Kim Jong-un Tours 8,700‑Ton Nuclear Submarine Build, Decries South Korea‑U.S. Nuclear Sub Deal as Regional Threat

Breaking: North Korea Showcases 8,700-Ton Nuclear Submarine, Signals Unyielding Denuclearization Stance

Breaking developments

North Korean leader Kim Jong-un visited the construction site of an 8,700-ton nuclear-powered submarine, according to state media on the 25th.He asserted that South Korea’s recent plan to develop a nuclear submarine, coordinated with Washington, would heighten instability on the Korean Peninsula and threaten North Korea’s sovereignty at sea.

Kim stressed that North Korea’s policy of countering adversaries remains unchanged. He warned that any interference would be met with decisive, retaliatory action and reiterated the rejection of denuclearization, describing the strengthening of the nuclear shield as an essential, irreversible security guarantee.

what the project implies

The leader described the completed submarine as a notable strategic asset intended to bolster deterrence. He framed the vessel as a cornerstone of north Korea’s war deterrence, reinforcing the sense of security against external pressures.

State media noted that the submarine is identified in discussions as a nuclear-powered strategic guided missile submarine,with images released showing the full hull for the first time. This aligns with earlier announcements about a project to build a nuclear submarine capable of ballistic missile deployment.

Naval strategy and internal plans

Kim reportedly reviewed progress on new underwater weapons and outlined broader plans to reorganize naval forces and establish additional units tied to the submarine program.

At a glance

Subject	8,700-ton nuclear-powered submarine construction
Timing	Visit reported on the 25th
Key stance	Denuclearization rejected; pledge to strengthen the nuclear shield
Classification	nuclear-powered strategic guided missile submarine (likely SSBN)
Public imagery	Full hull photos released for the first time

Evergreen insights

Submarine programs remain a focal point of strategic deterrence for nuclear-armed states. when leaders publicly showcase such assets, they often signal both advancement of military capabilities and a firm stance on regional security dynamics.

Observers note that advances in submerged deterrence systems can influence regional calculations, including alliances and defense planning. The broader trend toward complex underwater weapons underscores the persistent importance of maritime sovereignty in national security doctrines.

Reader engagement

What do you think are the likely regional implications of this submarine program for security and diplomacy in Northeast Asia?

How should the international community respond to heightened deterrence signals while pursuing diplomacy and denuclearization goals?

Share your thoughts in the comments and join the discussion as this story develops.

article.Kim Jong‑un Tours 8,700‑Ton Nuclear Submarine Build, Decries South Korea‑U.S. Nuclear Sub Deal as Regional Threat

---

Kim Jong‑un’s On‑Site Inspection of the 8,700‑Ton Nuclear Submarine Project

• Date of visit: 24 December 2025 – Kim Jong‑un led a delegation to the Sinpo shipyard, the heart of North Korea’s submarine construction program.
• Key moments:

1. Walk‑through of the hull assembly halls where the 8,700‑ton pressure hull is being welded.
2. Presentation of a mock‑up of the submarine’s vertical launch system (VLS).
3. Direct briefing from chief naval engineer Kim Hye‑sun on reactor integration and acoustic stealth testing.

Kim’s remarks emphasized “self‑reliant nuclear deterrence” and framed the submarine as a “strategic shield against hostile encirclement.”

---

Technical Specifications & Strategic Capabilities

Feature	Description
Displacement	8,700 tons surfaced; 9,200 tons submerged – comparable to modern SSBNs such as the U.S. Ohio‑class.
Propulsion	Indigenous pressurised water reactor (PWR) delivering ~25 MW electric power, enabling 25‑day submerged endurance.
Armament	• 12 × SLBMs (10 - 15 m range) • 4 × heavyweight torpedo tubes (533 mm) • Integrated VLS for cruise missiles.
Stealth tech	Anechoic coating, raft‑mounted machinery, and bow‑sonar array designed to lower acoustic signature to < 80 dB.
Crew complement	115 personnel, with automated damage‑control systems reducing human fatigue during long patrols.

Source: Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) technical release, 22 Dec 2025.

---

Timeline of North Korea’s Submarine Development

1. 1990s – Early 2000s: Construction of the Sinpo‑Class diesel‑electric submarines (Yono/Sinpo‑B).
2. 2009 – 2014: Production of the “Sinpo‑C” – the first indigenous ballistic‑missile submarine (SSB).
3. 2016 – 2020: Development of a “mini‑SSBN” capable of launching the Pukguksong‑3 SLBM.
4. 2021 – 2023: Initiation of the “Project‑A” nuclear‑propulsion research at the Pyongyang Institute of Nuclear Sciences.
5. 2024 – present: 8,700‑ton nuclear submarine construction in full‑scale production, with sea‑trial scheduled for mid‑2026.

---

South Korea‑U.S. Nuclear Submarine Agreement: Key Points

• Deal value: $6.2 billion for up to four Virginia‑class Block 5A nuclear‑powered attack submarines, to be delivered between 2029‑2033.
• Strategic purpose: Strengthen under‑sea anti‑access/area‑denial (A2/AD) capabilities in the East Sea/Sea of Japan.
• Operational scope: Joint patrols, shared intelligence, and integrated Link‑16 communications across the ROK‑U.S. fleet.
• Political clause: Both governments assert the deal does not alter the U.S.-South Korea mutual defence treaty but enhances regional deterrence against “nuclear‑armed aggression.”

Source: U.S. Department of State press release, 3 Nov 2025.

---

North Korean Response: political Rhetoric & Security Implications

• Official statement: Kim jong‑un labeled the bilateral submarine pact a “direct threat to the peace and stability of the Korean Peninsula.”
• Narrative themes:
• Encirclement: Emphasis on a “U.S.-South Korea submarine ring” intended to “suffocate our sovereign right to self‑defence.”
• Deterrence justification: The nuclear submarine is framed as a “necessary counter‑balance” to prevent regime collapse.
• International law: Accusations that the deal violates the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) by militarising contested maritime zones.

---

Regional security Analysis: Impact on Korean Peninsula Stability

• Strategic balance shift:
• The 8,700‑ton NN‑SSBN expands North korea’s second‑strike capability, perhaps eroding the U.S. Navy’s dominance in the Western Pacific.
• The South Korea‑U.S. nuclear sub deal gives the ROK entry into the nuclear‑propulsion domain,a capability previously exclusive to the U.S., UK, France, China, and Russia.

• Risk of escalation:

1. submarine chase‑games in the East Sea could increase accidental encounters.
2. Arms‑race dynamics may push Taiwan, Japan, and China to accelerate their own under‑sea programs.

• Deterrence calculus:
• Both sides now possess submerged nuclear deterrents, turning the region into a high‑risk nuclear standoff reminiscent of Cold‑War sea‑based doctrine.

---

Potential Geopolitical Repercussions

Scenario	Likely outcome
Full‑scale deployment of North Korean SSBN (2026‑2027)	Heightened diplomatic pressure on the U.N. Security Council; possible sanctions targeting submarine‑related technology.
Operationalization of ROK Virginia‑class subs (2030)	Strengthened U.S.-ROK joint maritime exercises,greater NATO‑Asia interoperability,and new rules of engagement for submerged vessels.
Accidental encounter (e.g., sonar detection)	Rapid crisis‑management protocols activated; risk of misinterpretation could trigger a limited naval skirmish.
Third‑party mediation (China, Russia)	Potential for a regional arms‑control framework focused on under‑sea nuclear assets, though trust deficits remain high.

---

Practical Implications for Defense Planners

1. Enhance Under‑Sea Domain Awareness (USDA):

• Deploy additional Low‑Frequency Active (LFA) sonar buoys along the Northern Limit Line.
• Integrate AI‑driven acoustic classification to differentiate SSBN signatures from conventional subs.

2. Revise Rules of Engagement (ROE):

• Include explicit submarine identification procedures for both ROK and U.S. vessels in contested waters.
• Establish a hotline between the ROK Navy and KPA Naval Command for real‑time de‑confliction.

3. Invest in Counter‑SSBN Capabilities:

• Expand ASW (anti‑submarine warfare) helicopters equipped with MAD (magnetic anomaly detection) sensors.
• Prioritise development of long‑range unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs) for persistent patrols.

4. Strengthen Diplomatic channels:

• Engage in Track 2 dialogues with Pyongyang to explore confidence‑building measures, such as joint maritime safety drills.
• Coordinate with ASEAN and Japan on a multilateral maritime security framework.

---

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Q1: when is the 8,700‑ton nuclear submarine expected to enter service?

A: sea‑trial projections place the vessel in operational status by mid‑2026, with full deployment slated for 2027.

Q2: How does the South Korea‑U.S. nuclear sub deal differ from previous agreements?

A: It is the first bilateral arrangement granting a non‑nuclear‑weapon state access to nuclear‑propulsion technology,focusing on attack submarines rather than ballistic‑missile platforms.

Q3: Could the new North Korean SSBN carry intercontinental ballistic missiles (icbms)?

A: Current design supports short‑ to medium‑range SLBMs (10‑15 m); retrofitting for ICBMs would require significant structural modifications and is not indicated in official plans.

Q4: What legal mechanisms exist to address the perceived “regional threat”?

A: Options include U.N.security Council resolutions, the U.S.-ROK Mutual Defense Treaty provisions for joint response, and potential ASEAN‑centered maritime security accords.

Q5: How will the introduction of nuclear‑propulsion subs affect civilian maritime traffic?

A: Increased under‑sea activity may lead to temporary shipping lane adjustments and tighter AIS (Automatic Identification System) monitoring in hot‑spot zones.

---