‘Real war': North Korea calls for preparedness for military action ‘anytime'; ramps up defence exercises
North Korea's
Kim Jong Un
on Thursday urged his armed forces to remain combat ready.
The Supreme Leader oversaw an artillery firing drill, according to Pyongyang's state media.
His comments come amid North Korea's continued military support for Russia in its ongoing war in Ukraine, now in its fourth year.
He called on his soldiers to be ready 'for real war' at 'anytime' and have the capacity to 'destroy the enemy in every battle,' reports the state media, reports AFP.
Video footage broadcast by state media showed artillery unit soldiers firing shells into the sea. Kim was seen observing the drill through binoculars from an observation post, accompanied by two senior military officials. However, the exact location of Wednesday's exercise was not disclosed.
Around 10,000 North Korean soldiers were deployed to Russia's Kursk region last year along with artillery, missiles and long-range rocket systems, as per South Korean and Western intelligence.
At least 600 North Korean soldiers have been killed and thousands more wounded while fighting for Russia.
North Korea has previously expressed its allegiance to Russia, reiterating that it is 'ready to unconditionally support and encourage all the measures taken by Russian leadership as regards the tackling of the root cause of the Ukrainian crisis,' reported KCNA.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Play this game for 3 minutes, if you own a mouse
planetcapture.io
Undo
Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov earlier warned the US, South Korea and Japan against forming a security alliance with North Korea.
'We warn against exploiting these ties to build alliances directed against anyone, including North Korea, and of course, Russia,' he said as per Russia's Tass news agency.
Lavrov's remarks come amid US, South Korea and Japan bolstering their military drills in retaliation to North Korea expanding its nuclear program. The three allies also conducted a joint air exercise near the Korean Peninsula in recent days, featuring US nuclear-capable bombers.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
24 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Explained: The rift in Western world over Gaza, and its possible impact
With the humanitarian crisis in Gaza growing more alarming, Israel Sunday said it would halt military operations for 10 hours a day in parts of Gaza and allow new aid corridors. Days before, Israel and the United States had withdrawn from ceasefire negotiations with Hamas, citing the Palestinian group's lack of 'good faith'. The following day, on Friday, French President Emmanuel Macron announced his country would declare its recognition of a Palestinian state at the United Nations in September, drawing criticism from both the US and Israel. On July 21, 25 countries including Italy, Canada, UK, Japan, France and the EU had asserted that 'the war in Gaza must end now'. In recent days, multiple Western leaders, including Macron, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Canadian PM Mark Carney, and Australian PM Anthony Albanese have strongly criticised Israel's actions in Gaza. These developments represent a global rift — including in the West — when it comes to Israel and Palestine. It is yet to be seen what this will mean on the ground. Israel's war on Gaza Over the past month, Israel's approach to Gaza has turned more decisive. With the US withdrawing from the ceasefire negotiations, Israel appears to have a carte blanche both for its maximalist military objective of eliminating Hamas and its maximalist political objective of a permanent occupation of Gaza. A chorus of Israeli ministers, like Itamar Ben-Gvir, continue to call for Palestinians to 'leave' Gaza. Defence Minister Israel Katz has laid out Israel's immediate plans for the Strip. This includes building a 'humanitarian city' on the ruins of Rafah where 600,000 Palestinians would initially be 'moved' and 'not be allowed to leave, except to go to other countries'. This plan, which will eventually include all of Gaza's population of roughly 2.1 million people, has been described as a potential concentration camp by several experts, including former Israeli PM Ehud Olmert. Israel's latest strategy of allegedly shooting unarmed Palestinians lining up for aid has triggered more pointed criticism from Western capitals outside the US. The July 21 joint statement stated that the 'Israeli government's aid delivery model is dangerous, fuels instability and deprives Gazans of human dignity'. Aid into the besieged Palestinian enclave is currently being routed through the Israeli-American Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF). There is growing evidence of starving Palestinians being slaughtered outside GHF centres; the UN reports that more than 1,000 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed by Israel since the GHF began operations on May 27. This comes even as more than a hundred humanitarian aid organisations have warned that a 'mass famine' is spreading in Gaza. The World Food Program, an arm of the UN, said recently that the hunger crisis in Gaza had reached 'new and astonishing levels of desperation, with a third of the population not eating for multiple days in a row.' Global positions on Palestine The French decision to recognise Palestinian statehood is representative of a growing rift in the global order vis-à-vis Israel and Palestine. * The US and Israel reject any push for a Palestinian state. The alliance of the two stakeholders with the greatest ability to affect changes on the ground has held firm even as global pressures on Israel increase. * Several Western states, such as Canada, UK, and Germany, however, are seemingly breaking from the US-Israel alliance. While they do back Israel's immediate objectives, they also remain committed to potentially implementing the two-state solution. Note, however, that these countries also retain their broader support for Israeli interests. Macron, for instance, called for a demilitarised Palestinian state — which would effectively deny Palestinians full sovereignty. * The Global South and Arab states seek an immediate end to Israel's current war in Gaza and an inclusive, negotiated two-state solution to the original dispute. However, most of these states have markedly limited abilities to actually shape events on the ground, and Arab states remain disinclined to undertake punitive economic or military measures against Israel. Status of two-state solution Broadly, despite the failure of the Oslo Accords of 1995, most states have stood by the two-state solution as the only achievable outcome — even as Israel progressively removes the physical contours of a future Palestinian state and has killed Palestinians at record rates each day since October 2023. A day before ceasefire talks broke down, the Israeli Knesset passed a non-binding resolution calling for Israel to annex the West Bank. Another Knesset resolution a year ago had rejected the possibility of allowing a sovereign Palestinian state. In June, Israel approved 22 new Jewish settlements in the West Bank. Most of Israel's West Bank settlements are deemed illegal by the UN and a majority of its member states, including India. That Israeli ministers also look to re-settle Homesh and Sa-Nur in the Northern West Bank, evacuated along with the settlements in Gaza in 2005, is indicative of Israel's concerted push to leverage the war to expand its illegal occupation of Palestinian territories. It is thus notable that France and Saudi Arabia are set to co-chair an international conference on the two-state solution at the UN from July 28. While a ministerial-level conference on the two-state solution was held at the UN in September 2024, Israel's war of attrition, combined with forced mass starvation, has sparked a renewed push to explore methods to advance the solution. However, unlike earlier global pushes for a Palestinian state alongside Israel according to pre-1967 borders, the current international effort arguably occurs with the US and Israel being the least amenable. Even as questions over the reform of the Palestinian Authority (restricted to the West Bank since 2007) can be addressed, the question of Hamas' future remains a dead-end. The upcoming international conference will bolster support for Palestinian statehood (recognised by 147 of the UN's 193 member states) but the degree to which participating states can influence Israeli actions remains unclear. It remains to be seen if the conference propels states to undertake punitive measures of any nature and scale against Israel, failing which Tel Aviv has little incentive to cease hostilities and territorial expansion, especially with continuing US support. Bashir Ali Abbas is a Senior Research Associate at the Council for Strategic and Defense Research, New Delhi
The Hindu
24 minutes ago
- The Hindu
U.S.-EU trade deal wards off further escalation but will raise costs for companies, consumers
President Donald Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen have announced a sweeping trade deal that imposes 15% tariffs on most European goods, warding off Mr. Trump's threat of a 30% rate if no deal had been reached by August 1. The tariffs, or import taxes, paid when Americans buy European products could raise prices for U.S. consumers and dent profits for European companies and their partners who bring goods into the country. Here are some things to know about the trade deal between the United States and the European Union: What's in the agreement? Mr. Trump and Ms. von der Leyen's announcement, made during Mr. Trump's visit to one of his golf courses in Scotland, leaves many details to be filled in. The headline figure is a 15% tariff rate on 'the vast majority' of European goods brought into the US, including cars, computer chips and pharmaceuticals. It's lower than the 20% Mr. Trump initially proposed, and lower than his threats of 50% and then 30%. Ms. von der Leyen said the two sides agreed on zero tariffs on a range of 'strategic' goods: Aircraft and aircraft parts, certain chemicals, semiconductor equipment, certain agricultural products, and some natural resources and critical raw materials. Specifics were lacking. She said the two sides 'would keep working' to add more products to the list. Additionally, the EU side would purchase what Mr. Trump said was $750 billion worth of natural gas, oil and nuclear fuel to replace Russian energy supplies, and Europeans would invest an additional $600 billion in the U.S.. What's not in the deal? Mr. Trump said the 50% U.S. tariff on imported steel would remain; Ms. von der Leyen said the two sides agreed to further negotiations to fight a global steel glut, reduce tariffs and establish import quotas — that is, set amounts that can be imported, often at a lower rate. Mr. Trump said pharmaceuticals were not included in the deal. Ms. von der Leyen said the pharmaceuticals issue was 'on a separate sheet of paper' from Sunday's (July 27, 2025) deal. Where the $600 billion for additional investment would come from was not specified. And Ms. von der Leyen said that when it came to farm products, the EU side made clear that 'there were tariffs that could not be lowered,' without specifying which products. What's the impact? The 15% rate removes Mr. Trump's threat of a 30% tariff. It's still much higher than the average tariff before Mr. Trump came into office of around 1%, and higher than Mr. Trump's minimum 10% baseline tariff. Higher tariffs, or import taxes, on European goods mean sellers in the U.S. would have to either increase prices for consumers — risking loss of market share — or swallow the added cost in terms of lower profits. The higher tariffs are expected to hurt export earnings for European firms and slow the economy. The 10% baseline applied while the deal was negotiated was already sufficiently high to make the European Union's executive commission cut its growth forecast for this year from 1.3% to 0.9%. Ms. Von der Leyen said the 15% rate was 'the best we could do' and credited the deal with maintaining access to the US market and providing 'stability and predictability for companies on both sides.' What is some of the reaction to the deal? German Chancellor Friedrich Merz welcomed the deal, which avoided 'an unnecessary escalation in transatlantic trade relations" and said that 'we were able to preserve our core interests,' while adding that 'I would have very much wished for further relief in transatlantic trade.' The Federation of German Industries was blunter. "Even a 15% tariff rate will have immense negative effects on export-oriented German industry," said Wolfgang Niedermark, a member of the federation's leadership. While the rate is lower than threatened, "the big caveat to today's deal is that there is nothing on paper, yet," said Carsten Brzeski, global chief of macro at ING bank. 'With this disclaimer in mind and at face value, today's agreement would clearly bring an end to the uncertainty of recent months. An escalation of the US-EU trade tensions would have been a severe risk for the global economy," Mr. Brzeski said. 'This risk seems to have been avoided.' What about car companies? Asked if European carmakers could still sell cars at 15%, Ms. von der Leyen said the rate was much lower than the current 27.5%. That has been the rate under Mr. Trump's 25% tariff on cars from all countries, plus the preexisting U.S. car tariff of 2.5%. The impact is likely to be substantial on some companies, given that automaker Volkswagen said it suffered a $1.5 billion hit to profit in the first half of the year from the higher tariffs. Mercedes-Benz dealers in the US have said they are holding the line on 2025 model year prices 'until further notice.' The German automaker has a partial tariff shield because it makes 35% of the Mercedes-Benz vehicles sold in the U.S. in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, but the company said it expects prices to undergo 'significant increases' in coming years. What were the issues dividing the two sides? Before Mr. Trump returned to office, the U.S. and the EU maintained generally low tariff levels in what is the largest bilateral trading relationship in the world, with some USD 2 trillion in annual trade. Together, the U.S. and the EU have 44% of the global economy. The U.S. rate averaged 1.47% for European goods, while the EU's averaged 1.35% for American products, according to the Bruegel think tank in Brussels. Mr. Trump has complained about the EU's 198 billion-euro trade surplus in goods, which shows Americans buy more from European businesses than the other way around, and has said the European market is not open enough for U.S.-made cars. However, American companies fill some of the trade gap by outselling the EU when it comes to services such as cloud computing, travel bookings, and legal and financial services. And some 30% of European imports are from American-owned companies, according to the European Central Bank.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
24 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Kim Jong Un's sister rejects appeasement overture by S Korea's new prez
The influential sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un rebuffed an appeasement overture by South Korea's new liberal government, saying Monday that North Korea has no interests in talks with South Korea no matter what proposal its rival offers. Kim Yo Jong's comments suggest again that North Korea, now preoccupied with its expanding cooperation with Russia, has no intentions of returning to diplomacy with South Korea and the U.S. anytime soon. But experts said North Korea could change its course if it thinks it cannot maintain the same booming ties with Russia when the Russia-Ukraine war nears an end. We clarify once again the official stand that no matter what policy is adopted and whatever proposal is made in Seoul, we have no interest in it and there is neither a reason to meet nor an issue to be discussed with South Korea, Kim Yo Jong said in a statement carried by state media. It's North Korea's first official statement on the government of South Korean President Lee Jae Myung, which took office in early June. In an effort to improve badly frayed ties with North Korea, Lee's government has halted anti-Pyongyang frontline loudspeaker broadcasts, taken steps to ban activists from flying balloons with propaganda leaflets across the border and repatriated North Koreans who were drifted south in wooden boats months earlier. Kim Yo Jong called such steps sincere efforts by Lee's government to develop ties. But she said the Lee government won't be much different from its predecessors, citing what it calls their blind trust to the military alliance with the U.S. and attempt to stand in confrontation with North Korea. She mentioned the upcoming summertime South Korea-U.S. military drills, which North Korea views as an invasion rehearsal. North Korea has been shunning talks with South Korea and the U.S. since leader Kim Jong Un's high-stakes nuclear diplomacy with President Donald Trump fell apart in 2019 due to wrangling over international sanctions. North Korea has since focused on building more powerful nuclear weapons targeting its rivals. North Korea now prioritizes cooperation with Russia by sending troops and conventional weapons to support its war against Ukraine, likely in return for economic and military assistance. South Korea, the U.S. and others say Russia may even give North Korea sensitive technologies that can enhance its nuclear and missile programs. Since beginning his second term in January, Trump has repeatedly boasted of his personal ties with Kim Jong Un and expressed intent to resume diplomacy with him. But North Korea hasn't publicly responded to Trump's overture. In early 2024, Kim Jong Un ordered the rewriting of the constitution to remove the long-running state goal of a peaceful Korean unification and cement South Korea as an invariable principal enemy. That caught many foreign experts by surprise because it was seen as eliminating the idea of shared statehood between the war-divided Koreas and breaking away with his predecessors' long-cherished dreams of peacefully achieving a unified Korea on the North's terms. Many experts say Kim likely aims to guard against South Korean cultural influence and bolster his family's dynastic rule. Others say Kim wants legal room to use his nuclear weapons against South Korea by making it as a foreign enemy state, not a partner for potential unification which shares a sense of national homogeneity. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
