North Korea fires advanced missiles into Sea of Japan
North Korea unveiled what analysts believe to be the world's largest liquid-fueled intercontinental ballistic missile. Photo via Korean Central TV
North Korea launched several ballistic missiles towards the Sea of Japan on Thursday, South Korea's Joint Chiefs of Staff confirmed through Yonhap news agency .
The projectiles were fired from Wonsan, a coastal city on North Korea's southeastern shore, and travelled approximately 190 miles eastward before landing in international waters.
'This clear provocation seriously threatens peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula,' South Korea's military leadership declared in their official statement condemning the launches.
Military intelligence suggests these projectiles are part of Pyongyang's new generation of sophisticated short-range ballistic missile systems, representing a significant technological leap from their Soviet-era arsenal.
Defence analysts identify these as likely belonging to North Korea's KN-series missiles, which feature quasi-ballistic flight patterns specifically engineered to evade interception by contemporary missile defence systems.
These newer weapons systems employ advanced manoeuvrability tactics, flying at unusually low altitudes before making abrupt trajectory changes. Such innovations considerably reduce the effectiveness of regional defensive countermeasures whilst simultaneously improving strike precision.
Thursday's demonstration constitutes North Korea's fifth missile test this year, following a similar launch on 22 April. The timing appears deliberate, coming days before President Trump's 20 January inauguration and shortly after the conclusion of joint US-South Korean 'Freedom Shield' military exercises, which North Korea consistently characterises as invasion rehearsals.
The ongoing missile development programme reflects North Korea's broader strategic shift toward asymmetric warfare capabilities to compensate for its ageing conventional forces.
Experts note this approach allows Pyongyang to maintain military relevance whilst potentially strengthening its negotiating position in any future diplomatic engagements.
Japanese and American defence officials continue monitoring the situation intently, with particular concern regarding the dual-capable nature of these missile systems, which could potentially deliver either conventional or nuclear warheads.
This technological advancement represents a growing security challenge for the entire region as missile defence systems face increasingly sophisticated threats designed specifically to overcome their protective capabilities.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Libyan Express
3 days ago
- Libyan Express
Trump sets conditions before possible Iran strike
BY Libyan Express Jun 20, 2025 - 06:30 Trump weighs Iran strike amid talks of diplomacy. Photo via AFP Axios reported on Thursday that US President Donald Trump is carefully weighing whether to authorise military strikes against Iran, with three main conditions guiding his decision: the necessity of the action, avoiding prolonged US involvement in the Middle East, and ensuring the operation would effectively neutralise Iran's nuclear programme. White House spokesperson Caroline Leavitt stated that Trump's position on Iran 'should not come as a surprise' and highlighted the possibility of negotiations with Tehran in the near future. She added that the president intends to make a final decision on military intervention within two weeks, depending on how diplomatic talks progress. US officials also revealed that Trump held a third meeting in three days with his national security team to discuss possible responses to the situation involving Iran. The president is reportedly considering supporting Israel's actions against Iran but emphasises the need to meet the outlined conditions before proceeding. Israeli sources indicated they expect a decision from Washington regarding US participation in military operations against Iran within the next 24 to 48 hours. However, the White House has signalled that the final decision could take up to two weeks. The situation remains fluid as diplomatic efforts continue alongside military preparations. The views expressed in Op-Ed pieces are those of the author and do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of Libyan Express. How to submit an Op-Ed: Libyan Express accepts opinion articles on a wide range of topics. Submissions may be sent to oped@ Please include 'Op-Ed' in the subject line.
Libyan Express
3 days ago
- Libyan Express
Trump faces internal Republican rift over possible Iran intervention
Steve Bannon says let Israel 'finish what they started' The prospect of United States military involvement in Iran has exposed growing divisions within the Republican coalition, particularly among members of former President Donald Trump's political base, some of whom are urging caution against further entanglement in the Middle East. Several prominent figures associated with the so-called 'America First' movement — a key component of Trump's electoral support in 2016 and 2024 — have voiced concern over reports that the US could join Israeli efforts to target Iran's nuclear infrastructure in the absence of a diplomatic solution. Steve Bannon, Trump's former chief strategist and a longstanding advocate of non-interventionist policies, said the US should not repeat past military engagements without broad national support. 'We can't do this again,' Bannon said at a press briefing in Washington on Wednesday. 'We can't have another Iraq.' Bannon reiterated his position on his War Room podcast, where he was joined by Jack Posobiec, another prominent conservative commentator. Posobiec argued that involving the US in regime change efforts could lead to unintended consequences. Bannon responded that such political change, if it occurs, 'has to come from the people, not from a foreign power.' The comments reflect wider concerns among certain Republican factions that military action could mark a departure from Trump's traditionally cautious approach to foreign conflicts. Critics have pointed to the potential deployment of advanced US munitions, including bunker-busting bombs, as a sign of possible escalation. Iran has issued warnings about any direct American involvement, suggesting it would have significant consequences, though it has not specified what form those might take. Trump downplays internal dissent Asked about opposition within his support base, Trump appeared dismissive of the idea that the issue could cause lasting political damage. 'My supporters are more in love with me today than they were even at election time,' he said at the White House on Wednesday. 'I only want one thing: Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.' While acknowledging that 'some are a little bit unhappy now,' Trump insisted that others agree with his assessment that preventing Iran from developing a nuclear arsenal is a priority. 'I'm not looking to fight,' he said. 'But if it's a choice between them fighting or having a nuclear weapon, you have to do what you have to do.' Trump has not formally announced any military plans, stating only that he has 'some ideas' on the path forward. Intraparty tensions The debate has highlighted a divide within the Republican Party over how the US should respond to Iran's nuclear ambitions. Marc Short, a former senior adviser to Trump and an ally of ex-Vice President Mike Pence, described the disagreement as 'a pretty large rift.' However, he suggested that Trump's political base was likely to remain loyal. 'Most of the president's followers are loyal to him more so than to any worldview,' Short said. Others argue that supporting Israel could strengthen Trump's standing among more traditional conservative voters. A Reuters/Ipsos poll conducted in March found that 48% of Republicans supported using US military force to defend Israel, compared with 28% who disagreed. Among Democrats, only 25% agreed, while 52% expressed opposition. Iran has consistently denied seeking nuclear weapons, but US and Israeli officials believe Tehran's programme could lead to regional instability. Analysts have warned that an Iranian nuclear capability could trigger a wider arms race in the Middle East. MAGA figures call for restraint Bannon urged the administration to provide greater clarity on its intentions. 'This is one of the oldest civilisations in the world, with over 90 million people,' he said. 'This is not something you play around with. You have to think this through, and the American people have to be on board.' Other high-profile Republicans have echoed those concerns. Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene wrote on social media: 'Anyone calling for the US to become fully involved in the Israel–Iran war is not America First. We are tired of foreign wars.' Former Fox News presenter Tucker Carlson has also criticised interventionist rhetoric, including in a recent exchange with Senator Ted Cruz, in which Carlson challenged Cruz's stance on regime change in Iran. Senator Lindsey Graham, a long-time Republican figure on foreign affairs, took a different view, telling Fox News he hoped Trump would support Israel's campaign. 'Iran is an existential threat to our friends in Israel,' Graham said. Vice President JD Vance attempted to address the debate by expressing confidence in the president's judgment. 'People are right to be worried about foreign entanglement after the last 25 years of foreign policy. But I believe the president has earned some trust on this issue,' he wrote online. As of Wednesday evening, no decision had been announced. Trump said discussions were ongoing and that a final determination had yet to be made.
Yahoo
13-06-2025
- Yahoo
Judge Blocks Trump Admin From Deploying National Guard in Los Angeles
As California Governor Newsom and President Trump continue to square off over the administration's militarized response to anti-deportation protests in Los Angeles, a federal judge has blocked the activation of National Guard troops in the city. Judge Charles Breyer ordered the Trump administration to return control of the guard to Newsom, saying the president had acted illegally in federalizing 4,000 guard troops against the governor's wishes. More from Variety PBS, NPR Could Lose $1.1 Billion in Funding After Trump's Rescission Bill Narrowly Passes House The Chrisleys Claimed Political Persecution to Get a Trump Pardon, but Records Tell a Different Story Bob Costas Slams Trump's 'Ongoing Assaults' on Free Press and Warns Against 'MAGA Media': 'Democracy As We Know It Is Under Attack' 'The Court concludes that Plaintiffs have demonstrated that the balance of equities tips in their favor and that an injunction restraining the President's use of military force in Los Angeles is in the public interest,' Breyer wrote. Protests have lasted nearly a week in Los Angeles following a series of raids conducted by Immigration and Customs Enforcement around Southern California. Trump declared on June 7 that the protesters were engaged in 'rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States,' and called out the guard. The ruling cites several dictionary definitions of 'rebellion' and concludes that the protests — including sporadic acts of violence — does not qualify. 'The protests in Los Angeles fall far short of 'rebellion,'' Breyer wrote. The order does not goes into effect until 12 p.m. PT on Friday; the Trump administration is expected to seek an appeal beforehand. The ruling came hours after Sen. Alex Padilla was forcibly removed from a press conference in Los Angeles, taken to the ground, and put in handcuffs. The moment became an instant media firestorm, leading news sites, playing on cable news all day, and bringing condemnation from Democrats on the Senate floor. In an interview Thursday evening on MSNBC's 'The Beat with Ari Melber,' Padilla said he was listening to a press conference from Kristi Noem, the secretary of homeland security, when 'the political rhetoric got to be too much.' 'At one point, it was just too much to take,' Padilla said in his first interview about the encounter. 'Not the first, but the second attack on the political leadership of California and this notion that Donald Trump and Kristi Noem have to come in and rescue the people of Los Angeles from Gavin Newsom and Karen Bass? It was too much. And so I spoke up.' Noem appeared at the FBI building in Westwood to vow to continue to crack down on the protests. 'We are not going away,' Noem said. 'We are staying here to liberate this city from the socialists and the burdensome leadership that this governor and this mayor have placed on this country.' That was the point at which the senator reacted, moving toward the front of the room and raising his voice to ask a question. The agents apparently did not recognize Padilla — the lesser known of California's two senators — and grabbed him. He identified himself as he was pushed backwards and out of the room. 'To suggest that they have to come into Los Angeles to restore order — ' he told interviewer Jacob Soboroff. 'You know Los Angeles. It's a big, spread-out city. The images that we've seen over the course of the last week of some vandalism, some violence, et cetera, that's wrong. And I denounce it. But it's very small and very contained in a big metropolis of the Los Angeles area. So the National Guard was not necessary.' He said he did talk with Noem afterward, but never got a scheduled briefing on the federal response. 'If they're allowed to do this in Los Angeles, they can and they will do this in any corner of the country,' Padilla said. Best of Variety New Movies Out Now in Theaters: What to See This Week 'Harry Potter' TV Show Cast Guide: Who's Who in Hogwarts? 25 Hollywood Legends Who Deserve an Honorary Oscar
