‘Proactive Step': South Korea Halts Anti-North Propaganda Broadcasts Along Border

Menu
हिंदी తెలుగు اردو
Home Politics Economy World Security Law Science Society Culture Editor's Pick Opinion
Support independent journalism. Donate Now
World
'Proactive Step': South Korea Halts Anti-North Propaganda Broadcasts Along Border
DW
42 minutes ago
South Korea's President Lee Jae-myung ordered the discontinuation of the loudspeakers to "promote peace on the Korean Peninsula." In return, Pyongyang appears to have stopped its loudspeakers near the border.
South Korea president Lee Jae-myung. Photo: AP/PTI.
Real journalism holds power accountable
Since 2015, The Wire has done just that.
But we can continue only with your support.
Contribute now
South Korea's military shut down loudspeaker blasting propaganda against North Korea along the border on Wednesday, marking newly elected President Lee Jae-myung's first major step to reduce cross-border tensions.
On Thursday, South Korea's Joint Chiefs of Staff said, in return, the North appears to have stopped its loudspeakers near the border targeting the South. Although, it remains unclear if Pyongyang has officially ended its campaign.
South Korea's President Lee Jae-myung had made the discontinuation of the loudspeakers a campaign promise, so as 'to restore trust in inter-Korean relations and promote peace on the Korean Peninsula.'
Kang Yu-jung, Lee's spokesperson, described the decision as a 'proactive step' to reduce military tensions in the region.
Engaging in psychological warfare
The broadcasts, which included propaganda messages and K-pop music, had resumed in June 2024 after North Korea launched thousands of trash-filled balloons toward the South in a psychological campaign.
In retaliation, Pyongyang began its own blaring broadcasts featuring howling animals, pounding gongs and other irritating sounds.
Residents near the border had long complained about the noise from both sides.
Seoul looks to reopen communication
The broadcasts were part of a Cold War-style standoff that escalated alongside North Korea's nuclear weapons development and closer military ties with Russia.
In his inaugural address last week, Lee vowed to reopen communication channels with North Korea. However, the road forward remains uncertain as Pyongyang continues to reject diplomatic overtures.
In recent years, nuclear-armed North Korea has grown closer to Moscow, reportedly supplying thousands of troops and large quantities of military equipment to support Russia's war in Ukraine.
There are growing concerns that North Korean leader Kim Jong Un's deepening ties with Russian President Vladimir Putin could result in technology transfers that would bolster North Korea's nuclear weapons and missile programs.
This report first appeared on DW.
The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
Make a contribution to Independent Journalism
Related News
Israel's Evacuation of Palestinians from North Gaza Hints at a Particularly Ominous Plan
Has Development in Northeast India Undermined Its Environmental Sustainability?
The Search for the 'Bandung Spirit'
Group of Nine Nations to Formulate 'Concrete' Legal, Diplomatic Measures Against Israel
Violent Pakistan Storms Trigger Floods, Landslides Killing At Least 10
Trump and the Fantasy of a 'White Genocide'
Trump's Afrikaners are South African Opportunists, Not Refugees: What's Behind the US Move
G20 Is Too Elite. There's a Way To Fix That Though – Economists
US Mediation in India-Pak Conflict Could Be a Double-Edged Sword
View in Desktop Mode
About Us
Contact Us
Support Us
© Copyright. All Rights Reserved.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Indian Express

40 minutes ago

• Indian Express

Understanding Pakistan's balancing act on Iran

Islamabad has extended strong rhetorical support to Tehran amid the ongoing Iran-Israel conflict, calling Israel's actions a 'violation of all rules of civilised behaviour…and international humanitarian law'. Yet it has stopped short of making any tangible military commitments to Iran. Earlier this week, when a top Iranian general claimed on television that Pakistan had promised to extend its nuclear deterrent to Iran, Pak Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar issued a swift denial, saying 'there [had] been no such statement' from Islamabad's side. Islamabad's tightrope walk vis-à-vis Tehran was also apparent in statements that came out during Army Chief General Asim Munir's visit to Washington this week. Even as Gen Munir in a public address on Wednesday declared 'clear and strong' support for Iran, the Pak military press release after his meeting with US President Donald Trump later that day simply stated that both US and Pakistan 'emphasised the importance of resolution of the conflict'. This delicate, deliberate balancing act is a product of Pakistan's complicated relationship with Iran as well as larger geopolitical considerations, especially regarding its relationship with the US and anxieties about India. The relationship between the two Islamic republics can be best described as fraternal and strategic albeit with perennially simmering mutual suspicion and hostility. Iran was the first country to recognise Pakistan in 1947, and the Shah's regime extended military and diplomatic assistance to Pakistan during the 1965 and 1971 wars. But beyond the oft-emphasised veneer of Islamic brotherhood lie a number of friction points, which have surfaced frequently in the years after the Iranian Revolution of 1979. 🔴 The 900-km Iran-Pakistan border runs through the Baloch heartland, with the Pak province of Balochistan on one side and the Iranian province of Sistan-Baluchistan on the other. Each side accuses the other of providing safe haven to separatist groups. There have been at least 15 border clashes — most often after Iran has struck alleged terrorist targets across the border — in the past decade alone, most recently in January 2024. 🔴 Iran and Pakistan have historically been at odds over Afghanistan. Like India, Shia-majority Iran supported the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance forces in the late 1990s, out of concerns stemming from a strongly anti-Shia group ruling a neighbour with which it shares a 921-km-border. Notwithstanding the current strain in ties, Pakistan has historically patronised the Taliban. 🔴 Pakistan's relationship with Saudi Arabia, which funds and sustains several networks of Sunni madrasas in the country, has often come at the expense of its potential ties with Iran. This is notable given that Sunni sectarian groups in Pakistan, often nurtured in these madrasas, have long persecuted the country's Shia minority. Iran's post-Revolution rupture with the US and Pakistan's continuing reliance on American support has further complicated the Islamabad-Tehran relationship. This is at the heart of Islamabad's current balancing act. Pakistan is a rentier economy, reliant on foreign aid. During the Cold War, even as India chose to remain non-aligned, Pakistan under Gen Ayub Khan joined the Western bloc, positioning itself as a bulwark against communist expansion in South Asia. This enshrined a certain reliance on the US that has persisted over the decades (although the relationship has seen its fair share of ups and downs, depending on Washington's interest in the region). Post the September 11, 2001 terror attacks in the US, Pakistan acted as a springboard for US action against Taliban in Afghanistan. Islamabad was the welcome recipient of an enormous amount of American material and military support during this time — whose dividends it continues to reap even today. But NATO's pullout from Kabul in 2021, and Washington shifting from its Afghanistan-centric 'War on Terror' to more China-centric Indo-Pacific objectives removed the default reason for US-Pakistan cooperation. During his term, former US President Joe Biden neither spoke to nor met any senior Pak leader. With Iran potentially becoming embroiled in a prolonged conflict with Israel (and by extension the US, although the degree of American involvement remains unclear), Pakistan likely sees an opening to restore its geostrategic importance to Washington. Even though it provides rhetorical support to Iran, its instant and vocal rejection of extending any military assistance to Tehran will be reassuring for the US (and Israel). This might also make Pakistan an ideal player (at least in its own eyes) to potentially de-escalate the conflict, something that would further bolster its relevance for the US. Trump said after his (long-scheduled) meeting with Gen Munir: '[The Pakistanis] know Iran very well, better than most… It's not that they're bad with Israel, they know them both actually…'. On June 16, Pak Foreign Minister Dar claimed that Islamabad was making efforts to amplify Iran's willingness to negotiate with the US (contingent on Israel halting its strikes). From India's perspective, there are three key points to note here. 🔴 India has long made efforts to isolate Pakistan diplomatically, and enjoyed a degree of success in this regard. But recent India-Pak hostilities during Op Sindoor, and the US response to them — Trump himself has repeatedly taken credit for the ceasefire, much to New Delhi's displeasure — has presented Islamabad with a window to re-hyphenate itself with New Delhi, and re-inject some substance in its bilateral relationship with the US. Pakistan's attempts to play up American mediation (with regards to Op Sindoor), and its tone vis-à-vis Iran when talking to the US are a part of its ongoing strategy to regain relevance as a regional player. 🔴 Iran has been a key element in India's strategy to circumvent Pakistan in regional connectivity projects. India's investment and operation of the deep-sea port in Chabahar, and the International North South Trade Corridor through Iran, potentially threaten to undermine the importance of Pakistan's own deep sea port at Gwadar (merely 70 km away on the same coast). Inherent limitations aside, Pakistan has sufficient reasons to make the most of any opportunity to wean Tehran away from New Delhi. Support for Iran, rhetorical though it may be, is seen by Islamabad as a means to do this, especially since New Delhi's own statements neither condemn nor condone either side. It must be noted, however, that this is insufficient to credibly threaten India-Iran ties, which are rooted in mutual strategic interests. 🔴 Pakistan's view of Israeli action against Iranian nuclear sites might also be coloured by its own experience during Op Sindoor, and the possibility of India hitting Pakistan's nuclear storage sites during a future conflict. For Pakistan, Israel's actions being potentially normalised by the international community might set a precedent for India to act similarly in the future. That said, there is no comparison between Iran, which is yet to weaponise its nuclear capabilities and Pakistan, a declared nuclear weapons power for almost three decades. Unlike Israel, India remains committed to being a responsible nuclear weapons power, with respect for both international nuclear safety norms as well its 1991 agreement with Pakistan to not attack each other's nuclear installations. Bashir Ali Abbas is a Senior Research Associate at the Council for Strategic and Defense Research, New Delhi

Hindustan Times

3 hours ago

• Hindustan Times

Mahmoud Khalil ICE detention case: Federal judge orders release of Columbia protester

NEW YORK (AP) — A federal judge on Friday ordered the U.S. government to free former Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil from the immigration detention center where he has been held since early March while the Trump administration sought to deport him over his role in pro-Palestinian protests. Federal judge has ordered the release of Columbia protester Mahmoud Khalil.(REUTERS) Ruling from the bench in New Jersey, U.S. District Judge Michael Farbiarz said it would be 'highly, highly unusual" for the government to continue to detain a legal U.S. resident who was unlikely to flee and hadn't been accused of any violence. 'Petitioner is not a flight risk and the evidence presented is that he is not a danger to the community,' he said. 'Period, full stop.' Later in the hourlong hearing, which took place by phone, the judge said the government had 'clearly not met' the standards for detention. Khalil could walk out of the detention center in rural Louisiana by Friday evening, which is when lawyers for the Trump administration said they expect to release him. He must surrender his passport and can't travel internationally, but he will get his green card back and be given official documents permitting limited travel within the country, including New York and Michigan to visit family, New Jersey and Louisiana for court appearances and Washington to lobby Congress. Khalil was the first person arrested under President Donald Trump 's crackdown on students who joined campus protests against Israel's devastating war in Gaza. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said Khalil must be expelled from the country because his continued presence could harm American foreign policy. Farbiarz had ruled earlier that the government couldn't deport Khalil on those grounds, but gave it leeway to continue pursuing a potential deportation based on allegations that he lied on his green card application. Trump administration lawyers repeated that accusation at Friday's court hearing. It's an accusation Khalil disputes. In issuing his ruling Friday, the judge agreed with Khalil's lawyers that the protest leader was being prevented from exercising his free speech and due process rights despite no obvious reason for his continued detention. The judge noted that Khalil is now clearly a public figure. Khalil's lawyers had asked that he either be freed on bail or, at the very least, moved from Louisiana to New Jersey so he can be closer to his wife and newborn son, who are both U.S. citizens. Khalil's wife, Dr. Noor Abdalla, said she can finally 'breathe a sigh of relief' after her husband's three months in detention. 'We know this ruling does not begin to address the injustices the Trump administration has brought upon our family, and so many others,' she said in a statement provided by Khalil's lawyers. 'But today we are celebrating Mahmoud coming back to New York to be reunited with our little family.' The judge's decision comes after several other scholars targeted for their activism have been released from custody, including another former Palestinian student at Columbia, Mohsen Mahdawi; a Tufts University student, Rumeysa Ozturk; and a Georgetown University scholar, Badar Khan Suri. Khalil was detained on March 8 at his apartment building in Manhattan over his participation in pro-Palestinian demonstrations. The international affairs graduate student isn't accused of breaking any laws during the protests at Columbia. He served as a negotiator and spokesperson for student activists and wasn't among the demonstrators arrested, but his prominence in news coverage and willingness to speak publicly made him a target of critics. The Trump administration has argued that noncitizens who participate in such demonstrations should be expelled from the country as it considers their views antisemitic.

India Today

4 hours ago

• India Today

US judge blocks Trump ban on foreign students at Harvard

A federal judge on Friday blocked the Trump administration's efforts to keep Harvard University from hosting international students, delivering the Ivy League school another victory as it challenges multiple government sanctions amid a battle with the White order from U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs in Boston preserves the ability of Harvard to host foreign students while the case is sued the Department of Homeland Security in May after the agency withdrew the school's certification to host foreign students and issue paperwork for their visas. The action would have forced Harvard's roughly 7,000 foreign students — about a quarter of its total enrolment — to transfer or risk being in the U.S. illegally. New foreign students would have been barred from coming to Harvard. The university called it illegal retaliation for rejecting the White House's demands to overhaul Harvard policies around campus protests, admissions, hiring and other issues. Burroughs temporarily halted the action hours after Harvard than two weeks later, in early June, Trump moved to block foreign students from entering the U.S. to attend Harvard, citing a different legal justification. Harvard challenged the move and Burroughs temporarily blocked that effort as stops and starts of the legal battle have unsettled current students and left others around the world waiting to find out whether they will be able to attend America's oldest and wealthiest Trump administration's efforts to stop Harvard from enrolling international students have created an environment of 'profound fear, concern, and confusion,' the university said in a court filing. Countless international students have asked about transferring from the university, Harvard immigration services director Maureen Martin has been warring with Harvard for months after it rejected a series of government demands meant to address conservative complaints that the school has become too liberal and has tolerated anti-Jewish harassment. Trump officials have cut more than $2.6 billion in research grants, ended federal contracts and threatened to revoke its tax-exempt April, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem demanded that Harvard turn over a trove of records related to any dangerous or illegal activity by foreign students. Harvard says it complied, but Noem said the response fell short and on May 22 revoked Harvard's certification in the Student and Exchange Visitor sanction immediately put Harvard at a disadvantage as it competed for the world's top students, the school said in its lawsuit, and it harmed Harvard's reputation as a global research hub. 'Without its international students, Harvard is not Harvard,' the suit action would have upended some graduate schools that recruit heavily from abroad. Some schools overseas quickly offered invitations to Harvard's students, including two universities in Hong President Alan Garber previously said the university has made changes to combat antisemitism. But Harvard, he said, will not stray from its 'core, legally-protected principles,' even after receiving federal Watch