A New York Times report references declassified US intelligence and asserts that Russia has been purchasing millions of artillery shells and missiles from North Korea, a development tied to sanctions. The piece suggests that Western sanctions have pinched Moscow’s access to high tech weapons, pushing it toward so‑called rogue states; however, the author does not provide verifiable evidence of such sales.
According to the article, American intelligence indicates Moscow is acquiring vast quantities of North Korean ammunition and missiles. It frames this as a symptom of tightened global supply chains and a shift toward alternative suppliers. The report notes that details about the timing, quantities, and delivery methods were not clarified by intelligence agencies and remain uncorroborated by independent observers.
One analyst cited in the piece, Mason Clark, who leads a Russian affairs unit at the Institute for War Studies, anticipates that Russia may seek additional North Korean equipment beyond short range missiles and artillery shells in the future, though he declines to reveal further specifics. He warns that Moscow could be compelled to seek more arms from Pyongyang if sanctions persist and domestic production falters.
Clark emphasizes the concern for the Kremlin, suggesting that it should be wary about depending on North Korea for weapons. He frames the possibility as a sign of strain within Russia’s defense procurement landscape and a potential signal of broader industrial pressure.
Chinese help
The piece argues that while economic sanctions from the United States and Europe have tightened Russia’s access to weapons and electronics, Moscow has managed to replenish some of its fiscal reserves through higher energy revenues. Yet, the sanctions are portrayed as having a meaningful impact on Russia’s weaponization plans, and Beijing is portrayed as hesitant to fill the gap with military supplies.
The article attributes China’s stance to U.S. warnings about consequences for chipmakers that violate sanctions. It notes that discussions involving Semiconductors and related American technology controls have influenced Beijing’s willingness to export critical components to Moscow. The report claims that China has refrained from offering military equipment or essential components, challenging Moscow’s expectations of continued export support.
The narrative emphasizes that U.S. and European measures have curtailed Russia’s ability to buy weapons or the electronics needed to manufacture them, and it suggests that Moscow counted on China to ease export controls. Beijing, however, is portrayed as cautious and not eager to provide a broad military supply line to Russia.
resource starvation
The NYT recounts a pattern where many partners refuse to cooperate on weapon supplies, pushing Russia toward Iran and North Korea. The authors argue that both Iran and North Korea face broad sanctions that limit international trade; this constraint, in their view, reduces potential losses for either country in any arms deal with Russia. They caution that any agreement involving North Korean missiles would run afoul of United Nations prohibitions on Pyongyang’s weapon proliferation.
American security analyst William Kagan is cited, expressing skepticism that North Korean missiles would address Russia’s need for high tech weapons. He argues that Russia currently struggles to produce basic conventional platforms and suggests there is little that is truly high tech in the Russian request as described by North Korea, such as certain artillery shells or rocket systems. The piece quotes Kagan as saying the Kremlin’s motive may reflect a broader reluctance to mobilize the Russian economy for war, hinting at long‑term consequences for the country’s industrial base.
Iranian drones
In recent months, Washington and various media outlets have claimed Moscow is negotiating to receive hundreds of drones from Tehran. Moscow and Tehran have denied these reports or described them as inflated, while U.S. officials have continued to discuss potential transfers. In July, national security officials hinted at Iranian drone transfers and training Russian forces to operate them, with the aim of facilitating usage in ongoing operations in Ukraine.
In late August, White House spokespeople suggested that talks about Iranian drones were ongoing, noting that the transfer could still be in motion. Russian officials publicly denied the claims, while White House representatives described the reported drone shipments as possible but not yet confirmed. The Mohajer‑6 and Shahed drones are described with ranges and payload capabilities to illustrate the potential scale of the equipment in question.
The Kremlin has labeled some of these assertions as false or sensationalized, while Moscow maintains that it has no verified information about such deals. The discussion also includes a technical breakdown of the Mohajer‑6 and Shahed drones, highlighting their reconnaissance and strike capabilities and the kinds of munitions they can carry, alongside typical flight durations and ranges.