Experts Spot Troubling Marking on Russian Ballistic Missile, Realize Where It Came From
Experts at a European investigative organization say that a missile recently fired at a Ukrainian target by invading Russian forces was very likely manufactured in North Korea.
The missile struck Ukrainian’s second-largest city, Kharkiv, on Jan. 2. Its remnants were examined by a “field investigation team” from U.K.-based Conflict Armament Research, an organization that seeks to track the movement of arms and munitions to war zones and militants groups.
“Based on several unique features observed during documentation, CAR determined that this missile was manufactured in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) and is probably a KN-23 or KN-24 , both of which were first tested in 2019 and reportedly entered service with North Korea in 2020,” CAR reported on its website.
CAR published excerpts of some of the most relevant portions of its findings on X.
CAR arrived at a conclusion about the missile’s origin by considering four distinctive characteristics:
– distinctive jet vane actuators;
– bolt pattern around the igniter;
– presence of a Korean (Hangul) character; and
– repeated presence of certain factory marks (2/7)— CAR (@conflictarm) January 22, 2024
CAR documented a bolt pattern on the front section of the rocket motor that strongly resembles that of a KN-23 or KN-24, observed in an official North Korean photo taken at the February 11 plant. (4/7) pic.twitter.com/8mDNkty2hp
— CAR (@conflictarm) January 22, 2024
CAR investigators documented the repeated presence of the mark ‘112’ on several components found in the missile wreckage. This particular mark likely refers to the February 11 plant in North Korea where these missiles are reportedly assembled. (6/7) pic.twitter.com/ajLpYiG7zK
— CAR (@conflictarm) January 22, 2024
The size and configuration of some of the missile’s components and the identification of several markings led investigators to determine that the missile had originated in North Korea.
They also compared the missile’s remnants to known Russian missiles, and found that they did not match.
“The use of such missiles leads to further erosion of global nonproliferation regimes, following the Russian Federation’s earlier use of Iranian [unmanned aerial vehciles], which CAR first reported in November 2022,” the organization concluded.
According to The New York Times, Russia had asked North Korean strongman Kim Jong Un for a million artillery shells and “dozens of North Korea’s newest, barely tested missiles.”
The Times reported that Russian had used North Korean missiles against Ukraine at least three times in the past 30 days.
The Times painted the situation as possibly dire — “a huge moment of vulnerability for Ukraine” that unnamed western officials found “deeply worrying” — despite also reporting that the Ukraine’s air defenses had not failed and had munitions sufficient for at least the next could of months.
“But if North Korea increases its missile shipments, and Congress fails to pass additional aid, that calculation could change,” the Times said.
European officials, again unidentified by the Times, “believe there could be far more to come,” the outlet claimed.
The Times also noted that, while the few missiles apparently supplied by North Korea so far — reportedly fewer than 50 in total — have been manufactured relatively recently, a great number of the North Korean artillery rounds haven’t even exploded on impact after being fired. Some, in fact, have reportedly exploded in the Russian guns before being fired.
More unnamed “officials and analysts,” this time from South Korea, reported told the Times that North Korea was happy to provide the arms to Russia because it allowed them to test their efficacy against NATO defenses.
North Korean state media has said that Russian President Vladimir V. Putin was planning another trip to North Korea, presumably again with hat in hand, looking for more munitions that his own country is apparently unable to produce.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
