Is it conspiratorial to think that China has played a massive role in the modernization of North Korea's armed forces? These guys struggled for decades and failed to modernize, yet right when China becomes the dominant manufacturing nation (especially around ~2015), suddenly North Korea seems to modernize its military on a massive scale. For my money, I just don't see how you can explain the modernization rate of North Korean arms without China providing expertise, guidance, tooling, etc to North Koreans over the last ~10 or so years.
North Korea Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter FORBIN
- Start date
-
- Tags
- north korea
My theory is that money and resources that were used to develop the intial nuclear capability are no longer needed in such quantities and were redirected towards other branches of the military. First the army then the navy and later the airforce.
tbf, if they are mostly littoral or near shore patrol, their comfort is less important compare to US and some NATO ships like the notoriously underarmed German frigates which are meant for long oversea deployments.
That said, I don't exactly understand the purpose of a North Korean surface fleet for its foreign affairs and objectives. Are they going to sail with PLAN? My quick google haven't find them train that much with PLAN
It isn't conspirational, it's just wrong, and tends to come from very misinformed view of relationship between two countries.
What China did, at most, is it didn't interfere with DPRK routine components through it anymore than it did with other countries doing same thing.
The main military S&T partner for North Korea, for many decades, was in fact Iran.
Protection of trade - Korean vesseles are routinely being boarded by not just US, but complete outsiders to the region. Part of the mission is non-nuclear deterrence of nations outside of the region, doing same thing.
Broader maritime security - it is normal for US to send in SF teams into DPRK and don't even flinch about it.
Nuclear deterrence - North Korea is small, and despite its emergence as a nuclear power, risk of first strike is significant; its own air defenses aren't quite comparable to what was just dismantled in Iran as well. Any spatial distribution will help.
Protecting deployment of future SSBNs. Straightforward.
Last edited:
Russia
- R&D priorities have shifted. With North Korea having essentially completed its nuclear program in 2017, it was able to redirect the vast capital and resources previously dedicated to it to other branches of the armed forces.
- Kim Jong Un's reforms aim to make military R&D more effective.
Dismissing DPRK advances is the exact same chauvinism as when Americans dismiss Chinese advances as stolen, copied or just somehow inherently inferior.
I would also remind people that both China and Russia agreed to very severe UN sanctions on the DPRK as late as 2017 exactly because they were uncomfortable with their weapons development. Those sanctions are still technically in effect from what I understand and it wasn't till some time after the start of the SMO in Ukraine that Russia vetoed the budget for enforcing/monitoring the sanctions that the DPRK would be able to more freely import machinery and dual-use components while several systems have obviously been in development since before then.
A few decades ago, before their physical economy was undermined by financialization, France was competetive on nuclear submarines, submarine launched ICBMs, nuclear warheads, fighter jets (with indigenous engines) and more on the military side, while also doing nuclear power, civil aviation, high-speed rail, rockets, satellites and multiple internationally successful car companies on the civilian side.
1. The DPRK population is only half of what the French was at the time, but it should be possible make up for that by having a narrower focus.
2. No-one would say any of that stuff wasn't french just because they imported various components from friendly countries or because some of their engineers studied abroad.
I would also remind people that both China and Russia agreed to very severe UN sanctions on the DPRK as late as 2017 exactly because they were uncomfortable with their weapons development. Those sanctions are still technically in effect from what I understand and it wasn't till some time after the start of the SMO in Ukraine that Russia vetoed the budget for enforcing/monitoring the sanctions that the DPRK would be able to more freely import machinery and dual-use components while several systems have obviously been in development since before then.
A few decades ago, before their physical economy was undermined by financialization, France was competetive on nuclear submarines, submarine launched ICBMs, nuclear warheads, fighter jets (with indigenous engines) and more on the military side, while also doing nuclear power, civil aviation, high-speed rail, rockets, satellites and multiple internationally successful car companies on the civilian side.
1. The DPRK population is only half of what the French was at the time, but it should be possible make up for that by having a narrower focus.
2. No-one would say any of that stuff wasn't french just because they imported various components from friendly countries or because some of their engineers studied abroad.
I believe North Korea is trolling the US Navy by assigning first in class Choe Hyon the same hull number as the Arleigh Burke first in class.Kim Jong Un visited the destroyer "Choe Hyon 51" on March 3 and 4 during its navigation tests and also attended cruise missile launch exercises, and photo's confirmed that the engines are on board
View attachment 170758
It isn't trolling, it's signalling. Same reason why DPRK systems on purpose look so much like systems they emulate.
It's always a message "we have it too now, don't mess with us".