The weight of Trump's 'nuclear power' remark

Home > Opinion > Editorials

print dictionary print

The weight of Trump's 'nuclear power' remark

On his first day in office, U.S. President Donald Trump made a series of explosive statements. In particular, his characterization of North Korea as a "nuclear power" during his Inauguration Day remarks on Jan. 20 deeply unsettled South Korea. Speaking at the White House after the ceremony, Trump was asked about threats highlighted by his predecessor, Joe Biden. He responded, “North Korea is now a nuclear power. Chairman Kim and I got along well. I think he’ll welcome my return.” The remark marks a stark departure from his earlier rhetoric during his first term when he traded insults — like “Rocket Man” — with Kim Jong-un.
 
The intent behind Trump’s statement is unclear at this stage. It could be an off-the-cuff remark or a calculated psychological maneuver to gain leverage in negotiations. Shortly after his comment, Trump spoke with U.S. troops stationed in South Korea via video call during the inaugural ball. He described Kim as "someone with very bad intentions" and added, “While I’ve developed a very good relationship with him, he’s a tough cookie.”
 
If renewed U.S.-North Korea talks lead to meaningful progress toward denuclearization and peace on the Korean Peninsula, they should be welcomed. However, if Trump’s remarks signal a shift toward recognizing North Korea as a nuclear state, potentially laying the groundwork for arms reduction talks rather than complete denuclearization, the consequences for South Korea could be catastrophic. A "small deal" that reduces North Korea’s nuclear arsenal while leaving South Korea exposed would force the country to live under the shadow of nuclear weapons.
 
Such an approach, prioritizing the removal of threats to the United States while sidelining South Korea, would not only damage the U.S.-Korea alliance but could also trigger a nuclear domino effect in Northeast Asia. Other nations might conclude that enduring sanctions for a time is a worthwhile price to pay for developing nuclear weapons. This would represent a failure of U.S.-led nonproliferation efforts.
 
As of 2016, the United States and South Korean intelligence agencies estimated that North Korea possessed enough fissile material to produce up to 60 nuclear warheads — 758 kilograms (172 pounds) of highly enriched uranium and 54 kilograms of plutonium. Despite this, both countries have refrained from formally recognizing North Korea as a nuclear state. Trump’s remarks carry far greater weight than earlier comments by Pete Hegseth, his nominee for Secretary of Defense, who also referred to North Korea as a nuclear power.
 
On Jan. 21, South Korea’s Ministry of Defense reiterated that "North Korea’s denuclearization is essential for lasting peace and stability not only on the Korean Peninsula but worldwide." However, the South Korean government must critically evaluate whether it has effectively communicated its concerns amid the ongoing domestic turmoil caused by President Yoon Suk Yeol’s impeachment. Merely reiterating the Biden administration’s policies to the Trump administration will likely prove ineffective.
 
The government must prepare and present a range of strategic scenarios that align with the shared interests of both countries. It should engage in active consultations with the United States while closely monitoring Washington’s policy shifts. In this new chapter of U.S. leadership, vigilance and adaptability will be key to safeguarding national security and its role in shaping the future of the Korean Peninsula.
 
Translated using generative AI and edited by Korea JoongAng Daily staff.  
Log in to Twitter or Facebook account to connect
with the Korea JoongAng Daily
help-image Social comment?
s
lock icon

To write comments, please log in to one of the accounts.

Standards Board Policy (0/250자)