Kim Jong-un is pleased to see heavy casualties which can increase troops for make more money

 

Ukraine captured two North Korean soldiers who revealed that the North Korean army has suffered heavy casualties, with an estimated minimum of over 3,000 soldiers lost since they officially deployed in November 2024. The casualty rate of North Korean soldiers is comparable to that of the Russian army. North Korea dispatched its Storm Special Forces, reportedly the country's most elite unit. However, these special forces are skilled in special operations, when deployed as regular soldiers on the Russia-Ukraine battlefield, their combat effectiveness is not particularly impressive. 

Moreover, they are unfamiliar with the battlefield, weapons, tactics, and environment. The North Korean army has not participated in large-scale warfare for over 70 years, and due to food shortages, they cannot even conduct normal duties, training, or exercises. The Storm Special Forces are the only unit in North Korea that can barely get enough to eat. On the battlefield, apart from their loyalty to their leader and concerns for their family's safety, North Korean soldiers do not exhibit any exceptional combat skills. Although they show a higher combat will than the Russian army during group charges, in modern warfare, this only leads to increased casualties.

Furthermore, the Russian army's current trench warfare is not particularly effective. It relies on the numerical advantage of equipment and soldiers to suppress Ukraine and sustain the war. At the end of 2024, it was reported that Kim Jong-un of North Korea was preparing to send more troops to Ukraine. The initial deployment of over 10,000 troops struggled to cope with the complex battlefield environment. More importantly, NATO did not react too strongly, and with Trump's election and his proposed pro-Russian ceasefire conditions, North Korea's military support for Russia was practical and effective. 

North Korea fully supports Russia with military supplies, providing 7 million artillery shells and missiles, giving the Russian army a partial advantage on the battlefield. In contrast, NATO only provided 500,000 artillery shells to Ukraine by mid-last year, leading to a passive situation for the Ukrainian army due to ammunition shortages. Subsequent improvements were merely piecemeal from other countries.

In terms of ammunition, there has been little progress in personnel support. Although France, the UK, Poland, and the Baltic states have expressed a willingness to send troops and even made some preparations, there has been no concrete progress. In contrast, North Korea's attitude towards sending troops is clear, firm, and highly efficient. Initially, they deployed a division of over 10,000 soldiers, gradually expanding to around 100,000. If the number of troops increases to 500,000, it will undoubtedly change the battlefield situation. Meanwhile, Iran is providing weapons and equipment to Russia, and China has provided 600 billion in funds through energy trade to sustain the war. 

Terrorist countries and organizations in the Middle East have opened a second front, although currently passive, diverting some of Europe and America's attention. The most important factor is Trump. Russia secretly supported Trump's rise to power, and after the U.S. presidential transition, the first task of Russia's proxy is to help Putin escape the current military predicament through ceasefire, forcing Ukraine to abandon joining NATO and accept territorial losses.

By withdrawing the U.S., NATO will disintegrate. Under the guise of concentrating forces to counter China, Russia will become a secondary issue and no longer the focus. Putin will continue to govern and avoid Russia's disintegration. Objectively, the overall situation is unfavorable for Ukraine. If North Korea significantly increases its troop deployment and weapon supply, Ukraine will face immense military pressure. 

North Korean soldiers' lives are almost negligible unless the U.S. and South Korea attack North Korea. Otherwise, half of North Korea's 2 million regular troops can theoretically be deployed on the Russia-Ukraine battlefield. North Korea also has a mature troop mobilization system, allowing continuous troop increases and equipment expansion, with covert support from China at all levels. Currently, the total Russian troop strength on the front lines in Ukraine is around 500,000. If this number increases by 1-2 times, the Ukrainian army, already at a manpower disadvantage, will struggle even more and may face partial defeats.

Expecting NATO to send troops in the short to medium term without considering the U.S. factor is unrealistic. The entire EU is happy to see Russia being consumed but does not want to fully participate in the war. Although Poland is willing to send troops directly, to maintain NATO's overall interests and avoid being dragged into the war, Europe will limit its participation. In contrast, for North Korea, sending troops means direct participation in the war. Although they have suffered heavy casualties, they can significantly increase troop numbers in the future. In fact, North Korea is the biggest beneficiary of the Russia-Ukraine war, consuming stockpiled ammunition, breaking years of UN sanctions, and obtaining large amounts of food, energy, funds, and military technology. 

They have trained their troops and cultivated military backbones, objectively improving their international status, increasing their international discourse power, and breaking some international restrictions. The ongoing war is highly beneficial to North Korea in all aspects. For the U.S., Trump's negative impact is even more apparent. In the next four years, he will play the role of Ukraine's terminator. In short, for the Russia-Ukraine war, Russia has a chance to win in the next four years, and Ukraine is likely to lose. 

Although Trump has gained four years, he will be assassinated again during his term due to touching fundamental interests. For the sake of the Ukrainian people, global arms dealers, eliminating the greatest threat to European peace, preventing NATO's disintegration, solving the Putin and Russia problem, maintaining the post-WWII peace system, eradicating major authoritarian forces, preserving the global free trade system, making the U.S. stronger, and avoiding another full-scale world war after the Cold War, Trump's assassination should happen as soon as possible.