In recent past, two world powers – first the United States in Iraq and eventually Russia in Ukraine – initiated conflicts that were commonly regarded as questionable, if not outright improper, by much of the global community. Both of these problems sparked heated debate and scrutiny, not just for the aggressors ‘ behavior but also for the international response and alliances they sparked.
Two responses, in particular, have out for their resemblance and political sarcasm: the selection by South Korea to send troops to Iraq in 2004, and North Korea’s new move to give support to Russia in Ukraine. This parallel between the Asian states ‘ respective political systems reveals complex interconnectedness, allegiances, and evolving norms governing foreign military treatments.
A tale of two attacks
The earth was distinctly divided when the United States invaded Iraq in 2003. The alleged presence of weapons of mass destruction ( WMDs ) in Iraq was the US’s official justification for the invasion, which was later refuted. However, the Bush administration went forth, citing a desire to promote democracy and remove threats to global stability.
The war was not approved by the UN. The intervention was criticized as unlawful by the UN secretary general and numerous specific nations, including many European allies. Despite global demonstrations and social criticism, the war proceeded, sparking what would become one of the most controversial war of the 21st century.
Nearly two decades later, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine unfolded in a similar surroundings of international condemnation. Russia asserted that it was responding to safety concerns and that Ukraine’s residents were being treated unfairly by NATO’s expansion and Russian-speaking groups. Supporters make a distinction between the two, claiming that Ukraine is a neighboring state allied to European powers that threaten Russia’s immediate safety while Iraq is a royal state on the other side of the planet that does not pose a threat to the US.
Regardless, the majority of the country’s nations, especially in the West, denounced Russia’s activities as unwarranted aggression and an unconstitutional violation of Ukraine’s independence. Countries all over Europe and beyond imposed sanctions on Russia while supporting Ukraine, and the UN General Assembly largely condemned the war.
South Korea’s assistance for the US in Iraq
South Korea made the decision to send troops to support the partnership 18 weeks after the US invaded Iraq. This decision was important because South Korea, as a close ally of the United States, was under significant pressure to demonstrate its help for Washington’s plans. South Korea became one of the largest forces contributors to the alliance, behind only the United Kingdom, with the implementation of the Zaytun Division, which included around 3,600 North Korean soldiers. Nevertheless, the decision was not without controversy internally.
Substantial monetary bonuses also contributed to South Korea’s decision to support the United States and dispatch forces. This included continued US military ( including technology ) support, favorable trade conditions crucial for an export-driven economy, and lucrative contracts in construction, energy and telecommunications in Iraqi reconstruction. These economic advantages at the time significantly contributed to South Korea’s growth into Middle Eastern industry.
In South Korea, common opinion on the Iraq War was greatly divided. Many South Koreans viewed the conflict as a United States ‘ “misuse of energy” and an international agreement-brokering. However, South Korea’s state argued that the empire with the US was major, especially given the ongoing defense tension with North Korea. So, South Korea saw a way to strengthen its proper ties with the US, hoping for continued security guarantees and political support for the Korean Peninsula.
North Korea’s aid for Russia in Ukraine
Today, over 30 times into the fight in Ukraine, North Korea has sent military aid to Russia. Although the precise nature of this aid is still undetermined, evidence suggests that North Korea has already deployed military forces and provided ordnance shells and other ammunition to Russian forces, although the role they may enjoy is still unclear. In light of the international sanctions and loneliness that both nations are experiencing, North Korea’s support indicates a more comprehensive alliance with Russia.
In supporting Russia, North Korea has possible secured vital power supplies, food aid and potential access to advanced military technology, which are essential for its struggling economy. Moreover, it is likely that direct funds or in-kind payments may add to the government’s capacity to maintain control within the regime.
The choice also reflects North Korea’s long-standing anti-Western attitude and want to balance US influence in East Asia. North Korea sends a powerful concept of disobedience to what it perceives as American imperialism by supporting Russia in Ukraine. Additionally, North Korea has a significant ally in a world where there are few and its economy and tools are severely restricted by international sanctions because of aligning itself with Russia. Russia, in turn, increases from North Korea’s artillery offer, easing its possess weapons shortages on the forefront in Ukraine.
Norms are dead, long live geopolitical irony!  ,
The irony of these events is not lost on observers. Each of the two rival states on the Korean Peninsula found itself allied with a superpower that was accused of carrying out illegal aggression. The decisions were strategic moves that emphasized the Koreas ‘ respective geopolitical alliances, not necessarily in accordance with the aggressors ‘ justifications.
South Korea’s participation in Iraq, while controversial, demonstrated its alignment with the Western world and its dependence on the US security umbrella, a crucial factor in its security strategy against North Korea. Similarly, North Korea’s support for Russia highlights its resistance to Western influence and a desire to maintain the balance of power in East Asia by aligning itself with a powerful, albeit embattled, Russia.
Further research is also needed regarding how international law and norms affect state behavior in these parallel decisions. Both superpowers acted in ways they believed were in line with their national interests despite the widespread condemnation and the possibility of diplomatic friction. Both South Korea and North Korea gave their strategic alliances precedence over strict adherence to international legal standards, which highlights the limitations of international law when national security is perceived as being at stake.
The two cases make a strong argument that “middle power” norms are, and always were, dependent on national interest. There is no such thing as” good international citizenship”. It is wholly dependent on national interest.
In the end, these cases demonstrate that international alliances often exert a stronger influence on state behavior than adherence to global norms or concerns about the legality of military actions. South Korea’s assistance for the US in Iraq and North Korea’s aid for Russia in Ukraine both highlight how secondary states navigate complex webs of power and influence. The priorities of both Koreas remain their national interestw and the maintenance of alliances that offer them some leverage and stability in an unpredictable world.
The complex nature of international relations and the strong sway of alliances are demonstrated by South Korea and North Korea’s decisions to engage in wars that are widely regarded as illegal. The two Koreas, though ideologically opposed, responded similarly when they were pressured , – and offered incentives – by their superpower allies. These choices, in contrast to the increasingly multipolar world where great power competition has resumed, show how small states continue to play strategic roles, frequently placing geopolitical advantage before universal principles.
Jeffrey Robertson is an academic, consultant and writer focusing on foreign affairs, diplomacy and the Korean Peninsula.  , This article was originally published , on his Substack, Diplomatic Seoul, and is republished with permission. Read more here.