North Korean ballistic missile launch. KCNA = Yonhap News

The phrase "denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula" has disappeared from recent security-related documents released by the United States and China. This has led some media outlets to speculate whether "the US and China are effectively tacitly accepting North Korea's nuclear weapons." However, analyses suggest that rather than immediately concluding the omission of the wording signifies a policy change, it is more reasonable to interpret it as a signal that the negotiation framework and the East Asian strategic order are undergoing transformation.

The National Security Strategy (NSS) released by the Trump administration on the 5th (local time) did not mention "denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula" at all, which was repeatedly stated in the Biden administration (2022) and the first Trump administration (2017). The fact that North Korea itself is not mentioned is also unusual. However, given that "complete denuclearization" was explicitly stated in the joint fact sheet between President Trump and President Yoon Suk-yeol in November of last year, it is difficult to view this omission as a "withdrawal of the objective."

Experts view this change as a shift in negotiation strategy.

Fixing the denuclearization objective in official documents could allow North Korea to leverage it to restrict US negotiation flexibility. Therefore, the removal of denuclearization from these documents is interpreted not as an evasion of responsibility, but as a means to secure negotiation space. This is assessed as an approach related to the possibility of a "broad deal," which is favored by a second Trump term.

Both the United States and China have not abandoned the denuclearization objective, but are making strategic adjustments to avoid being trapped in the existing negotiation framework.

China's change, while having different objectives than the US, is similar in direction. The phrase "denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula" was also omitted from China's recently released "White Paper on Arms Control and Non-Proliferation."

While the Hong Kong daily South China Morning Post (SCMP) reported on the 6th that this could be interpreted as "tacit acceptance of North Korea's nuclear weapons," there are counterarguments that China's intention is not "acceptance" but rather competition for leadership in the negotiation arena. This is because repeating the call for denuclearization would be seen as acknowledging the US framework.

Ultimately, the omission of the denuclearization wording by both the US and China is a trend of "redefining North Korea's nuclear issue as a variable in the negotiation structure" rather than "neglecting it." This signifies that the North Korean nuclear issue is beginning to be perceived not merely as a threat (fear factor) but as a structural factor that constitutes the East Asian security order.

The US is using this as a pretext to strengthen trilateral security cooperation with South Korea and Japan, while China is using it as a balancing variable to check the expansion of US alliances.

Therefore, a simplistic interpretation of "omission of wording = abandonment of denuclearization" has a weak basis in reality.

A more accurate interpretation is "re-establishment of the negotiation, security, and order framework."

The North Korean nuclear issue is now moving from "politics of 폐기 (disposal/abolition)" to "politics of order," and this is expected to serve as a key axis defining the future East Asian strategic landscape.

#NorthKoreaStrategy #USChinaSecurityCompetition #TrumpNSS #ChinaWhitePaper #NegotiationStructureVariable #EastAsiaOrderRestructuring #DenuclearizationFramework #KoreaUSJapanDaily