Nearly 4 weeks into the US-Israel battle in opposition to Iran, how does North Korea view the continuing scenario?
As of March 19, North Korea has issued two official responses. The day after the assaults have been launched, it launched a March 1 International Ministry “spokesperson’s press assertion [taebyonin tamhwa; 대변인 담화],” which was disseminated via each home and exterior media. On March 10, the International Ministry issued a second response—the lower-level “spokesperson’s reply [taebyonin taedap; 대변인대답]”—carried solely by exterior shops and thus withheld from the home public. Past these two statements, Pyongyang has largely opted for silence, making solely a few implicit references to the continuing scenario. As is usually the case with North Korean propaganda, nevertheless, such silence could be as significant as speech, generally extra so.
North Korea has sharpened its anti-US rhetoric and centered on criticism of US and Israeli actions, nevertheless it didn’t voice specific help for Iran. Pyongyang’s silence on the Iran battle following the 2 International Ministry responses appears to replicate each the political sensitivity of the difficulty and its choice to attend and see how occasions unfold.
Sharpened Anti-US Rhetoric Sans Criticism of Trump
The March 1 International Ministry assertion was harsher in its criticism of the USA than North Korea’s responses to both the June 2025 US bombings of Iranian nuclear websites or the January 2026 US raid in Venezuela. As an example, the March 1 assertion stated it “condemns within the strongest tone the shameless rogue act of the U.S. and Israel” and characterised Washington as enjoying a “harmful position destroying world peace and stability.” In contrast, each the June 2025 and January 2026 statements used the phrase “strongly denounces” to characterize US actions, a milder formulation. Moreover, whereas the January 2026 assertion alleged that the Venezuelan scenario “brought on a catastrophic consequence to fixing the construction of regional and worldwide relations,” this fell wanting the March 1 assertion’s condemnation of US conduct on the world stage.
But, just like the previous two statements, it kept away from criticizing Trump by identify.
This sharper anti-US rhetoric, whereas persevering with to chorus from naming Trump, is in step with the North Korean abstract report on the lately concluded Ninth Celebration Congress, the place Kim Jong Un introduced the Employees Celebration’s home and overseas coverage imaginative and prescient for the subsequent 5 years. Within the report, the North devoted a number of paragraphs to portraying the USA as an untrustworthy nation destroying the worldwide order, and but it made conditional diplomatic overtures towards the USA (though the brink for engagement has turn out to be even greater). Since Trump took workplace in January 2025, North Korean media have largely prevented naming Trump or his administration instantly of their criticisms of Washington.
Retaining Distance From Iran
Notably, neither of North Korea’s two responses to the Iran battle expressed specific help for Iran. Any help was implicit at finest, insofar as denouncing US and Israeli actions could possibly be learn as backing Tehran. This was in step with North Korea’s dealing with of the June 2025 US and Israeli strikes, when it equally prevented voicing specific help for Iran whereas criticizing the 2 nations.
The March 10 International Ministry pronouncement centered on what it described as US and Israeli interference in Iran’s home affairs and pursuit of regime change, themes which have traditionally resonated strongly with Pyongyang. Its remaining paragraph said that North Korea “respect[s] the rights and selection of the Iranian individuals to elect their supreme chief.” Nevertheless, this passage, which highlights the Iranian individuals’s “rights and selection,” must be learn as looping again to the 2 points raised earlier within the assertion—sovereignty and non-interference—fairly than as an expression of help for Iran itself or its new chief.
The potential for a better North Korea-Iran relationship isn’t with out foundation. Though particulars stay opaque in open sources, the 2 nations have maintained what one scholar has termed “shut however intermittent partnership” because the 1979 Iranian Revolution, significantly within the ballistic missile area.[1] Each are shut companions of Russia, and North Korea has already taken steps since 2024 to strengthen ties with Belarus, one other shut Russian ally. In February 2026, North Korea joined Russia, Belarus, Iran, and Myanmar in an initiative to develop “a Eurasian Constitution of Variety and Multipolarity within the XXI Century.” That stated, Pyongyang’s continued public distance from Tehran suggests it’s untimely to conclude how far this bilateral relationship will broaden or deepen. The trajectory of North Korea-Russia ties, in addition to how Russia-Iran ties evolve throughout and after the Iran battle, may also be elements.
(Largely) Silence After the Official Statements
North Korean media had often reported on rising tensions within the Center East within the lead-up to the battle, and had even flagged the potential of one other US strike on Iran.[2] After the 2 International Ministry responses, nevertheless, each home and exterior shops made no additional point out of the Iranian scenario—home media after the March 1 assertion, and exterior media after the March 10 pronouncement. This seems to replicate each the political sensitivity of the difficulty and Pyongyang’s choice to attend and see how occasions unfold.
The sample is in step with how North Korean media stopped reporting on Venezuela altogether following the International Ministry’s preliminary and solely response to the US raid there. What makes the absence of follow-up reporting notable on this case, nevertheless, is that not like the response to the Venezuela raid, which was carried solely by exterior shops, North Korea introduced the launch of US and Israeli strikes on Iran via home media as properly. That home disclosure would appear to have made follow-up reporting extra seemingly, not much less.
Nevertheless, North Korea has subsequently made a few implicit references to the Iran battle. Of observe is Kim Yo Jong’s March 10 “press assertion [tamhwa; 담화],” the place she alleged that the annual spring US-South Korea joint army workouts had begun at “a vital time when world safety construction is collapsing quickly and wars escape in numerous elements of the world as a result of reckless acts of the outrageous worldwide rogues.” She additional argued that the “latest world geopolitical disaster and complex worldwide occasions show” that each one army maneuvers of the enemies “must be suppressed via an awfully overwhelming and preemptive super-offensive.”
Conclusion
One of the crucial frequent questions on North Korea within the context of the continuing Iran battle is what Kim Jong Un is pondering, and whether or not the worry of the Trump administration’s projection of energy may truly draw him to the negotiating desk.
The Ninth Celebration Congress readout provides a reasonably clear reply:
It’s the fact proved by the current world and the law-governed precept within the worldwide enviornment dominated by the gangster-like logic of jungle legislation that energy respects energy and to arm oneself with such highly effective drive as nuclear weapons is the one means able to placing an finish to the imperialist ambition for aggression.
For many who may object that the Celebration Congress predated the beginning of the Iran battle, the Celebration every day Rodong Sinmun’s article on Israel’s conflicts with Lebanon and in Gaza below US “safety” reinforces the identical pondering. It is probably not a coincidence that this text appeared on the identical day as each Kim Yo Jong’s press assertion and the second International Ministry assertion on Iran. In line with the article:
The devastation of the indiscriminate battle unfolding right this moment within the Center East is as soon as once more impressing upon the individuals of the world a fact of historical past—that army energy is the security, dignity, and standing of the state and the individuals.[3]
