North Korea slams Seoul-US fact sheet as formalising confrontational stance against Pyongyang
Seoul, Nov 18
North Korea on Tuesday denounced the release of a joint fact sheet between South Korea and the United States on their trade and security agreements as "formulating" as policy their confrontational stance against Pyongyang, warning that the North will take countermeasures.
The North's warning came after Seoul and Washington released the document on Friday outlining the outcomes of two summits between South Korean President Lee Jae Myung and US President Donald Trump in August and October. On the same day, the allies also issued a joint communique following their annual defense talks held in early November.
In a lengthy commentary carried by state media, North Korea denounced details of the joint fact sheet, particularly Seoul and Washington's commitment to completing denuclearization of the North and the US' formal approval of South Korea's push to build nuclear-powered submarines.
"The DPRK will take more justified and realistic countermeasures to defend the sovereignty and security interests of the state and regional peace, corresponding to the fact that the confrontational intention of the US and the ROK to remain hostile towards the DPRK was formulated as their policy once again," the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) said.
DPRK stands for North Korea's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, and ROK is the acronym of South Korea's formal name, the Republic of Korea.
North Korea claimed the announcement of the summit agreements was "the most vivid manifestation" of the Trump administration's policy toward North Korea and denounced the US commitment with South Korea to achieving "complete denuclearisation" of the North, Xinhua news agency reported.
"This is an intensive expression of their confrontational will to deny the constitution of the DPRK to the last. It proves that their only option is confrontation with the DPRK," the North said.
North Korea also criticised Washington's approval of Seoul's push to acquire nuclear submarines as a "serious development" that destabilizes the security situation in the Asia-Pacific region and "causes the situation of impossible nuclear control in the global sphere."
"The ROK's possession of nuclear submarine is a strategic move for 'its own nuclear weaponisation' and this is bound to cause a 'nuclear domino phenomenon' in the region and spark a hot arms race," the KCNA said.
On the US expressing its support for South Korea's move to secure uranium enrichment and spent nuclear fuel reprocessing capabilities, North Korea denounced it as "laying a springboard for" Seoul to develop into a "quasi-nuclear weapons state."
The North's warning came as it has not responded to Trump's repeated proposal to meet with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un to resume stalled diplomacy with Pyongyang. Kim earlier said the North remains open to talks with the US if Washington does not demand North Korea's denuclearisation as precondition for dialogue.
— IANS
Reader Comments
While North Korea's nuclear ambitions are concerning, I can't help but notice the hypocrisy. The US supporting South Korea's nuclear submarine program while demanding denuclearization from North Korea? This double standard is exactly why such conflicts persist.
The nuclear domino effect mentioned by KCNA is a real concern. If South Korea gets nuclear submarines, what stops Japan or other neighbors from following? This could destabilize the entire region. We need diplomatic solutions, not arms races. ðŸ™
From India's perspective, we understand the complexities of nuclear geopolitics. But constant threats and counter-threats won't solve anything. Both sides need to return to dialogue without preconditions. The region can't afford another flashpoint.
Living in India, I see how regional tensions affect global stability. The US needs consistent foreign policy - one administration talks peace, next administration escalates tensions. This inconsistency makes peaceful resolution impossible.
Honestly, North Korea has a point about the confrontational stance being formalized as policy. When you openly declare someone as your enemy in official documents, how can you expect them to cooperate? The approach needs to change from both sides.
We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.