“Comprehensive strategic partnership” has become diplomat-speak par excellence, a phrase that now accompanies canapes and the cocktail circuit as a “like-minded” cliché. Nonetheless, North Korea and Russia now use this term to describe their relationship, going a step further in celebrations last month by rolling out a red carpet and motorcade parade in celebration.
Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong-un signed a treaty on 19 June upgrading relations. Strength, solidarity, and all.
But although ties between Russia and North Korea have evolved significantly over the past decade, the longevity remains unclear. Historical baggage or contemporary tension could get in the way.
At the heart of the North Korea–Russia partnership lies a shared desire to challenge the existing world order, dominated as it is by Western powers. North Korea, isolated and under the weight of international sanctions, sees Russia as a powerful friend that can provide economic and diplomatic support, as well as a counterweight to US influence in the region.
For Russia, stronger links with North Korea expands its sphere of influence, particularly in the Asia-Pacific, and asserts its position as a global power. By aligning with Pyongyang, Moscow can potentially undermine the effectiveness of international sanctions and gain access to resources. Moreover, it’s a move that generally disrupts whatever equilibrium is sought in the region. Think, for example, on the potential for cooperation on weapons of mass destruction. Any nuclear redeployment or development trend would be alarming.
North Korea and Russia may have sought to send a clear message of defiance to the world.
Kim and Putin made sure the world heard prominent points from their meeting. A vow of mutual assistance if either country is attacked, although given that no text of the agreement was released, who can know for sure. What constitutes “aggression”, for instance, given how broadly both countries use the term. North Korea considers joint military exercises between the United States and South Korea as “aggression”. Russia has also framed the war in Ukraine as a response to perceived NATO aggression.
Then there is the obligation to respond. This provision apparently reinstated language from the 1961 Treaty between the Soviet Union and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, a mutual promise of “military and other assistance by all means at its disposal” in the event of armed aggression against either party. This clause was modelled on the UN Charter’s Article 51, which refers to the “inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs” – ironic given Russia’s aggressive war in Ukraine.
A pledge of “military assistance” is another of those elastic diplomatic phrases that depends upon what is considered to constitute an armed attack or act of aggression. NATO’s Article 5 obligates member nations to aid each other. However, what is known of the Russia-North Korea agreement doesn’t specify whether aggression requires mutual assistance.
North Korea and Russia may have sought to send a clear message of defiance to the world. But rather than deter, the result appears to have encouraged South Korea to lend its support to Ukraine. Strong ties with Pyongyang could also lead Seoul to ask why bother in its relations with Moscow, already tense after South Korea went along with international sanctions.
What the Putin-Kim courtship does make clear is that European and Indo-Pacific security have become increasingly intertwined. This sends a message – but the answer might not be what North Korea and Russia hope.
