By Elena Guido, Eric Siyi Zhang & Christopher Green.
Supported by the Russia and Eastern Europe Knowledge Alliance.
This report analyzes the rapidly intensifying strategic partnership between North Korea (DPRK) and Russia since Moscow’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, explaining how this alignment has evolved from a transactional wartime arrangement into a broader, potentially long-term geopolitical axis. It argues that the partnership has deep implications for regional security in Northeast Asia, the war in Ukraine, global sanctions regimes, and the emerging multipolar international order. The study also examines Chinese perspectives on the partnership and considers how a second Trump administration reshapes U.S., South Korean, and Japanese security calculations.
A central finding is that DPRK–Russia military-technical cooperation has become strategically vital for Russia’s war effort. Facing sanctions and industrial bottlenecks, Russia increasingly relies on North Korean artillery shells, rockets, missiles, and potentially other weapons systems. Satellite imagery and maritime tracking show at least 64 shipments between 2023 and early 2025, with Ukrainian intelligence estimating that, at times, up to 70% of Russian artillery fired in Ukraine originates from North Korean stockpiles. Beyond ammunition, Pyongyang has supplied 170mm Koksan artillery, 240mm multiple-launch rocket systems, and short-range ballistic missiles (KN-23/Hwasong-11), which Russia has field-tested in Ukraine—providing Pyongyang with valuable battlefield data to improve its weapons’ accuracy.
The confirmed deployment of North Korean troops to Russia’s Kursk region, with at least 14,000 personnel involved by early 2025 comes as a shock. The Kremlin’s willingness to accept foreign combatants reflects both strategic desperation and the political utility of deploying troops with no domestic constituency. For North Korea, this provides combat experience and financial compensation but carries ideological risks at home, where reports show growing conscription evasion and dissatisfaction with supporting a “foreign war.”
Economically, the partnership is mutually advantageous. North Korea is estimated to have gained around $20 billion in wartime economic benefits, primarily from weapons sales, technology transfers, and revenue generated by laborers and troops sent to Russia. Moscow has also revived or expanded barter channels for food, oil, and industrial materials. This supports Pyongyang’s domestic programs, including efforts to expand munitions production and revitalize its constrained industrial sector.
Strategically, Russia’s motivations extend beyond Ukraine. Moscow is recalibrating its Indo-Pacific posture by institutionalizing ties with Pyongyang, culminating in the 2024 Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Treaty, which includes provisions for mutual military assistance. This marks a shift away from Russia’s previous attempts to balance relations with both Koreas. The partnership also enhances Russia’s influence in multilateral forums like BRICS and in the Global South, reinforcing its broader campaign to weaken Western dominance.
For North Korea, Russia serves as a critical external partner that helps break international isolation. Pyongyang leverages Moscow’s support to pursue advanced military technologies—including satellite systems, drones, air-defense assets, and potentially submarine-related know-how. The war in Ukraine provides an unprecedented testing ground for DPRK weapons and tactics, accelerating military modernization despite sanctions. Diplomatically, Russia’s backing strengthens North Korea’s position in forums where it seeks normalization, economic engagement, or sanctions relief.
China’s role is more ambivalent. Beijing officially downplays the DPRK–Russia alignment but is wary of instability on the Korean Peninsula and of North Korea gaining advanced military capabilities through Russian assistance. China remains indispensable to both states economically, giving it leverage—but its willingness to use that leverage is limited. The report argues that China sees some value in a Russia-DPRK counterweight to U.S. alliances but does not want uncontrolled escalation.
Finally, the report analyzes how a second Trump administration alters the strategic environment. Trump’s rhetoric—framing North Korea as a “nuclear power” and seeking a Russia-friendly end to the Ukraine war—creates uncertainty for U.S. regional allies. This dynamic may embolden Pyongyang and complicate South Korea’s and Japan’s security planning.
The DPRK–Russia partnership is likely to endure beyond the Ukraine war, reshaping global security dynamics and requiring sustained attention from the EU, NATO, and regional partners.
