Editor-in-Chief Atul Singh and Beijing-based Kiwi investor David Mahon examine why North Korea has suddenly become more visible on the international stage following high-profile visits by Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin. They explore North Korea’s history, economic realities, nuclear strategy and uncertain future while considering how changing US influence may reshape regional security. Pyongyang’s growing importance reflects broader shifts in the balance of power across Asia rather than a simple strengthening of alliances.
A dynasty shaped by history
Understanding North Korea requires looking far beyond the Korean War. Mahon traces the country’s political culture back to the Joseon Dynasty, which ruled Korea for roughly five centuries and established a tradition of dynastic continuity that still shapes public acceptance of the Kim family’s authority today. Legendary qualities attributed to the Kim leaders, he suggests, resemble those once associated with Korea’s monarchs, reinforcing a political culture in which one ruling family occupies an almost sacred position.
Singh and Mahon then turn to the upheavals of the 20th century. Japanese colonial rule, liberation after World War II and the Korean War fundamentally reshaped the peninsula, yet the conflict ended only with an armistice rather than a peace treaty. Mahon notes that China withdrew its forces from North Korea after the war while the United States maintained troops in the South, creating the strategic balance that still defines Northeast Asia.
Isolation and economic survival
North Korea remains one of the world’s most isolated countries despite recent diplomatic attention. Mahon describes an economy constrained by mountainous terrain, limited farmland and chronic shortages, leaving the country heavily dependent on China, which accounts for roughly 90% of its trade. During his visit a decade ago, he found a sharp contrast between the relatively prosperous appearance of Pyongyang and the extreme poverty of rural communities, where traditional farming methods remain common.
“There’s a desperation in that country,” Mahon admits.
Beyond official trade, North Korea relies on weapons exports and illicit activities to generate revenue while maintaining strict internal controls over information and movement. Singh notes the country’s chronic malnutrition, pointing to the significant height difference between North and South Koreans as evidence of decades of economic hardship. Yet despite repeated predictions of collapse, the regime has continued to survive through external support, internal repression and extraordinary political resilience.
Russia, China and the nuclear question
Recent visits by Putin and Xi signal what Mahon sees as a new phase in managing North Korea rather than transforming it into a formal military ally. Russia’s need for ammunition and manpower during the war in Ukraine initially deepened ties with Pyongyang, while China now appears more willing to engage directly with its neighbor after years of frustration over its nuclear and missile programs.
Mahon argues that Beijing’s primary objective is stability rather than confrontation. “China has no benefit in seeing any conflict anywhere,” he states.
Mahon characterizes North Korea’s nuclear arsenal as an insurance policy. He says that Pyongyang believes nuclear deterrence is the only reliable guarantee of regime survival after observing the experiences of countries that surrendered their strategic capabilities. Singh notes that while North Korea’s conventional military already poses a serious threat to South Korea, long-range nuclear weapons have transformed it into a global security concern for both Washington and Beijing.
Reform or renewed instability?
Succession remains one of North Korea’s greatest uncertainties. Singh observes that the leading candidates to succeed Kim Jong Un are reportedly women, an extraordinary possibility in a traditionally patriarchal political culture. Mahon nevertheless describes Kim as an effective ruler who has consolidated power despite inheriting leadership without the revolutionary credentials of previous generations.
Looking ahead, Mahon considers gradual economic reform modeled loosely on Deng Xiaoping’s China to be the most plausible path toward greater prosperity while preserving political control. Simultaneously, he warns that declining American influence across the Asia-Pacific region could create new security risks by encouraging regional tensions involving Japan, the Philippines and the Korean Peninsula.
Singh also questions whether North Korea can indefinitely sustain its current economic model. Mahon acknowledges that repeated predictions of imminent collapse have consistently proven incorrect, arguing that highly centralized regimes often endure far longer than outsiders expect. While he believes gradual economic opening offers the country’s best long-term prospect, he cautions that any transition will depend on decisions by the Kim leadership rather than outside pressure. Whether Pyongyang embraces reform, maintains its current path or faces an unforeseen crisis, he concludes that North Korea will remain a significant factor in the evolving strategic balance of East Asia.
“The West has to wake up and realize it's about 500 years behind on its homework on Asia.” Mahon concludes.
North Korea’s future remains deeply uncertain, but its isolation can no longer be understood in isolation from the wider transformation of the Asia-Pacific. As China, Russia and the US adjust to a changing regional balance, the choices made in Pyongyang will increasingly shape Northeast Asia’s security and geopolitical future.
[Lee Thompson-Kolar edited this piece.]
The views expressed in this article/video are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.
