Archive for the ‘Aviation’ Category

Air Koryo launches Shanghai-Pyongyang flights

Wednesday, July 28th, 2010

By Michael Rank

North Korea’s Air Koryo has begun twice-weekly direct flights between Shanghai and Pyongyang, a Chinese website reports.

The flights will run each Tuesday and Friday until October 5, leaving Shanghai at 1700 hours, arriving Pyongyang at 1950 and leaving Pyongyang at 1300 hours with the arrival time in Shanghai given rather vaguely as 16 hours.

It quotes the Korean Travel Agency as saying many Chinese [so-called] volunteers want to visit North Korea for the 60th anniversary of the Korean war, while August-October is the Arirang [Mass Games] season, so now is the time to come.

The report also says there is strong interest in visiting North Korea in eastern China around Shanghai, but it until now passengers had to change planes in Beijing or Shenyang which added to the cost and was inconvenient.

It says the first flight was on July 16 and gives the flight numbers as JS522/21. It also gives phone numbers, etc for tourists interested in booking a seat.

Share

Changchun-Pyongyang flights to begin in June

Friday, April 16th, 2010

Michael Rank

China Southern Airlines is planning flights to Pyongyang from the northeastern city of Changchun from June, a Chinese website reports.

It said flights will begin on June 20, but did not say how frequent the service will be or give any further details.

It said the Korean National Travel Company was in talks with the Jilin provincial tourism bureau about tours to North Korea from either Changchun, the provincial capital, or the border city of Yanji.

China Southern has operated Beijing-Pyongyang flights in the past does not do so at present.

Share

DPRK acquires new Tupolev

Tuesday, April 13th, 2010

Hat tip to a reader:

The Russian website Аргументы и факты reported that at a ceremony in the Russian city of Ulyanovsk on March 4th the Russian company Aviastar-CP handed over a new Tu-204-100B airplane to a delegation from Air Koryo.  Also present was a team representing the “Ilyushin Finance Leasing Company” through which the plane was handed over to the Korean airline. The report relates that, “Late at night, the aircraft took off for the flight to Pyongyang from Ulyanovsk’s Vostochnyy Airport.”  It also states that this is the second “new-generation” Russian aircraft delivered to the DPRK by Aviastar.  It is expected to operate on routes between the DPRK and Russia and Southeast Asia as well as within the DPRK.

Here is the story in Russian.

Here is the story in English via Google Translate.

Here is a photo of the first Air Koryo Tupolev that went into service on May 1, 2008.

Share

Jin Hualin, Yanbian University, on Chinese investment in DPRK.

Sunday, April 4th, 2010

Jin Hualin, dean of the College of Economics and Management at Yanbian University, talks about Chinese investment in Rason in China’s Global Times.  Here is an excerpt:

GT: If China does continue to rent Rajin harbor for another 10 years, what will the effects be?

Jin: China has reached an agreement to rent a pier at Rajin Port for another decade. A Dalian-based Chinese company has invested 26 million yuan ($3.8 million) in the reconstruction of Rajin Port No.1 Pier. Park also said that China may enjoy more favorable conditions there, such as more berths.

I think Chinese companies’ participation is good for promoting the North Korean economy and building logistical infrastructure in the area, which is beneficial to China, North Korea and the Northeast Asian countries.

When the Sino-Mongolia route is finished, raw materials and natural resources from Mongolia can be shipped to Japan and South Korea via Rajin harbor, and then China’s northeastern regions and North Korea can both benefit.

GT: What should China do to promote Northeast Asian cooperation and devel-opment?

Jin: I suggest Chinese governments at all levels consider the following issues. They should accelerate trade and tourism and build cooperation on logistics, and support Chinese companies going global and investing in North Korea.

Actually, China now has many companies capable of investing abroad. The point is foreign countries’ investment environment.

We should strengthen cooperation on education with North Korean universities and colleges, sending students to study there and exploring research in new areas together.

We can also strengthen regional cooperation. We can designate China’s Hunchun city and North Korea’s Rason city as pilot cities and permit China’s commercial banks to open yuan-based accounts in Rason’s commercial banks.

Relations between Northeast Asian countries are subtle and complicated because of geopolitical contradictions, different political systems, the influence of the Cold War, historical issues, territorial disputes and sentiments caused by historical and territorial issues.

Mutual distrust fundamentally hinders cooperation. China needs to take the responsibility to promote regional cooperation and make it institutionalized and legally guaranteed as soon as possible.

GT: How do you evaluate the political and economic risks for Chinese companies going into North Korea? What advantages do Chinese companies have?

Jin: There are always political and economic risks involved in trade between different countries. The first major solution is to establish a mutual investment guarantee agreement, so that the two countries’ economic cooperation will be protected legally.

We hope that North Korea can keep the stability and consistency of its policies and issue development policies that is in line with international conventions. As long as North Korea adopts consistent policies, Chinese companies won’t encounter great political and economic risks there.

China and North Korea are believed to enjoy good mutual trust. China has experience from its reform and opening-up and plenty of investment capability. North Korea has a good educational foundation, low labor costs, and rich natural resources.

Chinese companies are active participants in investing in North Korea and I believe they’ll do well there.

Read the full interview here. Hat tip to Adam.

Share

EU implements further sanctions on DPRK

Monday, January 11th, 2010

The EU has issued a list of 12 DPRK officials who will be denied entry visas to member countries.  According to the Choson Ilbo:

The EU has imposed sanctions targeting North Korea’s top leadership over the country’s nuclear weapons development. Twelve officials were blacklisted, many of them thought to be leader Kim Jong-il’s closest advisers.

The list includes Vice Marshal Kim Yong-chun (74), the minister of the armed forces, as well as Jang Song-taek (64), the director of the North Korean Workers Party’s Administration Department who is Kim Jong-il’s brother-in-law. Six of 13 members of the powerful National Defense Committee were blacklisted.

At a session of the Environment Council in Brussels on Dec. 22, the EU approved new sanctions against North Korea, including an entry ban on individuals and goods. EU regulations are binding on the 27 member states and overrule individual national laws.

The four other blacklisted committee members are O Kuk-ryol, the deputy chairman of the National Defense Commission; Jon Pyong-ho, the secretary of the Central Committee and head of the Committee’s Military Supplies Industry Department; Paek Se-bong, the chairman of the Second Economic Committee of the Central Committee; and Ju Kyu-chang, the first deputy director of the Defense Industry Department. Also on the blacklist are Hyon Chol-hae, the deputy director of the General Political Department of the Armed Forces, and Pak Jae-gyong, the deputy director of the Logistics Bureau of the Armed Forces.

So Sang-guk, the chair of the Physics Department at Kim Il Sung University who laid the technical groundwork for the North’s nuclear development, and Pyon Yong-rip, the president of the State Academy of Sciences, were also blacklisted.

The legal statement issued by the EU can be found here on page 16. The complete list of officials affected by the travel ban are listed here on page 3The UN Security Council sanctioned five individuals in 2009.

The EU also maintained its ban on Air Koryo.  According to Yonhap (h/t The Marmot):

Air Koryo, North Korea’s air carrier, has been banned from offering flight services to Europe for a fifth year after having failed to meet international safety requirements, U.S. international broadcaster Radio Free Asia (RFA) said Saturday.

The North Korean carrier has been involved in the list of carriers prohibiting from flying to the 27 members of European Union that was released this year, RFA said.

Air Koryo reportedly has a fleet of about 20 planes made between the 1960s and 1970s in the Soviet Union.

UPDATE: Here are the EU regulations adopted on Dec 22, 2009. Thanks to Mike.

Share

Friday Fun: DPRK movies, KFA, and Air Koryo

Thursday, September 10th, 2009

Movies:

Hero of the the Commoners

 heroofcommoners.JPG

One Photo (Part 1)

photofilm1.JPG

One Photo (Part 2)

photofilm1.JPG

Shiny Morning (part 1)shinymorning.JPG Shiny Morning (Part 2)shinymorning.JPG

The Miraculous Sound of Love

soundofove.JPG

Cartoon- A Kum Rangakumrang.JPG
Creepycreepy.JPG

KFA:
Also, Alejandro Cao de Benos has published his own book in Thailand.  According to the KFA web page the book, Korea, the Songun Citadel, was recently published in Bangkok, Thailand. With 148 pages and first edition of 500 volumes.

I am not sure when volume 2 of 500 will be published.

AIR KORYO:
And finally, Skytrax has ranked Air Koryo as the world’s only 1-star airline.

Share

Direct flights planned between Pyongyang and Shanghai

Monday, July 13th, 2009

By Michael Rank

Direct flights are planned between Pyongyang and Shanghai, as well as charter flights from Chinese cities to the North Korean capital, a Chinese website reports.

It gives few details, but says the plans follow two visits by Shanghai tourism officials to Pyongyang in June.

At present the only direct flights are from Beijing and Shenyang. The report says there are hopes of attracting more tourists from the Shanghai region and mentions the possibility of charter flights from nearby Hangzhou.

It quotes the Shanghai officials who visited Pyongyang as finding the city “quiet” and “clean”. A separate report notes that because of “tension on the Korean peninsula” Shanghai residents haven’t been terribly interested in visiting North Korea, but this is now expected to change.

In loosely related news, a North Korean delegation in June visited the northern Chinese city of Tianjin, where they are reported to have toured the European Airbus factory where the A320 is being assembled and which opened last year. Rather surprising, given the high tech nature of such a plant… The first Airbus assembled in China was delivered the day after the North Korean visit. The North Korean delegation was led by the deputy chairman of the Central Inspection Bureau, Choi In-hak최인학.

Share

North Korea on Google Earth v.18

Thursday, June 25th, 2009

North Korea Uncovered version 18 is available.  This Google Earth overlay maps North Korea’s agriculture, aviation, cultural locations, markets, manufacturing facilities, railroad, energy infrastructure, politics, sports venues, military establishments, religious facilities, leisure destinations, and national parks.

This project has now been downloaded over 140,000 times since launching in April 2007 and received much media attention last month following a Wall Street Journal article highlighting the work.

Note: Kimchaek City is now in high resolution for the first time.  Information on this city is pretty scarce.  Contributions welcome.

Additions to this version include: New image overlays in Nampo (infrastructure update), Haeju (infrastructure update, apricot trees), Kanggye (infrastructure update, wood processing factory), Kimchaek (infrastructure update). Also, river dredges (h/t Christopher Del Riesgo), the Handure Plain, Musudan update, Nuclear Test Site revamp (h/t Ogle Earth), The International School of Berne (Kim Jong un school), Ongjin Shallow Sea Farms, Monument to  “Horizon of the Handure Plain”, Unhung Youth Power Station, Hwangnyong Fortress Wall, Kim Ung so House, Tomb of Kim Ung so, Chungnyol Shrine, Onchon Public Library, Onchon Public bathhouse, Anbyon Youth Power Stations.

Share

US and UN responses to the DPRK’s nuclear test no.2

Monday, June 8th, 2009

UPDATE: In response to the resolution, the DPRK has made some serious threats.  According to the Telegraph:

A commentary in the North’s state-run Rodong Sinmun newspaper claimed the US had 1,000 nuclear weapons in South Korea ready to strike. 

Meanwhile, the Tongbil Sinbo newspaper said that North Korea is “completely within the range of US nuclear attack and the Korean peninsula is becoming an area where the chances of nuclear war are the highest in the world.” 

Over the weekend, North Korea angrily responded to fresh United Nations sanctions by threatening to build as many nuclear weapons as possible. 

Until now, it said, it had only reprocessed one-third of its spent fuel rods into weapons-grade plutonium. Analysts believe the rogue state could end up with enough plutonium to make eight to nine bombs. 

The rogue state also claimed to have a uranium-enrichment programme, the first time it has admitted to one. The claim is alarming, said Professor Yang Moo-Jin, of Seoul’s University of North Korean Studies. 

“The North has abundant natural uranium of good quality, which, if combined with technology and facilities, would result in a great nuclear arsenal,” he said.  

UPDATE:  The United Naitons Security Council (UNSC) has passed a new resolution in response to the DPRK’s second nuclear test.  Althought the text of the resolution has been posted to the UNSC web page (here), below are the economically significant excerpts (taken from Reuters).  The resolution…

1. Calls upon all States to inspect, in accordance with their national authorities and legislation, and consistent with international law, all cargo to and from the DPRK, in their territory, including seaports and airports, if the State concerned has information that provides reasonable grounds to believe the cargo contains items the supply, sale, transfer, or export of which is prohibited;

2. Calls upon all Member States to inspect vessels, with the consent of the flag State, on the high seas, if they have information that provides reasonable grounds to believe that the cargo of such vessels contains items the supply, sale, transfer, or export of which is prohibited;

3. Calls upon all States to cooperate with inspections pursuant to paragraphs 11 and 12, and, if the flag State does not consent to inspection on the high seas, decides that the flag State shall direct the vessel to proceed to an appropriate and convenient port for the required inspection by the local authorities pursuant to paragraph 11;

4. Decides that Member States shall prohibit the provision by their nationals or from their territory of bunkering services, such as provision of fuel or supplies, or other servicing of vessels, to DPRK vessels if they have information that provides reasonable grounds to believe they are carrying items the supply, sale, transfer, or export of which is prohibited … unless provision of such services is necessary for humanitarian purposes;

5. Calls upon Member States … to prevent the provision of financial services … that could contribute to the DPRK’s nuclear-related, ballistic missile-related, or other weapons of mass destruction-related programs or activities;

6. Calls upon all Member States and international financial and credit institutions not to enter into new commitments for grants, financial assistance, or concessional loans to the DPRK, except for humanitarian and developmental purposes;

7. Calls upon all Member States not to provide public financial support for trade with the DPRK … where such financial support could contribute to the DPRK’s nuclear-related or ballistic missile-related or other WMD-related programs or activities;

In the Washington Post, Marcus Noland asserts that this sanctions plan is “clever”. Instead of a “crime and punishment” approach to North Korea, he said, the proposed sanctions are “basically defensive,” relying on interdiction of ships and global financial restrictions. He also went on to say, “The North Koreans will be down to whatever China gives them and whatever they can get from their subterranean customers in the Middle East.”

The Washington Post also states:

But there is little chance that these tougher sanctions will limit the ability of Kim Jong Il’s government to profit from more conventional overseas trade, said Lim Eul-chul, a researcher who specializes in North Korean trade for the Seoul-based Institute for Far Eastern Studies.

“The sanctions will not have much effect on what North Korea trades with China,” he said.

North Korea consistently fails to grow enough food to feed its 23 million people, and its state-controlled economy is moribund, but it does have mineral resources that are coveted by many industrialized countries.

The estimated value of its reserves — including coal, iron ore, zinc, uranium and the world’s largest known deposit of magnesite, which is essential for making lightweight metal for airplanes and electronics — is more than $2 trillion, according to the Korea Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

The manufacturing boom in neighboring China has dovetailed with North Korea’s acute need for hard currency and has accelerated Chinese access to the North’s resources, according to Lim, Chinese mining experts and South Korean government officials. There is, however, a significant new wrinkle in the North’s trade with China, Lim said. “The military is taking control of export sales,” he said, citing informants inside North Korea.

Other branches of the North Korean government, such as the Workers’ Party and the cabinet, have been forced to relinquish their interest in these sales to the military, Lim said. The military has grabbed greater control of export revenue, he said, as it has provoked the outside world with missile launches and the nuclear test.

Based on the recent growth of North Korean-Chinese trade, Lim said he does not believe that China wants to “take any strong measures to crush the North Korean economy.”

An article in the New York Times expresses sckepticism that these new sanctions will deter North Korea’s nuclear ambitions:

This time, in addition to financial sanctions, the proposed Security Council resolution calls for a tighter arms embargo, possible interdiction of North Korean vessels. But most analysts say that none of the threats are large enough to stop a regime that sees nuclear weapons as the key to its survival, and that has endured decades of economic sanctions and hardships, including even starvation, rather than capitulate to outside pressure.

“These are people who didn’t flinch even when 2 million of their own people died of hunger,” said Lee Ji-sue, a North Korea specialist at Myongji University.

And that is assuming that the sanctions are fully enforced. While many of these same measures have been included in previous U.N. resolutions, nations like China and Russia were reluctant to enforce them to avoid antagonizing the North.

Critics and proponents alike agree that the linchpin in making any sanctions work is China, North Korea’s primary aid and trade partner. China shares an 850-mile border with North Korea, and its $2 billion annual trade with the North accounts for over 40 percent of Pyongyang’s entire external trade, according to South Korean government estimates. North Korea’s trade with China expanded by 23 percent just last year, the South Korean government said.

Both United States and South Korean officials fear that although Beijing was disappointed by the North’s continued tests, it remains reluctant to push too hard. They say China fears causing a collapse by the Pyongyang regime that could flood it with refugees and create a newly unified, pro-American Korea on its border.

Finally, The Economist weighs in with some critical analysis:

It is hard to envision that the new sanctions will bring North Korea back to the negotiating table. With few exceptions, previous rounds of economic sanctions have had little impact. In the present case, unanimity was achieved at the price of watering down the provisions that require other countries to search North Korean vessels. The final compromise—that North Korean ships are required to undergo searches but cannot be forced to do so—is hardly a recipe for effective enforcement.

As in the past, China—and Russia, to a lesser extent—may have supported the new sanctions primarily to send North Korea a message of unified international condemnation. But North Korea will hardly infer from the passage of a murkily worded, patchily enforced resolution that it has exhausted its ability to wring concessions from its neighbours and exploit their differences. Moreover, even if the new measures are consistently enforced, it’s not clear that punishments designed to put economic and diplomatic pressure on North Korea will change the regime’s behaviour. North Korea is already one of the most isolated and desperately poor countries in the world.

Divergent interests
A lasting solution to the North Korea problem will require more than just agreeing a common approach and collectively enforcing sanctions. The main problem is not just North Korea’s unpredictability, which is, after all, predictable. It is that there are also major differences between the various interested powers in terms of how they assess the threat and what they view as the optimal outcome.

Although China’s influence over North Korea is often overstated, China alone has the economic leverage to force the regime back to the bargaining table. China’s dilemma, however, is that there may be a fine line between the amount of pressure sufficient to force the stubborn regime to make concessions and the amount that would precipitate its collapse. The fall of the current regime would almost certainly result in a massive humanitarian crisis (more accurately, China would suddenly bear the brunt of the crisis already wracking its chronically famine-stricken neighbour). For China (and Russia) the collapse of North Korea would also be a big strategic setback. The bonds of communist solidarity may have faded since Mao Zedong sent hundreds of thousands of soldiers to fight US-led UN forces during the Korean war—but North Korea remains a buffer state, the loss of which could result in a united, US-allied Korean peninsula. 

Read the full articles below:
Key excerpts from U.N. North Korea resolution
Reuters
Claudia Parsons
6/12/2009

Value of N. Korea Sanctions Disputed
Washington Post
Blaine Harden
6/12/2009

Will sanctions ever work on North Korea?
New York Times
Martin Fackler and Choe Sang-hun
6/12/2009

Punishing North Korea
The Economist
6/17/2009

ORIGINAL POST: The DPRK has historically faced few substantive repercussions from its missile and nuclear tests due to roles that Russia and China occupy both in the UN Security Council and in their status as North Korea’s neighbors, trading partners, and investors. Russia is developing the DPRK’s Rason Port and seeks to build a natural gas pipeline through the DPRK to South KoreaChina is the DPRK’s largest trading partner. And of course, hundreds (maybe thousands?) of  North Koreans work in both China and Russia to earn foreign currency for their government.

So how have China and Russia responded to the most recent nuclear test and missile launches? China has issued some tough language condeming the test and supposedly canceled some cultural exchanges, and  Russian President Medviev has also expressed concern in the

Western business media:

We have always had good relations with the North Korean leadership. But what has happened raises great alarm and concern. I have had quite a number of telephone talks with the Prime Minister of Japan and the President of South Korea. We need to think about some measures to deter those programs that are being conducted. We hope the North Korean leadership will get back to the negotiating table, because there is no other solution to this problem. The world is so tiny—as we see from the economic problems common to all of us. But indeed, WMD development or [nuclear] proliferation is a danger that is even higher than that. I’m prepared to discuss this matter in more detail during our meeting with President Obama in Moscow in early July. And we’re going to discuss this in other forums also.

As the UN Security Council debates a resolution in response to the DPRK’s recent nuclear test and missile launches, China appears to be the DPRK’s strongest partner.  According to the New York Times:

Negotiations over toughening sanctions against North Korea in the wake of its underground nuclear test last month have stalled over the issue of inspecting cargo ships on the high seas, according to two Security Council diplomats. China has yet to sign off on the idea that North Korean vessels could be stopped and searched, the diplomats said. Ambassadors from the five permanent members of the Security Council — the United States, Russia, China, Britain and France — plus Japan and South Korea, locked in intensive bargaining sessions all week, have agreed on other issues, including widening an arms embargo and financial restrictions, the diplomats said. North Korea has declared cargo inspections an act of war.

So it looks like Russia is “ok” with searching the DPRK’s cargo ships?  That is surprising.

Aside from inspecting cargo ships, the US is pushing for the UNSC resolution to restrict the DPRK from the global financial system (a la Banco Delta Asia).  According to the Washington Post:

State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley confirmed yesterday that the United States was considering targeting North Korea’s access to financial markets. A draft of the resolution urges U.N. member states to cut loans, financial assistance and grants to North Korea and its suppliers for programs linked to its military program. The draft also expands an asset freeze and travel ban.

The Bush administration applied similar financial pressure in 2005, infuriating Pyongyang. Crowley noted that, during a tour of Asian capitals this week, Deputy Secretary of State James B. Steinberg was accompanied by Treasury Undersecretary Stuart A. Levey, the architect of the Bush-era sanctions.

“Obviously, Stuart Levey’s presence on this team would indicate that we’re . . . looking at other ways that we can bilaterally put pressure on North Korea to return to the negotiating process,” Crowley said.

Additionally, the Obama administration has signaled that it might take the advice of John Bolton, former President Bush’s UN ambassador.  According to the Washington Post:

The United States will consider reinstating North Korea to a list of state sponsors of terrorism, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said in an interview broadcast yesterday as the Obama administration looks for ways to ratchet up pressure on Pyongyang after recent nuclear and missile tests.

 “We’re going to look at it,” Clinton said on ABC’s “This Week” when asked about a letter last week from Republican senators demanding that North Korea be put back on the list. “There’s a process for it. Obviously we would want to see recent evidence of their support for international terrorism.” 

Secretary of State Clinton’s comment “we would want to see more evidence of their support for international terrorism” refers to a legal requirement for any nation to be added to the list.

Here is the press release on the nuclear test by the US Director of National Intelligence.

Read more here:
Medvedev’s Strong Words for North Korea
Business Week
Maria Bartiromo
6/3/2009

Talks on North Korea Sanctions Stall Over Inspections
New York Times
Neil MacFarquhar
6/5/2009

U.S. Pushes U.N. Draft on N. Korea
Washington Post
Colum Lynch and Glenn Kessler
6/6/2009

U.S. to Weigh Returning North Korea to Terror List
Washington Post
Peter Finn
6/8/2009

U.S. Weighs Intercepting North Korean Shipments
New York Times
David E. Sanger
7/7/2009

Share

North Korea Google Earth

Wednesday, March 11th, 2009

North Korea Uncovered v.16
Download it here

laurent-kabila.jpg

The most recent version of North Korea Uncovered (North Korea Google Earth) has been published.  Since being launched, this project has been continuously expanded and to date has been downloaded over 32,000 times.

Pictured to the left is a statue of Laurent Kabila of the Democratic Republic of Congo.  This statue, as well as many others identified in this version of the project, was built by the North Koreans. According to a visitor:

From the neck down, the Kabila monument looks strangely like Kim Jong Il: baggy uniform, creased pants, the raised arm, a little book in his left hand. From the neck up, the statue is the thick, grim bald mug of Laurent Kabila (his son Joseph is the current president). “The body was made in North Korea,” explains my driver Felix. In other words, the body is Kim Jong Il’s, but with a fat, scowling Kabila head simply welded on.

This is particularly interesting because there are no known pictures of a Kim Jong il statue.  The only KJI statue that is reported to exist is in front of the National Security Agency in Pyongyang.  If a Kim Jong il statue does in fact exist, it might look something like this.

Thanks again to the anonymous contributors, readers, and fans of this project for your helpful advice and location information. This project would not be successful without your contributions.

Version 16 contains the following additions: Rakwon Machine Complex, Sinuiju Cosmetics Factory, Manpo Restaurant, Worker’s Party No. 3 Building (including Central Committee and Guidance Dept.), Pukchang Aluminum Factory, Pusan-ri Aluminum Factory, Pukchung Machine Complex, Mirim Block Factory, Pyongyang General Textile Factory, Chonnae Cement Factory, Pyongsu Rx Joint Venture, Tongbong Cooperative Farm, Chusang Cooperative Farm, Hoeryong Essential Foodstuff Factory, Kim Ki-song Hoeryong First Middle School , Mirim War University, electricity grid expansion, Tonghae Satellite Launching Ground (TSLG)” is also known as the “Musudan-ri Launching Station,” rebuilt electricity grid, Kumchang-ri suspected underground nuclear site, Wangjaesan Grand Monument, Phothae Revolutionary Site, Naedong Revolutionary Site, Kunja Revolutionary Site, Junggang Revolutionary Site, Phophyong Revolutionary Site, Samdung Revolutionary Site, Phyongsan Granite Mine, Songjin Iron and Steel Complex (Kimchaek), Swedish, German and British embassy building, Taehongdan Potato Processing Factory, Pyongyang Muyseum of Film and Theatrical Arts, Overseas Monuments built by DPRK: Rice Museum (Muzium Padi) in Malaysia, Statue de Patrice Lumumba (Kinshasa, DR Congo), National Heroes Acre (Windhoek, Namibia), Derg Monument (Addis Ababa, Ethiopia), National Heroes Acre (Harare, Zimbabwe), New State House (Windhoek, Namibia), Three Dikgosi (Chiefs) Monument (Gaborone, Botswana), 1st of May Square Statue of Agostinho Neto (Luanda, Angola), Momunment Heroinas Angolas (Luanda, Angola), Monument to the Martyrs of Kifangondo Battle (Luanda, Angola), Place de l’étoile rouge, (Porto Novo, Benin), Statue of King Béhanzin (Abomey, Benin), Monument to the African Renaissance (Dakar, Senegal), Monument to Laurent Kabila [pictured above] (Kinshasa, DR Congo).
Share