4 Comments

Professor Daniel Drezner: Your narrative is of critical strategic importance:

"One could argue that this is merely the latest development [Russian dependence on North Korean troops] in a conflict that is turning into the Spanish Civil War of the 21st century. Still, this seems like a pretty significant escalation of DPRK [North Korean] involvement, which leads to the obvious question: why?!

"For Russia, the incentives are pretty clear. As the Times points out, “Moscow is straining to maintain its costly offensives in Ukraine without destabilizing Russian society. U.S. officials estimate that Russia is recruiting 25,000 to 30,000 new soldiers a month, just enough to replace the dead and the wounded.

* * *

"There is a logic to this kind of DPRK-Russia cooperation. But I really have to wonder if Russia has truly thought this move through. Tens of thousands of malnourished DPRK troops does not buy Putin that much time. More importantly, increased cooperation with North Korea gives South Korea a pretty big incentive to reciprocate. And, sure enough, that’s exactly what the ROK leadership is saying. According to Choe’s story:

"On Tuesday, the office of the South Korean president, Yoon Suk Yeol, accused the North of “driving its young people into an unjustifiable war as mercenaries.”

"It warned that it could take “phased countermeasures” to respond to the growing “military collusion” between Moscow and Pyongyang. Such steps could include supplying both defensive and offensive weapons to Ukraine, a senior South Korean official said on Tuesday, speaking on condition of anonymity.

"So far, Seoul has limited its direct support for Ukraine to humanitarian and financial aid and nonlethal military equipment, such as mine detectors.

"Far be it for me, a non-security person, to have the final word on this subject, but this seems like a bad deal for Russia. If the choice is between:

"Accepting North Korean troops with the understanding that South Korea will respond with sending advanced weaponry to Ukraine; or

"The status quo.

"I, for one, would go with the status quo! Ukraine is really, really good at taking advanced military weaponry and using them to wreak havoc on Russian forces! Why take any non-pivotal action that risks an outcome that leads to a better-armed opponent?!

"Then again, my preferences are clearly not Vladimir Putin’s preferences. He has been acting like he has an expiring window of opportunity ever since 2022. This move seems akin to that worldview."

Expand full comment

My simple take about the use of Koreans is that Putin is trying to pull EU/NATO ground forces in so he has an off ramp for the war. See the bullies are ganging up on poor Russia. Same as always.

The endgame will be similar to the end of the Korean War.

Expand full comment

"The endgame will be similar to the end of the Korean War." I assume you mean a truce along lines already established, with Russia in control of the Donbas. I find this accurate.

Expand full comment

This would seem to help reinforce the friendshoring and development of the broader anti-China military alliances. If the US and Western Europe finance Ukraine working with the South Korean defense industry on really pushing drone warfare and anti-EW measures that could be very bad for Russia.

Expand full comment