Abstract

This paper analyses North Korea’s unprecedented deployment of troops to Russia in its war against Ukraine, exploring the timeline of events, tactical analysis, underlying motivations of participating actors, and the broader global implications. North Korea’s involvement marks a significant escalation, providing Russia with manpower while granting North Korea military experience, resources, and diplomatic leverage. Rooted in a recent mutual defence pact, this alliance heightens tensions globally, particularly in East Asia, as South Korea considers increasing its support for Ukraine. The paper concludes that while practical limitations exist, this partnership could reshape geopolitical alignments and will influence the conflict in Ukraine.

Introduction

“Embarrassing comedown for Moscow, bad news for Ukraine, and a very scary development for the rest of the world” is how Foreign Policy described the recent report of North Korean troops joining Russia in its war against Ukraine (Johnson, 2024). But what exactly led to this alliance, and what does it mean for the world? This issue will outline the timeline of events, tactical analysis, underlying motivations of participating actors, and the broader global implications of this development.

Timeline of the Events

North Korea has long supported Russia's military ventures in Ukraine, but recent developments mark unprecedented levels of involvement. North Korea has consistently supplied arms to Russia, and intelligence reports have previously noted the presence of North Korean military engineers in Russia, assisting with engineering projects and specifically instructing on the use of North Korean ammunition. These claims were denied by both the Kremlin and Pyongyang despite extensive evidence (Picheta et al., 2024). 

On October 17th, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky publicly stated that Ukrainian intelligence indicated 10,000 North Korean troops would join Russia's force in Ukraine (Bertrand et al., 2024). Initially, Russian Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov dismissed this claim as a hoax (Regan et al., 2024). However, evidence soon surfaced; one video provided to CNN showed North Korean soldiers receiving uniforms and equipment (CNN, 2024), others revealed a Russian speaker in one video remarking: “Here are the new reinforcements. This is just the beginning. There are more.” Additionally, a published questionnaire for arriving soldiers detailing uniform sizes in both Korean and Russian was acquired, confirming North Korean troops receiving training in Russia (Yee et al., 2024).

The White House has estimated the number of North Korean soldiers at around 3,000 and condemned the move as a violation of UN Security Council resolutions. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin noted that if deployed, these soldiers would be considered “fair targets” (Bertrand et al., 2024).

Following these developments, Russian President Vladimir Putin did not deny their presence. When questioned about satellite images showing North Korean troop movements, he replied: “Images are a serious thing. If there are images, then they reflect something.” However, he compared it to NATO officers and instructors supporting Ukraine (Wintour, 2024). Later, Peskov acknowledged the troops' presence, framing it as a part of a developing relationship with North Korea not directed against third parties (Regan et al., 2024).

Their presence on the battlefield has reportedly already led to casualties, with officials from both Seoul and Kyiv confirming that some North Korean soldiers have been killed to date (Graham-Harrison & McCurry, 2024).

Tactical Analysis

Sources differ on the exact reasons behind Russia's decision to involve North Korean troops. As mentioned, some view it as a desperate move by Russia (Johnson, 2024), attributing it to manpower shortages and domestic opposition to conscription, particularly after the unpopular draft to counter Ukrainian advances near Kursk (CNN, n.d.). Austin commented on the development, noting that Putin “may be in even more trouble than people realise” (Bertrand et al., 2024).

However, other experts argue this is a calculated tactical decision, not a desperate one, as Russia is currently making significant gains on the battlefield. These sources suggest North Korean troops may be tasked with stabilising the situation around Kursk, allowing Russian soldiers to concentrate on other fronts (Fix & Harris, 2024). Given the recent warming of North Korean–Russian relations, this appears less like a last-minute solution, but more as a result of their military pact.

Russian–North Korean Military Pact

In June, Putin visited North Korea—the first visit of its kind in two decades—and during his trip, the two countries formalised a mutual agreement pledging immediate military support if either was attacked (Picheta et al., 2024). The agreement spans military matters, foreign policy, and trade cooperation. According to North Korean sources, if either nation is invaded, the other must deploy “all means at its disposal without delay” to provide “military and other assistance.” This arrangement revives a level of cooperation reminiscent of the 1960s, when a similar treaty existed but was abandoned after the USSR’s collapse and later replaced by a weaker agreement (Tong-Hyung & Heintz, 2024).

Experts, however, note that the treaty’s commitments are carefully worded with specific limitations. It invokes both domestic laws and the UN Charter, meaning Russia is obligated to respond only if North Korea is not the aggressor, if an attack on North Korea is legally recognized as an act of war in Russia, and if Russia’s defence of North Korea aligns with UN justification. While the language of automatic intervention appears strong, it may be less concerning in practice. For instance, the US has maintained a permanent troop presence in South Korea under a comparatively weaker treaty. Furthermore, while North Korean leader Kim Jong Un referred to it as an “alliance,” Putin avoided such language (Tong-Hyung & Heintz, 2024).

In essence, this pact formalises an already existing relationship, signalling the world—particularly the US—of their close ties (Tong-Hyung & Heintz, 2024). Details of the agreement are likely to unfold as events progress, as demonstrated by the news of North Korean troops’ involvement in the Ukraine conflict.

In response to the agreement, South Korea stated it may reconsider its limited support for Ukraine. Russia, however, has assured that the treaty is not directed at South Korea, noting that there would be no threat unless it attacks North Korea first. Putin has also not ruled out the possibility of a separate agreement with South Korea (Tong-Hyung & Heintz, 2024).

So what exactly is driving North Korea’s closer ties with Russia and, specifically, its decision to send troops into an active conflict?

North Korea’s Gains from War Involvement

North Korea has significant motivations for strengthening its ties with Russia, and this agreement has likely come with specific promises from Putin to bolster North Korea’s military capabilities. The war in Ukraine provides an ideal opportunity for North Korea to test its military in real combat conditions (Johnson, 2024). Despite Kim Jong Un’s frequent military parades, North Korea’s armed forces lack actual combat experience, and their effectiveness is impacted by the country’s isolation, harsh living conditions, and ageing equipment, much of it from times of the Soviet Union (Draudt-Véjares, 2024). This involvement resembles past precedents, such as South Korean troops fighting alongside US forces in the American war in Vietnam (Johnson, 2024).

Putin has probably offered North Korea material resources—cash, food, and other essentials (McCarthy, 2024). The North Korean army also suffers from shortages, as seen with their pilots seldom flying due to the lack of jet fuel (Choe, 2024). Additionally, Russia’s support may extend to bolstering North Korea’s space capabilities (McCarthy, 2024). Overall, North Korea will enhance its standing with a powerful international ally.

Harry Kazianis, a senior director of National Security Affairs at the Center for the National Interest, summarised this partnership: “North Korea’s forces only have one mission: to fight and die for Russia and make Kim Jong-Un billions of dollars in the process, ensuring Pyongyang has more than enough cash to evade sanctions and never give up its nuclear weapons” (McCurry & Harding, 2024).

However, North Korea’s decision to send troops comes with risks. Significant loss of life is anticipated (Draudt-Véjares, 2024). South Korean intelligence suggests the deployed forces are among North Korea’s best, while other analysts believe they are likely regular soldiers, and even described them as nothing more than “cannon-fodder mercenaries” (Choe, 2024). This view further underscores the regime’s disregard for the lives of its soldiers under Kim Jong-Un’s rule. Nevertheless, this development will have a significant impact not only on the war itself but also on global relations.

Impact on Global Relations

The deployment of North Korean troops marks the first instance of a foreign government sending troops in support of Russia (Graham-Harrison & McCurry, 2024). South Korea responded by summoning the Russian ambassador in Seoul and demanding the “immediate withdrawal of North Korean troops” (Regan et al., 2024). However, the ambassador maintained that the cooperation complies with international law (Draudt-Véjares, 2024).

Seoul has already dispatched officials to Ukraine to share intelligence on North Korean battlefield tactics and participate in the interrogation of captured North Korean soldiers. It has also reiterated its intent to reconsider its restrictions on arms supplies to Ukraine (Graham-Harrison & McCurry, 2024). Despite being the world's 9th largest arms supplier, South Korea is bound by its 1957 Foreign Trade Act, which prohibits the export of arms for use in active war zones, originally formulated in the aftermath of the Korean War when South Korea sought to avoid backlash from taking sides. So far, South Korea has manoeuvred around this by indirectly supplying Ukraine with arms via the US. The US sends Ukraine weapons from its stockpiles, while South Korea sends the US replacements. To fully lift the restriction, however, South Korea would need to amend its constitution (Borowiec, 2024).

North Korea’s strengthening alliance with Russia amplifies the threat it poses to its neighbours. The two Koreas are now engaged in a proxy conflict in Europe (Draudt-Véjares, 2024). If Kim Jong Un feels emboldened by his partnership with Putin, he may adopt a more aggressive stance toward South Korea. These developments enhance Kim’s leverage over Putin. As the war drags on—and experts predict it is far from over—Putin’s reliance on North Korea could deepen, fortifying the Kim regime’s power even more day by day (Johnson, 2024).

Although some speculate this could signal a new axis of power involving North Korea, Russia, China, and Iran, it is more suitable to see this as a cooperation of survival, with high coordination between these nations being unlikely. China, in particular, has been hesitant to weigh in on these developments, aiming to promote its image as a global leader instead (McCarthy, 2024). Yet, unless China distances itself, it risks being perceived as an enabler of the war in Ukraine, which could hinder Beijing's efforts to improve its relations with the EU. Furthermore, a closer Russian–North Korean partnership might indicate a waning influence of China over North Korea (Fix & Harris, 2024).

Conclusion

This paper argues that the deployment of North Korean troops to support Russia in Ukraine signals a strategic alliance that marks a significant escalation, providing Russia with needed manpower while granting North Korea military experience, resources, and diplomatic leverage. This partnership heightens tensions globally, particularly in East Asia, as South Korea considers increasing its support for Ukraine. 

However, the cooperation between North Korea and Russia introduces uncertainties about its practical effectiveness. Russian soldiers have reportedly mocked their North Korean counterparts, raising questions about morale and communication given the language barrier between them (Regan et al., 2024). One wonders how this alliance will shape the upcoming winter months as Ukraine faces an intensified energy crisis and the outcomes of the US elections loom large (Fix & Harris, 2024). Any shift could disrupt the scales of the conflict. 

As the conflict in Ukraine persists, these dynamics suggest an evolving landscape where strengthened alliances may redefine international relations.