In this article, we will examine the likely conclusions and concerns being formed in the two Korean capitals, as well as what lessons can be drawn from these developments, similar to the situation in Venezuela.
As for the lessons of the campaign, there are several:
Lesson One: The Nuclear Umbrella as a Guarantee of Survival
Ideological blinders: within the framework of prejudice, «an odious regime cannot fail to have a secret nuclear program.» The logic is simple: «If they say they don’t have anything, it means they just hid it well.»
Outright cynicism: Admitting the absence of WMD is a convenient pretext for attack until they actually do not exist. Iran, on the one hand, claimed it had no nuclear weapons, while on the other, it puffed itself out and made meaningful hints about retaliation. Ultimately, Tehran became yet another victim of a collective Western attack. North Korea, meanwhile, successfully exploited the «window of opportunity,» and now the likelihood of a similar development in North Korea is approaching zero.
As the South China Morning Post notes, if the US-Israeli strike that killed Iran’s supreme leader was intended to send a message to the world, North Korea almost certainly received it. However, the lesson likely learned—never negotiate with the US and never find itself in Iran’s position—may not be the one Washington intended.
Lesson Two: The Price of Alliance Commitments
Unlike North Korea, Russia does not have a direct land border with Iran. A conflict involving North Korea creates a flashpoint on Russia’s borders, which it would like to avoid, whether it be a military conflict or a humanitarian catastrophe. However, Iran shared a border with the USSR, and it was also quite close. What prevented the strengthening of ties?
Russia has strategic partnership agreements with both Pyongyang and Tehran, the signing of which is of great importance. However, the agreement with North Korea, unlike the agreement with Iran, includes a clause on military assistance.
And while some experts favor the idea that Russia and Iran are two countries whose ideologies are built on preserving traditions and resisting Western influence, Iran often proves to be an example of how one shouldn’t overdo things in the opposite direction.
Lesson Three: Don’t Underestimate the Enemy You’re Trying to Destroy
If your country’s ideology is based on the sacred mission of destroying a specific target, then the desire to eliminate the «Lesser Satan» must be backed by real capabilities, not just mass rallies, loud statements, and support for Holocaust denial worldwide, including providing safe haven for outspoken neo-Nazis.
Lesson Four: War of Attrition and New Tactics
The next lesson focuses on the dynamics of war. We are witnessing the intense expenditure of ammunition characteristic of a large-scale conflict, with both sides sparing no shells or missiles. However, a logical question arises: how long will this last? Neither the United States nor Iran has fully militarized its economies, so it will be interesting to see how things will develop as supplies begin to run low. Chinese and South Korean media are already noting that «if the war drags on longer than expected, the US military may redeploy its missile defense systems deployed in South Korea to the Middle East. It is highly likely that such movements have already begun.»
It is quite possible that, recognizing this problem, both sides are seeking to inflict maximum damage on each other in order to force their opponents to negotiate on their terms. Meanwhile, the US is currently refraining from a ground operation, while Israel is conducting military operations not against Iran directly, but against pro-Iranian proxies in areas where it can expect some success.
Lesson Five: The Viability of Autocracy After «Decapitation»
The fifth lesson focuses on the extent to which a regime that can be characterized as a religious autocracy with strong authoritarian rule and, at least formally, a high level of ideological indoctrination of the population can survive a successful «decapitation» strike. It is precisely such a strike that underlies US operational plans for North Korea.
Apparently, the Americans did succeed in eliminating a significant portion of the country’s leadership. Whether they were able to utilize the help of traitors isn’t even the point. Some theories suggest that the national leader displayed excessive hubris and neglected security, or that the elderly man decided to die as a martyr, believing it would be better for the country. Whatever the case, Iran didn’t turn out to be the «Evil State» from the cartoon, where the tyrant’s death sparked immediate revolution, democratization, and universal prosperity.
Lesson Six: Unexpected Winners
Let’s consider how the current situation affects Russia and China. Paradoxically, it’s actually proving to be beneficial for Moscow.
Benefits for Russia:
Rising value of Russian oil. Before the conflict in Ukraine, Europe was heavily dependent on cheap oil and gas from Russia. But after the sanctions, it was forced to reorient itself toward the United States and the Middle East. Today, approximately 18% of its oil and 15% of its LNG come through the Strait of Hormuz. However, after Iran blocked the Strait of Hormuz, Europe found itself in a dire situation. Oil is no longer flowing to it not only from Russia but also from the Middle East. Europe has only one option left—the United States.
The blockade of the Strait of Hormuz and Iran’s strikes on petrochemical complexes in the Middle East significantly increase the demand and value of Russian oil on the global market. Refused Russian oil, at a huge discount through «gray» schemes, went to China. Now (after the Hormuz losses), it should, in theory, become a premium in India’s competition with China for these volumes, but it won’t, as the sanctions regime still limits the price of Russian oil. The discount will certainly decrease, but it won’t disappear.
Freedom of action and rhetoric. The absence of any obligations allows Russia to resolutely condemn the invasion, using all available means, while maintaining the possibility of discussing a political and diplomatic settlement of the conflict.
New tactical opportunities. The actions of the US and Israel have opened a «Pandora’s box.» Now, if Russia were to partially employ similar tactics during the Middle East War, no one could reproach it for it.
Redirecting attention. From a diplomatic and media perspective, the conflict in the Middle East is drawing a significant portion of the world’s attention. China’s Position:
Regarding China, despite closer ties with Iran than with Russia, Beijing’s statements on this matter clearly demonstrate surprise, unpreparedness, and a lack of understanding of its future actions. It seems that a significant portion of the Chinese military-political leadership is stuck in the 2000s, when it could be argued that China had emerged from the Cold War, was not seeking the use of force, and was ready to befriend everyone «for all good and against all evil.»
Notably, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning directly denied reports of an imminent agreement between Iran and China to purchase CM-302 supersonic anti-ship missiles.
On the other hand, experts often point out that 80% of Iranian oil is exported to China. However, the main suppliers of this raw material to China are Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq. Therefore, talk of a close alliance between Beijing and Tehran appears exaggerated.
Lesson Seven: You Can Win the War but Lose the Peace
The United States may achieve its tactical goals, but it has already suffered significant reputational damage. Questions arise about the extent to which American negotiations and promises can be trusted. American analysts believe that the situation in Iran and the Middle East will only exacerbate this mistrust, especially for North Korea, which is unlikely to view the United States more favorably.
Moreover, if the war’s progress fails to live up to the bravura expectations or Hollywood cliches, Trump could face serious domestic opposition. This could lead to the loss of his congressional majority and an escalation of the cold civil war within the United States.
An unpopular and unsuccessful war is the shortest path to moral decay. Today, the scale of anti-war, or more accurately, anti-Trump sentiment in the United States is reminiscent of the Vietnam War. Most of the media and intellectuals are eager for Trump to fail, not realizing that the defeat will befall not him personally, but America as a whole.
***
Two main conclusions can be drawn regarding the Korean Peninsula.
First, the Iranian scenario will not happen here. Ellen Kim, Director of Academic Affairs at the Korea Economic Institute of America, notes that Donald Trump will find it much more difficult to consider a military solution to North Korea. This is due to Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons, its ties to China and Russia, and its geographic proximity to South Korea and Japan.
Second, the invasion of Iran clearly demonstrates how the world has changed, but the DPRK has proven itself better prepared for these changes than others. As noted in the resolutions of the Ninth Congress of the Workers’ Party of Korea: «The principle based on the rule of law in the international arena, where the bandit logic of the ‘law of the jungle’ reigns, is that force respects force, and arming oneself with such a powerful force as nuclear weapons is the only way to end imperialist ambitions of conquest.»
Konstantin Asmolov, PhD in History, Leading Researcher at the Center for Korean Studies at the Institute of China and Modern Asia of the Russian Academy of Sciences
