By David Maxwell - November 6, 2024
Introduction
As North Korean troops begin deployment to Russia with the prospect of fighting alongside Russian forces in Ukraine, communication challenges are becoming evident. While military operations rely on clear communication, the relationship between Russian and North Korean forces goes beyond linguistic issues. To succeed on the battlefield, trust and mutual respect between the forces are equally crucial. Interpretation and translation can only bridge some of these gaps, and without trust, there is a risk of miscommunication and failure on the battlefield.
The Challenge of Language Interpretation and Cultural Understanding
Military communication is complex. Hand signals and tactical gestures can be universally understood across forces, conveying basic commands like "attack" or "stop." However, more intricate orders require interpreters with a deep understanding of both languages and cultures. A simple Google translation can convey words but lacks the nuance of military concepts and operational standards. Interpreters need to understand complex military tactics and the cultural context of the forces they are communicating between to ensure that orders are not merely understood but acted upon with clarity.
North Korean and Russian forces do not have a history of combined training or interoperability. By contrast, the U.S. and South Korean alliance has focused on living, working, and training together over the past 70 years. This integration has led to a deep-rooted understanding of military operations and the capability to conduct combined operations effectively. Programs such as the Korean Augmentees to the U.S. Army (KATUSA) are instrumental in fostering trust. This program, initiated in 1950, places Korean soldiers within U.S. Army units, facilitating better communication and shared understanding. The high level of interoperability at the command levels and the cross-pollination of doctrine the professional military education in both countries have strengthened the alliance and improved operational efficiency.
The Role of Trust in Combined Military Operations
A foundation of trust is essential in any successful military alliance. Trust is built over time through shared experiences, such as training exercises and even casual bonding among soldiers. You cannot “surge trust.”
One report suggests a ratio of one translator and three Russian officers per 30 North Korean soldiers. If these officers are expected to control the North Korean troops, the arrangement could lead to a breakdown in command structures. Without mutual trust, North Korean soldiers may feel subjugated or distrusted, potentially undermining their morale and cooperation with Russian forces.
There are two critical aspects of building trust between forces. First, soldiers must live, work, and train together to create a bond. Veterans often note that shared combat experiences, training hardships, and social interactions (e.g. sharing beer, soju, or vodka) help build camaraderie. However, given the lack of past cooperation between North Korean and Russian troops, there is minimal opportunity for such bonding to occur. To paraphrase one of the U.S. SOF truths, you cannot create the bonds of trust rapidly after emergencies occur. This is certainly an emergency for Russia. Instead of the unity that U.S. and South Korean forces experience through combined exercises and training, the Russian and North Korean forces are likely to encounter friction due to unfamiliarity with each other's military culture and operational expectations.
The second aspect required for trust is respect. Reports from Ukrainian intelligence reveal that Russian forces refer to North Korean troops in derogatory terms, suggesting a lack of respect for their Korean counterparts. Negative perceptions or cultural biases within the Russian forces could create resentment among the North Koreans, diminishing the potential for a cohesive military effort. To build a successful combined force, Russian leaders must acknowledge and respect the experience and contributions of the North Korean soldiers rather than viewing them as subordinates or expendable assets.
The Limitations of Basic Communication Tools
Recently, a booklet containing basic Korean military commands was reportedly distributed to Russian forces, suggesting a minimalistic approach to language training. These phrases include simple commands like “Attack!” or “Get down!” While these basic expressions might help Russian forces communicate in critical moments, they fall short of conveying complex military strategies or nuanced commands. This issue is exacerbated by the lack of trained interpreters capable of providing real-time, contextually accurate interpretations.
For instance, the South Korean and U.S. forces have spent decades refining their communication protocols. Interpreters and translators embedded in these forces are familiar with military jargon and the cultural nuances of both nations. Additionally, they undergo continuous training to ensure that they can handle the intricacies of operational planning and battlefield directives. In contrast, Russian efforts to teach a limited set of Korean phrases to their soldiers may prove ineffective on the battlefield, where rapid and precise communication is paramount.
Consequences of Inadequate Trust and Respect
The reliance on basic translations without building trust and respect could result in operational chaos. Military leaders and experts agree that trust between forces is necessary to execute effective combat operations. Without well-trained interpreters and a history of combined training, it will be challenging for North Korean and Russian forces to conduct coordinated operations. The U.S. and South Korea's combined forces have conducted interoperability training for decades, yet even with these established protocols, communication is continuously honed through joint and combined exercises.
With North Korean soldiers reportedly struggling to understand the Russian military’s combat terminology, the expectation of a seamless partnership may be unrealistic. Russian reports suggest that the North Korean military is finding it difficult to learn even the basics of military communication, further complicating operational effectiveness. An atmosphere of distrust, coupled with language barriers and cultural misunderstandings, could compromise the effectiveness of both forces in Ukraine.
Building a Sustainable Partnership for Battlefield and Strategic Success
If Russian and North Korean forces wish to build an effective alliance, they must address these foundational issues beyond language. Investing in comprehensive interpreter training, fostering mutual respect, and creating opportunities for joint training exercises would be more effective long-term solutions. Learning basic phrases might be a short-term fix, but without trust and respect, there is no foundation for the kind of cooperation that successful military partnerships demand.
Ultimately, if Russia views North Korean forces as expendable or subservient, it will be nearly impossible to build the trust needed for successful combined operations. Building effective partnerships requires time, commitment, and a genuine respect for each other’s capabilities. In this regard, the Russian and North Korean forces have a long way to go if they hope to work together as a cohesive and effective military unit.
Not only are trust, respect, and effective communication required for the battlefield they are required for effective policy making and strategy development. Fortunately, these relationships that have developed among the military have also been built among policy makers in South Korea and the U.S. This includes both professional civil servants and political appointees. There is nothing comparable between Russian and North Korea.
Conclusion
Although perhaps not apparent to the casual reader, this comparison has particular meaning for the outcome on the Korean peninsula. The differences between them are the reasons why one will achieve success and the other will not. The alliance based on trust and respect will always defeat a transactional alliance. If there is war or regime collapse on the Korean peninsula the South Korea–U.S. alliance will prevail in defending Korea and making the Korean peninsula safe for all Korean people. Now that the military alliance has publicly committed to a free and unified Korea in the 56th Security Consultative Meeting, showing the utmost respect for the desires of the Korean people, it will provide military support to achieving the political end state of a unified Korea, a United Republic of Korea (U-ROK).
David Maxwell is a retired U.S. Army Special Forces Colonel who has spent more than 30 years in the Asia Pacific region. He specializes in Northeast Asian Security Affairs and irregular, unconventional, and political warfare. He is Vice President of the Center for Asia Pacific Strategy and a Senior Fellow at the Global Peace Foundation. Following retirement, he was Associate Director of the Security Studies Program at Georgetown University. He is on the board of directors of the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea and the OSS Society and is a c
Comments