October 24, 2024

Institute for the Study of War: Lukaschenko says N. Korean troops fighting Ukraine  would be ‘undesirable for Russia’

Institute for the Study of War

Russian President Vladimir Putin failed to deny the presence of North Korean military personnel in Russia on October 24, amid official Ukrainian reports that the first North Korean military units arrived in Kursk Oblast on October 23. Ukraine’s Main Military Intelligence Directorate (GUR) reported on October 24 that the first units of North Korean personnel arrived in Kursk Oblast on October 23. The GUR reported that the North Korean personnel trained at the Baranovsky military training ground in Ussuriysk, Primorsky Krai; the Donguz military training ground in Ulan-Ude, Republic of Buryatia; the Yekaterinoslavsky military training ground in Yekaterinslavka, Amur Oblast; the 248th military training ground in Knyazye-Volkonskoye, Khabarovsk Krai; and the 249th military training ground in Primorsky Krai. The GUR reported that the Russian military spent several weeks coordinating with the North Korean military units. The GUR reported that North Korea has transferred roughly 12,000 North Korean personnel, including 500 officers and three generals, to Russia and that Russian Deputy Defense Minister Colonel General Yunus-Bek Yevkurov is responsible for overseeing the training and adaptation of the North Korean military personnel. The GUR noted that the Russian military is providing ammunition and other personal kit to the North Korean personnel. Russian President Vladimir Putin responded to a question at a press conference after the BRICS summit in Kazan, Republic of Tatarstan, regarding recently released South Korean intelligence satellite imagery reportedly showing North Korean troops in Russia. Putin wryly responded that “photos are a serious thing” and “reflect something.” Putin reiterated the mutual defense article in the Russian-North Korean strategic partnership agreement with North Korea, announced in June 2024 and officially ratified by the Russian State Duma on October 24, 2024.

Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko strongly hinted that Belarusian forces will not fight in Ukraine and appeared to question Russian President Vladimir Putin’s likely efforts to introduce North Korean forces into Russia’s war against Ukraine in the process. Lukashenko answered a question from the BBC on October 23 about reports of North Korean troops going to fight alongside Russian forces in Ukraine, claiming that these reports are “rubbish,” that Russian President Vladimir Putin would “never try to persuade” another state to involve its army in Russia’s war in Ukraine, and that the deployment of armed forces from any state – including from Belarus – to the frontline in Ukraine would be a “step towards the escalation” of the war. Lukashenko claimed that if “we” (Belarussians) got involved in the war, this would be the “path to escalation” and that NATO would deploy forces to Ukraine in response to another country’s involvement. Lukashenko continued to deny that Belarus was involved in the Russia’s launch of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in part from Belarussian territory. Lukashenko also gave an interview on October 23 to Russian state-run TV channel Rossiya 1 in which he claimed that he did not think that the Russian leadership or military needs North Korean troops as there are enough Russian forces on the front and Russia has significant mobilization resources. Lukashenko claimed that Moscow understands that the deployment of North Korean forces to the war would be “undesirable for Russia” and that the West will respond by sending NATO troops to Ukraine. Kremlin newswire TASS notably did not report on Lukashenko’s statements about how the use of North Korean forces in Russia’s war against Ukraine is not in Russia’s interests and only reported on his claims that NATO would deploy troops to Ukraine in response to the participation of North Korean forces in the war.

The Kremlin is reportedly attempting to portray the BRICS summit in Kazan, Republic of Tatarstan as evidence of widespread international support for Russia – especially to domestic audiences in Russia. Russian opposition outlet Meduza reported on October 24 that it reviewed the Russian Presidential Administration’s manual to Russian state media and propagandists with guidelines about how to frame the ongoing BRICS summit in Kazan. The manual reportedly highlighted three themes: Russian President Vladimir Putin is the “informal lead of the world majority,” Western elites are “panicking,” and “anxiety” is prevalent in the West generally. The Kremlin reportedly told media outlets to report that the BRICS summit “has the world’s attention” and proves that “attempts to isolate” Russia after its full-scale invasion of Ukraine have “failed.” Meduza reported that media outlets are supposed to highlight how Putin establishes “strategic ties that are not limited to one direction” in contrast to the West’s alleged “fleeting alliances” (NATO celebrated its 75th anniversary this year). Russian state media and propagandists recently published articles highlighting many of these themes, sometimes even word for word as reportedly written in the manual.” Russian opposition outlet Verstka reported on October 24 that pro-Russian bots on Russian social media site VKontakte (VK) have left over 10,000 comments in two days about the BRICS summit – reportedly one of the largest Kremlin bot efforts recently. The bots were promoting the idea that Russia is not internationally isolated, that BRICS’ influence is growing, that anti-Russian sanctions are decreasing in importance, and that Russian forces are achieving successes in Ukraine. A Russian insider source claimed on October 24 that unspecified Kremlin-linked sources stated that BRICS states largely do not support Russia’s position on its war in Ukraine, forcing the Kremlin to push this topic into the background in order to achieve some kind of “serious international association.” The insider source claimed that multiple meetings during the summit discussed the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) and Brazil’s peace proposals – which favor Russia – but that these discussions “ultimately led to nothing.” ISW assessed on October 23 that the adoption of the Kazan Declaration on the second day of the BRICS summit demonstrated that Russia has not yet secured the international support nor created the alternative security structure that the Kremlin desires.

Key Takeaways:

  • Russian President Vladimir Putin failed to deny the presence of North Korean military personnel in Russia on October 24, amid official Ukrainian reports that the first North Korean military units arrived in Kursk Oblast on October 23.
  • Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko strongly hinted that Belarusian forces will not fight in Ukraine and appeared to question Russian President Vladimir Putin’s likely efforts to introduce North Korean forces into Russia’s war against Ukraine in the process.
  • The Kremlin is reportedly attempting to portray the BRICS summit in Kazan, Republic of Tatarstan as evidence of widespread international support for Russia – especially to domestic audiences in Russia.
  • Russian President Vladimir Putin attempted to project Russian confidence in the Russian military’s ability to repel the Ukrainian incursion into Kursk Oblast at a press conference after the BRICS summit on October 24.
  • Ukrainian authorities are investigating another execution of Ukrainian prisoners of war (POWs) by Russian forces in the Pokrovsk direction against the backdrop of Russian forces’ increasingly frequent POW executions across the theater.
  • Ukrainian forces recently advanced in Kursk Oblast and near Toretsk and Pokrovsk.
  • Russian forces recently advanced near Kreminna and Siversk.
  • The Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD), Ministry of Defense (MoD), and Rosgvardia reportedly each have their own Akhmat units that perform different functions in different sectors of the front and rear.

       (For full report:  https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-october-24-2024  )

Share the Post:

Wilson Center

Forced displacement represents one of the most pressing humanitarian issues of our time. Individuals and families, torn from the fabric of their communities, find themselves navigating a world of uncertainty, often without basic necessities or a clear path to safety. There are currently some 110 million forced displaced, and this number is growing by 10 million each year!

At the heart of this crisis are the political triggers. Armed conflicts, ethnic or religious persecutions, and systemic human rights abuses force millions to flee their homes in terror. Many are displaced within their own national boundaries, while others seek asylum abroad. If these factors change as a result of political shifts at home or the pressures from abroad, they can return to their homes. Forced displacement is thus different from environmentally driven displacement, as victims of climate change may never be able to return to their homes.

The ramifications of any sort of displacement are profound, not just for those directly affected, but also for host communities and countries. Overburdened infrastructures, socio-economic strains, and cultural tensions can arise, necessitating comprehensive strategies to foster harmony and integration. Yet the root causes of forced displacement can be remedied with a concerted focus by local players and international diplomacy.

Organizations like Refugees International play a crucial role in this arena, advocating for the rights and needs of the displaced, conducting on-the-ground assessments, and influencing policymakers to take informed actions. Their relentless work underscores the gravity of the situation and the urgency ofinternational cooperation. But they, too, are overwhelmed by the rapid expansion of the crisis.

International Humanitarian Law (IHL), with its core principles centered on the protection of civilians during conflicts, plays a pivotal role in this discourse. Yet, despite clear legal frameworks, compliance remains
inconsistent. This initiative emphasizes the importance of upholding and reinforcing these international standards.

It’s not just about recognizing the problem; it’s about active engagement. We urge governments, organizations, and individuals to prioritize the rights and needs of the forced displaced. Through collective efforts, informed policies, and sustained advocacy, we can shift the narrative from passive acknowledgment to proactive intervention.