North Korea moved quickly through its top leadership from the early stage of the recent landmine explosion in the Demilitarized Zone in order to protect construction work on fortifying its southern border and to limit the range of countermeasures available to South Korea's military, according to a new analysis.
Hong Min, a senior research fellow at the Korea Institute for National Unification, wrote in a report titled "The Structure and Intent of Kim Yo-jong's Statement on the DMZ Landmine Explosion" that "North Korea's response this time was fast, high-level and preemptive compared with the 2015 wooden-box mine incident," the institute said on the 2nd.
A landmine exploded on Sept. 21 in the DMZ sector held by the Army's 25th Division on the western front. The Joint Chiefs of Staff announced preliminary findings on Sept. 28 that it was highly likely to have been a North Korean military mine. The following day, the JCS said it would carry out "appropriate and commensurate measures" once the findings were confirmed. Kim Yo-jong, a senior North Korean official, issued a statement the same day calling the incident a "self-staged farce" by South Korea and denying any North Korean responsibility.
That marked a departure from the 2015 wooden-box mine incident. Then, North Korea first responded on Aug. 14, four days after the JCS announced its findings on Aug. 10, through its National Defense Commission policy bureau. It subsequently escalated step by step, with a notice from its front-line command, artillery fire, a 48-hour ultimatum and a declaration of a quasi-state of war. This time, the military and working-level agencies were bypassed and Kim took the lead from the outset.
Hong assessed Kim's direct response to a working-level military investigation as "a top-level response that skipped multiple stages and directly reflected the intent of the supreme leader." That indicates the North Korean leadership saw the matter as a grave issue requiring high-level handling from the start, he said.
The report pointed to the southern border fortification project as the reason for the rushed response. In her statement, Kim referred not to the western front where the blast occurred but to North Korean border construction sites facing the 21st Division on the eastern front, warning of "immediate and merciless retaliation" if South Korean troops moved beyond warning shots to live fire at construction crews or if rounds landed on the North Korean side. The eastern front is where the North's work to permanently fortify its southern border is concentrated.
"What North Korea is wary of is not so much being blamed for the mine as the prospect that South Korean countermeasures triggered by the incident could lead to live fire at construction crews and halt the work," Hong said. Heightened military tension in the area would disrupt the schedule and endanger crews working near the Military Demarcation Line, he said.
Also notable is that Kim issued her statement before the JCS released final findings or specified countermeasures. Hong said that by responding from the highest political level rather than through military-to-military exchanges, North Korea elevated the question of countermeasures into the realm of political decision-making. The aim, he said, was to raise the burden on South Korea's decision-makers and narrow their options before Seoul settles on how strongly to respond.
Hong added, however, that Kim's early high-intensity statement could also signal an intent to manage the situation. In 2015, a response that began through military channels expanded in stages and tension mounted, he said, whereas this time a senior figure set a threshold for retaliation at the outset, suggesting an effort to head off incremental escalation.
On South Korea's response, Hong recommended actively disclosing physical evidence to counter the North's "staged" claim. "Disclosing physical evidence and sharing it internationally is the most effective means of neutralizing the 'staged' frame," he said.
He also recommended that the final findings and countermeasures be handled in the working-level domain, grounded in facts and procedure, including a joint investigation with the United Nations Command and procedural steps over violations of the armistice agreement. The point, he said, is to respond in a way that denies North Korea a pretext for unnecessary political or military escalation.
