Home > National > North Korea

Pyongyang issues sharp but restrained critique of South Korea-U.S. joint documents

Published: 18 Nov. 2025, 17:20 Updated: 18 Nov. 2025, 17:37

President Lee Jae Myung, center, speaks at a press conference announcing the conclusion of a joint fact sheet with the United States at the Yongsan presidential office in central Seoul on Nov. 14, flanked by National Security Adviser Wi Sung-lac, right, and Kim Yong-beom, presidential chief of staff for policy. [JOINT PRESS CORPS]

North Korea reacted sharply to South Korea’s pursuit of nuclear-propelled submarines, calling it “a springboard for its development into [a] ‘quasi-nuclear weapons state.’”

North Korea betrayed such sentiment in its first response Tuesday to the joint fact sheet on tariffs and security released by Seoul and Washington last Friday, as well as to the joint communiqué from the South Korea-U.S. Security Consultative Meeting.

In a roughly 1,600-word commentary, the state-run Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) said the documents “reveal the true colors of the confrontational will of the U.S. and the ROK [Republic of Korea] to remain hostile toward the DPRK to the end,” adding that Pyongyang would take “more justified and realistic countermeasures.” ROK is the acronym of South Korea's official name, the Republic of Korea.

But the response also drew attention for its moderated tone. High-ranking figures such as Kim Yo-jong, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un’s sister, or Foreign Minister Choe Son-hui did not issue the statement, and the KCNA refrained from naming President Lee Jae Myung or U.S. President Donald Trump or using coarse personal attacks.

The KCNA criticized the inclusion of the “complete denuclearization of the DPRK” in the summit fact sheet, calling it an “intensive expression of their confrontational will to deny the constitution of the DPRK to the last” and insisting it “proves that their only option is confrontation with the DPRK.” DPRK is the acronym of North Korea's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

It also argued that using the phrase “complete denuclearization of the DPRK,” rather than “complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula,” amounted to “denying the entity and the existence of the DPRK.”

Analysts said the sharp reaction suggests the language in the fact sheet struck a nerve. Experts noted that the KCNA highlighted that Seoul and Washington reaffirmed “the complete denuclearization of the DPRK” at the beginning of the commentary.

Korean President Lee Jae Myung, right, listens to U.S. President Donald Trump during a dinner event at a hotel in Gyeongju, North Gyeongsang, on Oct. 29, following their bilateral summit. [JOINT PRESS CORPS]

Hong Min, senior researcher at the Korea Institute for National Unification, said this underscored Pyongyang’s priorities.

“It shows how much importance they place on being recognized as a nuclear-armed state,” Hong said, adding that whether Washington abandons denuclearization and recognizes North Korea as a nuclear state is “the criterion by which the North judges the U.S. willingness to negotiate.”

“Unlike what appears in the KCNA’s commentary, the government has no hostile or confrontational intent toward the North and intends to continue working consistently to ease tensions and rebuild trust between the two Koreas,” Kang Yu-jung, spokesperson for the presidential office, said in response.

Kang added that the Korea-U.S. alliance “will continue contributing to peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and in the region.”

The KCNA criticized the United States for approving South Korea’s development of nuclear-propelled submarines and for supporting its ally's civilian uranium enrichment and spent-fuel reprocessing, calling these moves “evidence of Washington’s dangerous and reckless confrontational ambitions” that enable South Korea to “step up to a mid-level nuclear state.”

The U.S. Navy’s nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS George Washington (CVN-73) enters the Busan Naval Operations Base in Nam District, Busan, on the morning of Nov. 5. [NEWS1]

It argued that approving Seoul’s pursuit of nuclear-propelled submarines would destabilize not only the Korean Peninsula but also the broader Asia-Pacific security environment, creating a “global situation in which nuclear control becomes impossible” and triggering a “nuclear domino effect” and intensified arms race.

North Korea further claimed that South Korea’s push for nuclear submarines was not a defensive response to the North’s nuclear arsenal but rather an “ambition” that Seoul has pursued secretly since around 2003.

It called the project “a serious development that destabilizes the military security situation in the Asia-Pacific region beyond the Korean Peninsula and causes the situation of impossible nuclear control in the global sphere,” rejecting Seoul’s argument that nuclear-propelled submarines are necessary to counter Pyongyang’s nuclear threat.

KCNA also criticized the references in the fact sheet to freedom of navigation and peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait, saying it “reveal[ed] their sinister intention to deny territorial integrity and core interests of sovereign states in the region and openly interfere in the affairs in the international conflict areas.”

It went on to condemn the tariff consultations between Seoul and Washington, likening them to the “humiliating and unequal Treaty of Jemulpo,” and described the relationship as deepening into one where Seoul “serves U.S. unilateralism.”

North Korean leader Kim Jong-un arrives to attend a national flag-raising and oath-taking ceremony at the Mansudae Assembly Hall to mark the 77th anniversary of the country’s founding in Pyongyang, on Sept. 9, in this picture released by the North Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) on Sept. 10. [KCNA]

The Treaty of Jemulpo in 1882 was an unequal treaty imposed by Japan on Korea following the Imo Incident, a violent uprising in which Korean soldiers attacked the Japanese legation in Seoul. The treaty forced Korea to punish the rebels, pay large indemnities and compensate Japan for losses. It also granted Japan the right to station troops in Seoul to protect its legation, marking a significant intrusion into Korean sovereignty.

The commentary criticized the communiqué for putting “the U.S.-ROK alliance on a regional and modern basis” as part of “the U.S. hegemonic scenario to encircle and contain rivals” by “forming a U.S.-led NATO-style security structure in the Asia-Pacific region.” It also listed South Korea’s purchases of U.S. weapons, increases in defense spending and deployments of U.S. strategic assets on the peninsula as evidence of a deepening military alignment.

Lim Eun-chul, a professor at the Institute for Far Eastern Studies at Kyungnam University, said North Korea is using the fact sheet “as justification to argue that stronger measures are unavoidable to ensure its security.”

“In response to Seoul-Washington and trilateral Seoul-Washington-Tokyo cooperation, the North is likely to accelerate the formation of an anti-U.S. bloc, including closer alignment with China and Russia,” said Prof. Lim.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.
BY CHUNG YEONG-GYO [[email protected]]