in thinking about escalation, if South Korea sent those troops to Ukraine, how would that be viewed by North Korea, by Russia? I mean, would that be seen as a pretty severe escalation that could potentially lead to triggering

a broader global conflict? Well, not necessarily a broader global conflict, but Russia has threatened that it would respond to South Korea if they provided direct lethal aid, not militarily, but economically or diplomatically or some form of intimidation. And that's been one of the reasons that South Korea has been reluctant to kind of cross the line and provide directly aid. In a way, similar to South Korea has been more reticent than some of our other allies and directly criticizing China because for South Korea, like many Asian countries, is its largest trading partner. And in the past, when South Korea did an action, which was

allowing the deployment of U.S. surface-tair missiles that were more effective than South Korean missiles, China responded economically. It cost South Korea about $15 billion in various industries. So South Korea has been reluctant to more directly criticize or take actions, which could trigger some kind of Chinese or in this case Russian response. Okay. So how do you see this shaking out in the next several weeks and months? Is this really going to be a big game changer for Russia in its fight against Ukraine? Well, we don't know what the top end of the North Korean troop provision will be if it's 10 to 12,000 troops. That's not going to be a game changer that could be sort of several days worth of casualties as Russia just sort of throws troops into the meat

grinder. So it's not going to turn the tide of the war. It allows Russia to continue and prolong its attacks on Ukraine. But if North Korea sends more troops, then that could have more of an impact. So we see that not necessarily, there's a lot of questions as to whether the North Korean-Russian relationship is a true alliance or more a marriage of convenience. Sort of the longer it goes on, it seems a bit more of an alliance. The two leaders, Putin and Kim, signed a strategic partnership agreement earlier this year, where they pledged to help defend each other. And Putin has sort of cited that as a reason for justifying North Korean troops being there

because they're defending Russia against attacks by not only Ukraine, but he claimed. NATO. But there's not really a sense, I think, by experts that Russia would send troops if something happened on the peninsula. Even during the Korean War, they only sent a handful of pilots. And certainly Russia would be focused on troops and equipment going into Ukraine. So, but it is a big debate amongst the Korea watchers, what kind of, particularly what Putin may be willing to provide to Kim. And now that Kim's providing troops, is the price higher on military technology than would have been the case without the troops. What about for the U.S. what should a U.S. response look like, or should there be a U.S. response to this?

Well, it's a quandary because even with the artillery shells and missiles that have been going into Russia and Ukraine, there's not really a way to intercept them because they've been traveling via the direct land route, via rail. And even with ships, it's a short transit from North Korea to Russian ports. And the UN resolutions, which were passed in response to North Korean nuclear and missile actions and violations, don't give any country the authority to intercept ships on the high seas. So there's not really a way to intercept the artillery shells, the missiles, or the troops. So then it leaves whether we try to increase sanctions on North Korea, Russia, other entities that are facilitating not only this behavior, but other violations behavior. Successive U.S. administrations have all underachieved, even on fully enforcing our own laws against China, North Korea, Russia, etc.

Or is it trying to induce our allies to provide more direct lethal aid? or European allies or U.S. actions to provide more aid or induce our allies to provide more military aid. So it's not really much we can do on the interception. It's more on what sanctions we could impose or what military actions either we or allies do in response. Okay, I see. Bruce, any final thoughts before we let you go? Well, one thing that we're just following very recently is some headlines just today that South Korean intelligence thinks that North Korea may be preparing for an ICBM and or nuclear test, sort of the October surprise that many people always predict.

They may do that, but then again, both the U.S. and South Korea said in March 22 that a nuclear test was imminent, and that hasn't happened since then. So a lot of times with North Korea military provocations or tests, we just have to wait for it to happen and then respond accordingly. The Heritage Foundation's Bruce Klinger, Bruce, thank you so much for your analysis today. We really appreciate it. Well, thanks for having me. And for all of our listeners, don't forget to hit that subscribe button so you never miss out on brand new shows from the Daily Signal podcast. And if you would, take a minute to leave us a comment, a five-star review. We love hearing your feedback. We'll be back with you around

five o'clock today for our Top News edition. And we have a fun, kind of big announcement coming at the end of the week. So make sure to catch the show on Friday for that announcement. We'll see you right back here at Five for Top News. The Daily Signal podcast is made possible because of listeners like you. Executive producers are Rob Louis and Katrina Trinko. Hosts are Virginia Allen, Brian Gottstein, Tyler O'Neill, and Elizabeth Mitchell. Sound designed by Lauren Evans, Mark Geinney, John Pop, and Joseph von Spakovsky. To learn more or support our work, please visit DailySignal.com.