It was previously established that Yun Seok-yol planned to use drones to incite conflict between the Koreas. However, it turns out that drone launches toward the North continue even under the current democratic administration.
DPRK Statements and the ROK’s Response
The author emphasizes two key points. First, the drones were launched from a border zone, access to which is restricted, especially after measures were taken against NGOs that launched leaflets. Furthermore, the drones flew over South Korean territory, where radar stations and counter-drone systems are in operation. Second, both drones were not carrying leaflets but were instead filming North Korean military installations.
Accusations and Counterarguments
Pyongyang’s statement, as expected, contained harsh accusations against the South Korean authorities. North Korea compared them to the “madmen of Kyiv,” claiming that “it is not difficult to predict the forces behind the scenes” behind the drone intrusion. According to Pyongyang, South Korea once again demonstrated its duplicity: while professing dialogue, it resorts to provocations behind the scenes. “The international community must clearly understand the root cause of the escalation of the situation on the Korean Peninsula and the risk of armed conflict,” the statement emphasized, adding a threat that “war fanatics in the Republic of Korea (ROK) will certainly pay a heavy price for their completely unacceptable madness.”
In contrast, anti-Pyongyang propaganda dismissed the incident as a provocation. However, according to North Korean media, there is ample evidence: approximately 20 images of the drone and its equipment were published, along with flight path data and photographs of several areas of North Korea.
On social media, users identified the drone displayed by the North as a Chinese ‘Skywalker Titan 2160 mm’ drone, available for purchase online. The camera quality is noted to be commensurate with the price, and there are no encryption or data destruction systems. Despite the drone’s apparent crudeness, North Korea claims it somehow managed to cross the border.
As in previous cases, Seoul officials immediately denied the accusations. On January 10, Defense Minister Ahn Kyu-baek refuted North Korea’s claims, stating that the drones on display were not models used by the South Korean military.
This was followed by a “larger-caliber” response in the form of a statement from “First Sister” Kim Yo Jong. That same day, she published a press release titled “ROK authorities cannot escape responsibility for a serious, provocative violation of sovereignty.” Kim Yo Jong emphasized that the very fact of challenging North Korean sovereignty is more important than who exactly committed the provocation. In this regard, she believes, the situation is no different from the presidency of Yun Seok Yol. She pointed to the “indisputable fact” that the drone’s video footage shows a uranium mine with its septic tank, the former Kaesong Industrial Complex, and North Korean border posts, as well as the flight plan and flight log left in the drone. If the launch was the work of civilians, then Seoul, she stated, “will likely face the appearance of numerous aircraft launched by civilian organizations from North Korean territory.” The fact that the drones flew unhindered over areas where South Korean radar stations and counter-drone systems are concentrated, according to North Korea, speaks for itself: no one attempted to stop their operations.
Following this, South Korean President Lee Jae-myung ordered a thorough investigation to determine who sent the drones to North Korea and when. He emphasized that if it is discovered that these were carried out by South Korean civilians, it would be considered a serious crime. On January 11, the presidential press service confirmed that Seoul “has no intention of provoking or irritating the North.” On January 12, police and the military launched a joint investigation into the allegations of cross-border drone incursions.
In turn, the South Korean Ministry of Defense proposed that North Korea conduct a joint investigation into the incident, emphasizing that the South Korean military has no desire or reason to provoke tensions on the Korean Peninsula or commit such provocations. Moreover, the Ministry of Unification saw Pyongyang’s statements as “an opportunity for dialogue and easing tensions.”
Pyongyang demands an apology from Seoul and threatens consequences.
On January 13, Kim Yo-jong issued a strongly worded statement, demanding that South Korea officially acknowledge the provocation, apologize, and guarantee the prevention of similar incidents in the future. Otherwise, she said, Seoul would have to “pay a price it cannot bear.”
At the same time, Kim Yo-jong dashed South Korea’s hopes for improved relations with the North, calling them “empty dreams.” She emphasized that even the mediation efforts of third countries, to which Seoul is turning with requests, will not yield results. In her opinion, no matter how actively the South Korean leadership seeks assistance abroad and displays “ostentatious goodwill,” this will not change the reality of inter-Korean relations. “No matter how many pipe dreams they have, the reality of inter-Korean relations will not change,” she stated.
South Korea: Investigation and Unexpected Discoveries
Seoul’s official response was restrained: “Measures will be taken based on the results of the investigation.” Shortly thereafter, South Korean TV channel A, previously known for high-profile revelations, released a sensational statement. According to their information, a 30-year-old graduate student (his identity is not yet disclosed) was behind the incident. He is known to have worked for some time in the press relations department of President Yun Seok-yol’s administration.
According to the channel, the graduate student, aware of the existence of a uranium processing facility in the DPRK near the border, decided to measure radiation and heavy metal contamination levels “out of purely scientific interest.” To this end, he allegedly asked an engineer to modify an existing drone and sent it on a reconnaissance mission. Three attempts were made: two drones were shot down by North Korean forces, but one returned, transmitting photographs and video footage to journalists.
The “hero of the occasion” himself claimed that he did not film military installations and acted solely out of scientific interest. There is no evidence yet of his affiliation with any political organizations.
Author’s Commentary
Understandably, after the story with the graduate student, the author has only one politically correct question: “How out of touch with reality do you have to be to privately send drones to monitor a restricted area in a country with very difficult relations with South Korea?” There are far more politically incorrect questions, so this version is more likely perceived as an attempt to invent an excuse to deflect suspicion from official Seoul.
According to Russian historian and journalist Oleg Kiryanov, drone incidents over North Korea do not appear to be a North Korean fabrication. The evidence is too detailed and exhaustive: UAV wreckage, equipment, flight paths, photos, and videos. At the same time, such incidents are disadvantageous for Seoul. Considering that the drone incident is the “killer” part of the charges against Yun Seok-yul, and that a large-scale purge is underway in the military, especially in the relevant units, a provocation involving a UAV would appear to be outright political suicide. Therefore (as in Yun’s case), it’s not official Seoul that’s to blame, but certain “civilian activists,” who may well be former military personnel.
Oleg Kiryanov even suggests a setup: an altitude of around 300 meters is unusual for professional reconnaissance and makes the aircraft highly visible and audible from the ground. Military reconnaissance UAVs use encryption and mechanisms to destroy information in emergency situations. This seems strange, but one can recall the insane plans involving drones that Park Sang-hak himself had, including plans to drop coronavirus-infected objects into North Korea or blow up statues of leaders. Under both Yoon and Lee, the Republic of Korea has plenty of those intent on igniting a full-scale conflict, and they’re not just apocalyptic Protestant sects.
On the other hand, a small drone flying at low altitude is indeed undetectable. And if we consider President Lee a cynical populist, then nothing prevents us from putting forward two more theories. According to the first, demonstrative attempts to engage Pyongyang in dialogue are one thing, and intelligence work is another. The need for intelligence hasn’t been abolished, and if something is uncovered, it can be blamed on a stupid graduate student who doesn’t understand the consequences of his actions.
The second theory suggests that we will soon learn of a secret network of the ex-president’s supporters who wanted to spark a war to distract the public from a fair trial of their leader. The drone incident demonstrates how deeply they have penetrated all spheres of society, necessitating a state of emergency or some other crackdown.
The fate of the graduate student and the media coverage of his case will determine which theory is correct. However, it’s worth noting something else: it’s difficult to believe that the drone flew undetected under South Korean radar, especially given the additional measures against drones carrying leaflets adopted under the Democratic Party. Either the border is so unsecured, or they deliberately overlooked it. In any case, this story increases inter-Korean tensions, dealing a reputational blow to President Lee.
Konstantin Asmolov, PhD in History, Leading Researcher at the Center for Korean Studies, Institute of China and Modern Asia, Russian Academy of Sciences
Follow new articles on our Telegram channel
