By John Q. Hosedrinker 
North Korea has launched an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) that flew for 86 minutes, marking the longest flight time yet. The missile reached a height of 7,000 km. South Korean and US officials have agreed to “take strong and varied response measures,” and South Korea has vowed to impose fresh sanctions on North Korea in response. This comes amid deteriorating relations between the Koreas and allegations of North Korean troops supporting Russia in the war in Ukraine. Both North Korea and Russia have yet to confirm or deny these claims.
Read the original article here
North Korea’s most recent missile launch, characterized as a banned intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) and marked by its longest flight yet, is a striking reminder of the ongoing tensions on the Korean Peninsula. The missile’s flight lasted 86 minutes and reached an altitude of 7,000 km, a height that even sparked thoughts of space travel. It’s perplexing to think that a country with such a bleak reputation can still develop something capable of such impressive heights, even in a test scenario. The realities of North Korea’s military ambitions become daunting when we consider the implications of such power. Could this be an indication of their readiness to defy global norms?
The fact that this launch occurred during a period of heightened hostility between the North and South reveals a naked audacity on North Korea’s part. The test comes against a backdrop of deteriorating relations and North Korea’s increasingly aggressive posturing. This isn’t just a show for domestic audiences; it sends messages abroad. The choice to fire the ICBM at a sharply-raised angle, rather than horizontally, seems to suggest that while they’re testing their capabilities, they are also keenly aware of the geopolitical chess game being played.
Banned missiles serve as a fascinating paradox. They are still fired, seemingly in bold defiance of international regulations, raising questions about the efficacy and enforcement of these bans. Why is it that North Korea can continually push the envelope, while other countries endure a different set of consequences? The international community often reacts with condemnation, labeling these actions as violations of UN sanctions. Yet, when it comes to actual punitive measures, it feels like a slap on the wrist at best. There seems to be a discrepancy in the perception of what constitutes a threat and how countries respond to those threats.
Imagining the strategic calculations behind these missile tests leads to a troubling realization. North Korea appears to be playing a long game, leveraging its military developments while simultaneously engaging in international diplomatic efforts, or lack thereof. The notion that a missile could theoretically reach the U.S. West Coast raises alarm. Even if they aren’t necessarily planning to strike there, the mere capability is enough to invoke fear. It reminds us that North Korea retains the ability to make waves, regardless of its dire economic conditions or the suffering of its people.
Critics often remark on the absurdity of the situation, likening North Korea’s provocations to childish tantrums—dare I say, they feel more like a desperate cry for relevance on the world stage? Every time there’s a missile launch, a litany of global leaders respond, “Naughty, naughty,” yet nothing material changes. It’s as if the same tiresome script is being replayed. North Korea, for its part, seems to understand the pattern and continues executing its show.
The reality of North Korea’s military advancements is stark, regardless of the mockery of their execution. Dismissing their capabilities due to the shabby appearance of their missiles or the lack of precision in tests does not lessen their potential as a real threat. The very fact that they are developing these machines reflects a commitment to pursuing nuclear capabilities. However, there’s a palpable sense of irony in how this has all evolved. Countries across the globe, some with far worse human rights records, engage in similar endeavors without facing equivalent scrutiny. The rules seem to play differently depending on who’s involved.
Here we are, grappling not just with the question of “is it safe,” but with the normative implications of these actions. North Korea’s audacity exists in a space where laws are unilaterally enforced by larger powers—an uncomfortable truth for many. Whether one views North Korea as a rogue state or a legitimate player in international affairs shapes the entire discourse around these launches. The absence of effective diplomatic relations highlights the helplessness we often feel in the face of such flagrant violations of what others deem “unlawful”.
So much of the global rhetoric surrounding North Korea is grounded in incredulity and mockery. Yet, beneath this chaotic surface lies a complex interplay of power, fear, and international law—or the lack thereof. The world watches, as the specter of another military confrontation looms ever closer while dictating the narrative that North Korea is merely a collection of ragged missiles being fired into the sea. Yet, this serves to mask the very real potential for conflict that lies beneath the absurdity. The question remains whether there will ever be a point at which actions will provoke actual responses, or if we will continue riding this tide of inaction until it carries us to an unthinkable conclusion.