North Korea is deepening its involvement in the Ukraine war, with military engineers now aiding Russia in targeting Ukraine with ballistic missiles, according to senior officials in Ukraine and South Korea quoted in a The War Zone report.
North Korean troops, including officers, have been deployed alongside Russian forces, marking the first instance of a foreign government sending uniformed troops to support Russia’s invasion. NATO nations are known to have sent military “advisors” to the Ukraine side.
The War Zone report states that North Korea benefits by testing its weaponry and gaining real-world, high-intensity combat experience. Ukraine has responded in kind by targeting North Korean ammunition depots in Russia.
Declassified US intelligence reports indicate that Russia has used North Korean short-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs), including the KN-23 and KN-24, in attacks targeting Ukraine’s critical infrastructure. Since the war erupted in February 2022, North Korea has reportedly provided over a million artillery rounds to Russia.
North Korea’s support may stem from a belief that a Russian victory would set a precedent for lifting US and UN sanctions. The punitive measures have forced North Korea to rely heavily on China for its economic survival, undermining its strategic autonomy.
As North Korea has intensified its involvement by deploying troops to the war, Ukraine has retaliated by targeting these forces and disrupting supply lines.
In a Politico article this month, Ketrin Jochecova mentions that South Korea’s defense minister, Kim Yong-Hyun, confirmed reports of North Korean casualties in Ukraine, indicating that Ukrainian forces have killed North Korea’s soldiers.
While North Korea’s military personnel numbers in Ukraine are difficult to ascertain, a June 2024 The Telegram article notes that, in line with a mutual defense pact signed that month, North Korea planned to send three of its ten engineering brigades as part of an agreement under which Russia will pay North Korea US$115 million annually. North Korea may thus have as many as 15,000 soldiers in Ukraine.
In response to North Korea’s boots on the ground in Ukraine, Ellie Cook and John Feng mention in a Newsweek article this month that Ukraine has intensified its targeting of Russian ammunition depots, focusing in particular on those supplied by North Korea.
Cook and Feng note that since late summer, Ukraine has struck several vital sites, including a large depot in Sergeevka, Voronezh and another in Soldatskoye, destroying munitions provided by North Korea.
Further, they say that in mid-September Ukraine targeted a depot in Mariupol, followed by hits on storage sites in Tikhoretsk and Karachev, both of which housed North Korean supplies.
Cook and Feng note that the Main Directorate of Intelligence of the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine (GUR) has been instrumental in these operations, aiming to disrupt Russia’s logistics and reduce its artillery capabilities.
However, they point out that Ukraine remains frustrated by Western allies’ reluctance to approve long-range-strike weapons, which could further enhance its ability to hit deep inside Russian territory.
While Ukraine intensifies its missile strikes on depots filled with North Korean munitions, NATO’s ongoing reluctance to provide long-range weapons and the ever-present threat of Russian nuclear weapons complicates Ukraine’s bid for a decisive victory under its “Victory Plan.”
In September 2024, RBC-Ukraine reported that Ukraine’s Victory Plan, as outlined by Mykhailo Podolyak, advisor to the head of Ukraine’s Presidential Office, is a strategic blueprint for modern warfare against Russia.
While the plan’s specifics remain vague, Podolyak emphasized that it was not a mere proposal but a clear understanding of the necessary military tools, quantities and costs to conclude the war effectively. He stressed the importance of international support, urging partners to stop fearing Russia’s propaganda about nuclear red lines and escalation.
RBC-Ukraine states that President Volodymyr Zelensky intends to present the plan to US President Joe Biden to clarify whether Ukraine’s allies are committed to a Ukrainian victory or merely to contain Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression.
Podolyak warned that the cost of war with Russia would escalate if not addressed promptly, advocating for a principled decision to support Ukraine fully. The report says the plan underscores the need for a unified and resolute stance against Russian aggression to ensure a fair and lasting resolution.
As for NATO’s position on the Ukraine war, in a Politico article this month, former NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg reflected on the alliance’s cautious stance regarding providing long-range munitions to Ukraine for strikes deep inside Russian territory.
Stoltenberg emphasized that while NATO allies have delivered unprecedented support to Ukraine, including High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS), cruise missiles and advanced battle tanks, there remains a significant debate over the use of these weapons on Russian soil.
He says NATO aims to uphold Ukraine’s right to self-defense, including targeting legitimate military sites in Russia. However, he points out that there are varying stances within NATO, with some members imposing restrictions to prevent further escalation.
He stresses that it is crucial to avoid self-fulfilling prophecies and ensure ongoing US support for Ukraine, irrespective of the upcoming US presidential election outcome.
Reuters reported in September 2024 that Putin had announced significant changes to Russia’s nuclear doctrine, emphasizing that any conventional attack on Russia, supported by nuclear power, would be considered a joint nuclear assault.
The report says that this shift, revealed during a UN Security Council meeting, broadens the conditions under which Russia might deploy nuclear weapons.
Reuters notes that Russia’s 2020 doctrine allowed for a nuclear response only if the state faced existential threats from nuclear or conventional attacks.
However, it points out that the updated policy now includes aggression against Russia or its ally Belarus, even with conventional weapons, as grounds for a nuclear response.
As per the report, Putin highlighted that these amendments are a reaction to deliberations in the US and UK about enabling Ukraine to strike Russia with Western missiles.
Apart from threatening the use of nuclear weapons, Russia may choose to escalate in other ways. Reuters reported in September 2024 that Russia is considering sending advanced P-800 Oniks anti-ship missiles to Houthi rebels in Yemen, with Iran acting as a broker.
Reuters notes that while the missiles would significantly enhance the Houthis’ capability to threaten commercial and military vessels in the Red Sea, Russia has not yet decided to make the transfer.

Russia has had a training program for North Korean mid level officers for years. Brigade level and such. I’m guessing it is to get them up to speed on maneuver operations as there is little focus on that in North Korean mostly defensive style operations. Russia has been recruiting in areas of Russia that have ethnic populations that might resemble North Koreans. Otherwise, the story is just plain stupid.
Where is the evidence? The author of this article ought to be ashamed. This isn’t journalism, simply propaganda unless evidence other than, “S. Korea said” or “Reuters says”.
Russia’s depleted forces? According to all statistics Russia’s forces are growing each month. North Korea isn’t there to help Russia, they are there to fight South Korea! That is, they are in Russia to gain critical real-life combat experience and experience from fighting against Nato weapons.
I wouldn’t be surprised if DPRK combat troops turn up next. Language difference precludes low level integration with Russian forces, so they would need to be integrated at a level feasible the number of bilingual speakers. A divisions-size deployment to Kursk, replacing Russian forces, looks possible.
Let us see if this gets past the censors. Need to reword. Russia does not need NK for anything, so this is just Ukraine style propaganda. Us does not have weapins to match Russia, why on earth would Russia need NK to do targetting. Boring, predictable and designed to fill in media cycles in the absence of positive news.
The DPRK is currently very useful to Russia. It has an outsized Soviet calibre armaments industry. Russia is swapping food, fuel and raw materials for everything they can produce. Thanks to the Ukraine war, North Koreans are eating better than they have been for a long time.
Wasn’t Stoltenberg the fellow who openly laughed at Trump when he was told the European’s had to pay more towards their defense to deter Russia? Rhetorical question, YES he was Head of NATO.
How is it he was still in the job after Russia invaded Ukraine?
Who’s his replacement, Rutte? Oh right, the previous PM of the Netherlands whose party has ceremoniously been thrown on it’s behind.
Failing upwards like Ursula von der Leyen. Nothing to see here !
The 2019 ‘Houthi’ (what happened to the Blowfish BTW?) attack on KSA’s oilfields and production showed just how vulnerable oil delivery is. It’s now considered an Iranian attack ie ‘this is how vulnerable you are, KSA’, while Putin was taunting MBS ‘your US air defense was hopeless, you ought to have bought ours’.
Almost all of Iranian oil goes to China (by sea) and the US has Israel on the leash because an attack on Kharg Island will make the Tiddly Winks very twitchy. The alliance to contain China is not yet complete.
Also hence KSA’s attempts to say out of this conflict. Disrupted oil revenue and not only are MBS’s vanity projects up in smoke, but also his regime.
The Iranians are also getting fed up with the v low level of support from Putin for the Palestinians. Putin is worried having any fingerprints on attacks on Israel will mean blowback from Israel (and also the many 4by2’s in his cadre).
Interesting times.
“Ellie Cook and John Feng mention in a Newsweek article this month that Ukraine has intensified its targeting of Russian ammunition depots, focusing in particular on those supplied by North Korea.”
What infantile propaganda. Why would North Korean supplied ammunition have a greater priority than any other?
Maybe because there might be NK soldiers there? but you are right, strange.
At least the NK’s will have something to eat in Russia, still lots of strays !
North Korean ammunition depots in Russia.
Please please please don’t be a joker
Depots containing ammo’ from NK maybe.
The Russians don’t seem to want anything from China – v small weapons obviously.