North Korea fires 10 multiple rocket launcher shells after trilateral air drills
Seoul: North Korea fired around 10 artillery shells from its multiple rocket launcher system on Thursday, South Korea's military said, a day after the South conducted joint air drills with the United States and Japan.
The North fired the shells toward the Yellow Sea at around 10 a.m. from the Sunan area near Pyongyang, the military said, adding that South Korean and US intelligence authorities are conducting an analysis of the latest weapon test.
The North's 240mm multiple rocket launcher puts Seoul and its adjacent areas in target range. Last year, the North conducted a test-launch of what it claimed to be a multiple rocket launcher equipped with a new guidance system, Yonhap news agency reported.
The weapon test came a day after South Korea, the US and Japan conducted a three-way aerial exercise as part of efforts to strengthen their trilateral security cooperation against North Korean military threats.
The exercise, the first to take place under the Lee Jae Myung government, involved the South Korean F-15K, the US F-16 and the Japanese F-2 fighter jets.
Last month, North Korea had fired multiple cruise missiles toward the East Sea, South Korea's military said, a day after a "serious" accident occurred during Pyongyang's launch of a new warship.
The launches took place as North Korea said earlier in the day that parts of a new naval destroyer were "crushed" during its launch ceremony, with the North's leader Kim Jong-un calling it a "criminal act" that could not be tolerated.
The Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) said it detected the North's missile launches from the Sondok area in South Hamgyong Province, without providing further details, such as the number of missiles fired.
The JCS said it is closely monitoring North Korean activities so that Pyongyang does not "misjudge" the current security situation, adding that it is maintaining the capabilities to "overwhelmingly" respond to any provocation.
It marked the North's latest major missile launch this month after it fired multiple short-range ballistic missiles into the East Sea on May 8.
The South's military usually does not immediately announce North Korean cruise missile launches, compared with ballistic ones, which are banned under UN Security Council resolutions.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
21 minutes ago
- News18
Internet Reacts As Indian Developer's F-1 Visa Gets Approved In Just 30 Seconds
Last Updated: The applicant worked for two years as a Backend Developer at a reputed Public Benefit Corporation (PBC) in India. As the US reopens student visa interview slots, a young Indian software engineer's swift F-1 visa approval at the Hyderabad consulate has sparked attention online. The applicant, who has worked for two years as a Backend Developer at a reputed Public Benefit Corporation (PBC) in India, recently shared their visa interview experience on Reddit. The scheduled slot was at 10:30 AM IST, and the interaction lasted only a few moments. According to his post titled 'F1 approved in 30 seconds," the consular officer began the process by asking for their passport and I-20 form. Once the documents were verified, the officer inquired about the current professional role. 'I work as a Backend Developer at a PBC," he responded. The next question focused on their motivation to pursue a Master's degree at this point in their career. 'While I was working as a developer, I realised I need to gain more knowledge and an in-depth grip on a lot of core concepts, so that I could come back to India and work in even better companies and better roles," the user explained. His post gained traction and in the comment section, users shared their mixed reactions. One Redditor commented, 'Congratulations! that answer. Even they know that you not doing masters to come back to India and work. I'm sure that's your college or VO was in good mood." 'You won't gain more knowledge in USA. You gain debt, depression and jobless. Situation is so bad, and it gets much worse. Save yourself and enjoy life in India," another said. Someone shared, 'No even though VO was aware that you won't come back, still they approve because they only approve the candidates who can add value to their country, economy after education." 'Same story 4 years ago, VO went chill as soon as he saw that I worked for a reputed American MNC," read another comment. Meanwhile, the US State Department has confirmed that it will continue scheduling appointments for international students but with one condition. The applicant is required to make their social media accounts publicly viewable during the application process. Officials have reportedly been directed to monitor applicants' online presence closely and search for 'any indications of hostility toward the citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles of the United States." These changes come after a temporary pause on F-1 visa appointments in late May during which the US government was said to be revising its policies toward foreign students. F visas are primarily issued to international students seeking academic degrees in US and are now subject to tighter scrutiny under the revised guidelines. First Published:
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
Atmanirbhar Europe? France's Macron pushes for Rafale as alternative to US jets
French President Emmanuel Macron, in a quirky post on X, exhorted European nations to rethink their dependence on American fighter jets and positioned France's Rafale as an alternative in a push towards strategic post featured a Rafale jet on a mobile interface, with the text on the call banner reading, "Secure our Europe". The X post was captioned as, "European friends, you have a call".advertisementWhile Macron did not elaborate on the post, it is being viewed as an outreach to European countries, including NATO allies, to strengthen collective defence by buying European military hardware and reducing dependence on American technology amid the uncertainties in US foreign policy following Donald Trump's return to office. For Europe, reliance on American-made military hardware has been the cornerstone of its security needs for a vocal supporter of European strategic autonomy, had pushed his case in March as well."We must offer European alternatives to countries accustomed to American equipment... Scaling up production of these systems will lower costs and create a self-sustaining defence network across Europe," the French President told VS US F-35 JETIn recent years, countries like Poland and Finland have opted for the US-made F-35 fifth generation stealth fighter aircraft, produced by Lockheed Martin. In 2020, Poland signed a USD 4.6 billion deal for 32 F-35s. Finland also ordered 64 such aircraft in Rafale is a 4.5-generation fighter jet, developed by France's Dassault Aviation, and is capable of air-to-air combat, and ground strikes. On the other hand, the selling point of the F-35 is its stealth features, advanced electronic warfare systems and call comes at a time when speculation has swirled on social media about the potential existence of a 'kill switch' on the F-35s - a mechanism that would allow the US to remotely disable or limit the functionality of the jets sold to allies. However, the Pentagon has strongly refuted such the timing of Macron's post comes at a time when US military aid to Ukraine, which is locked in a never-ending war with Russia, has dried VS TRUMPIt also comes on the backdrop of a social media exchange between Macron and Trump over the Israel-Iran the US President left the G7 Summit a day early, Macron suggested to reporters that it was probably to negotiate a ceasefire between Israel and Iran. "There is indeed an offer to meet and exchange," Macron soon as his remarks went viral, Trump was swift to slam his "publicity-seeking" French counterpart."Macron mistakenly said that I left the G7 Summit, in Canada, to go back to DC to work on a ceasefire between Israel and Iran. Wrong! He has no idea why I am now on my way to Washington. Whether purposely or not, Emmanuel always gets it wrong," Trump said in a post on Truth Watch
The Wire
an hour ago
- The Wire
Indus Treaty: Can India Stop All the Water?
Environment Biksham Gujja Jun 05 2025 Not unless it builds large dams spending billions of dollars; till then, the threat to do so could end up helping Pakistan and hurting India. India has always acted in a responsible manner as an upper riparian state, ambassador Parvathaneni Harish told a UN meeting on 'Protecting Water in Armed Conflict – Protecting Civilian Lives' on May 23, days after the Narendra Modi government announced that the Indus Water Treaty was being held in abeyance in response to the Pahalgam terror attack. Harish, India's permanent representative to the UN, made the point that Pakistan had violated the treaty's Preamble, which speaks of 'a spirit of goodwill and friendship'. More than 20,000 civilians had died over the years because of terrorism, he told the UN Security Council Arria Formula meeting organised by the permanent mission of Slovenia, voicing India's frustration. Pakistan had obstructed every move of India to repair and replace infrastructure that is old and is preventing 'full utilisation of legitimate rights by India', the ambassador said, and added that terrorists had even attacked the Tulbul navigation project, endangering the safety of the project and the lives of civilians. At the same forum, Pakistan's representative Saima Saleem alleged that India is 'impeding the flow of rivers that serve as a lifeline for the 240 million people of Pakistan. Water is life and not a weapon of war'. On May 22, Prime Minister Narendra Modi had iterated at a public meeting in Rajasthan that ' Pakistan will not get water from rivers over which India has rights '. Before that, external affairs minister S. Jaishankar had said the 'Indus Waters Treaty will be held in abeyance until Pakistan stops cross-border terrorism'. The decision to hold the treaty in abeyance was taken right after the April 22 terrorist attack in which 26 people were killed. The water resources minister said steps would be taken to 'ensure that not even a drop of water from the Indus river goes to Pakistan'. India is also preparing a 'comprehensive plan to control and halt the flow of the western rivers', the chairman of the Central Water Commission, Kushvinder Vohra, was quoted as saying. The abeyance of the Indus Water Treaty is already an international issue and Pakistan is likely to use it to the fullest extent for its propaganda and to deflect from any discussion on terrorism. This article examines the practicality of India's stated intention of stopping water from the Indus basin. Transboundary rivers At least 286 rivers basins in the world are shared by more than one country, and more than 150 countries have shared river basins. It is estimated that shared or transboundary river basins make up about 42% of the land area globally and 54% of the total global river discharge. More than 3 billion people live within the catchments of these basins. Most of the 286 shared river basins are governed by some agreements, treaties and conventions to share water, maintain water quality and share the benefits such as hydroelectricity production. Most are also at the centre of conflicts or disagreements. India shares river basins with more than half a dozen countries. About a dozen rivers are shared with countries both upstream and downstream of India. Also read: The Indus and Ganges-Brahmaputra Basins Are Drying Up Faster Than We'd Like Indus Water Treaty The Indus Water Treaty is somewhat different among the river basin agreements for two reasons. The treaty comes out of a bitter and unresolved territorial conflict that dates back to the Partition of India in 1947, and, as a result of this, it is not a typical water sharing agreement but a division of the rivers. Under the treaty, three western rivers – Jhelum, Chenab and Indus – have been allocated to Pakistan. India is allowed only the 'non-consumptive use' of the water from these western rivers flowing through its territory. This includes domestic use, navigation, flood control and hydroelectricity generation, so long as the water is returned to the river system with minimal loss through seepage or evaporation. India is not allowed to construct any dams to store water from the western rivers or disturb their flow. The eastern rivers – Ravi, Beas and Sutlej – have been allocated to India, which has total control over their flow until they enter Pakistan. India can use every drop of water from these three rivers within its territory and is not required to leave any water downstream for Pakistan. In other words, India would not be in violation of the treaty if it were to block the entire flow of the eastern rivers into Pakistan. Indus basin The Indus basin is an area of 1.14 million sq km spread across four countries – Pakistan, India, China and Afghanistan. The population is estimated to be around 320 million in 2025, and is projected to touch 380 million by 2050. Of the 320 million, about 110 million (35%) live in India, and 195 million (61%) in Pakistan. The remaining 4% of the population is in Afghanistan. The population in China is negligible. Close to 80% of Pakistan's total population and 8% of India's population lives within the Indus basin. The total average annual surface water availability of the basin is about 239 billion cubic metres (BCM). Of this, the estimated average flow from the eastern rivers is 73.3 BCM, over which India has total rights under the treaty. Not all of this water can be utilised for various natural reasons, leaving about 46 BCM that is utilisable. India uses as much of the water as it needs to and has the capacity to store 16.3 BCM. Water that is left over, flows into Pakistan. While it is legal for India to stop the flow of this water into Pakistan, it does not have the storage capacity to be able to do so. The average water available from the western rivers is 165 BCM. Under the treaty, Pakistan has complete rights over all this water and India is not allowed to divert or store it. Is it possible to stop the water from the western rivers? The Government of India report on Indus, which is publicly available, states that 'the average water resource potential of the Indus basin is 73 BCM (billion cubic metres). According to the assessment, the total utilisable surface water resource in the basin is 46 BCM' and the current 'live storage capacity of the completed projects is 16.3 BCM'. These figures mentioned are with reference to the water from the eastern rivers, which are allocated to India. In order to store all the utilisable water, India would need storage capacity for about 30 BCM more. Of the 16.3 BCM existing storage capacity, the Bhakra Nangal dam accounts for about 9.8 BCM. In other words, India would need to build at least three dams as big as Bhakra Nangal if it wants to store all the water. The estimated cost to build one dam of that size now would be at least $5 billion. In order to stop the western rivers, India would need to build storage capacity to hold about 40 BCM. This is the quantity of water which flows from Indian territory to Pakistan from these western rivers. Given the terrain through which the western rivers flow and other factors, such as availability of land, the cost of building a dam to store their water would be several times higher. To store all the water from the western rivers in India, assuming this is even possible given the nature of terrain, it could go up to $100 billion. So, this would be the cost of stopping every 'drop of water flowing into Pakistan from the Indus Live system' as articulated by the water resources minister. Implications India, during its recent military action, announced that the Pakistani military establishment had not been targeted during the air strikes. This means India is clear that its actions are aimed only at terrorists and their infrastructure, not the Pakistani people. But as a first response, even before the military action, India announced its decision to keep the Indus Water Treaty in abeyance, which will impact 90% of the people in the country. Such a threat had been issued from the very highest level about a decade ago, in 2016, too, but nothing actually happened on the ground then and even after. The Indian government might have issued the threats with the domestic audience in mind, but these are helping the Pakistan government to muster its own domestic support. Millions of Pakistanis might actually believe that India has already stopped the water, just as many Indians are believing that Pakistan has been punished by stopping the water. The delegations India has been sending 'for diplomatic outreach on India-Pakistan conflict' to talk to key partners and to the UN might have a tough time explaining the decision to hold the treaty in abeyance. Pakistan is likely to use all possible forums to divert the focus from terrorism to water sharing. This would also put the World Bank in a difficult situation as and when Pakistan approaches them formally with a complaint. The World Bank president, in an interview, said that an expert committee or court of arbitration has to be set up when a country complains about any violation of the treaty's provisions. The original treaty set up a trust fund to pay for the process of scrutiny by independent experts and the court of arbitration. Pakistan is waiting for the right time to complain. Conclusion The strategy to stop the flow of Indus water might actually end up damaging India's interests in several ways: Pakistan knows that India cannot stop the water until it builds several dams, but it will use the threat to galvanise its population to rally behind its own actions, including support to terrorism. Any future drought or floods in that country might be blamed on India, with the Pakistan government spreading propaganda that India stopped the water or released it at the wrong time. Most important, internationally, India will be seen as a country acting without responsibility because a threat to stop water from an international river basin is a very sensitive issue. Within the country, the government could lose credibility if Indians realise that Pakistan is getting the water as before. India is also a downstream country, and could face issues in the future if it abandons the Indus treaty. Therefore, India would do better to use tools other than the Indus waters to force Pakistan to stop supporting terrorism. Empty threats of blocking Pakistan's water might end up actually helping the Pakistan government in its domestic propaganda and its international campaign against India, diverting the focus away from terrorism. Dr. Biksham Gujja is global water policy expert. Former head of water programme and policy at WWF International, Switzerland also worked with ICRISAT and UN agencies. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
