Experts divided on Lee's UN speech approach to North Korea

'Halt-reduce-denuclearize' seen as phased strategy

Critics warn proposal undermines pressure on Pyongyang

Analysts say real limits on nuclear capability are key

President Lee Jae Myung delivers a keynote address at the UN General Assembly hall in New York on Tuesday (local time). [Yonhap]
President Lee Jae Myung delivers a keynote address at the UN General Assembly hall in New York on Tuesday (local time). [Yonhap]

President Lee Jae Myung's proposal — outlined in his UN General Assembly speech and interviews with foreign media — to halt North Korea's nuclear and missile development in exchange for sanctions relief as a long-term path to denuclearization has drawn sharply divided reactions from experts, with some calling it a pragmatic, phased approach and others warning it amounts to a road map for accepting the North as a nuclear state.

Yu Ji-hun, a research fellow at the Korea Institute for Defense Analyses (KIDA), said Wednesday that Lee's proposal was not about abandoning the goal of denuclearization or recognizing North Korea as a nuclear-armed state. "It appears to be a phased approach aimed at first halting the advancement of North Korea's nuclear and missile capabilities, then linking that halt to reduction and eventual denuclearization," Yu said in a phone interview.

Given the reality that North Korea's nuclear capabilities have continued to grow while complete denuclearization has been the stated goal, Yu said the proposal reflects a pragmatic judgment that a "halt-reduce-denuclearize" pathway could create an opening for negotiations.

Shin Beom-chul, a senior research fellow at the Sejong Institute, said the Lee administration's denuclearization formula could be defined as "a halt as the entry point, denuclearization as the exit." He said this represented a significantly more flexible stance than the Moon Jae-in administration's approach of "a freeze as the entry point, denuclearization as the exit." A "freeze" typically refers to halting the production of fissile material and the operation of related facilities subject to verification, while a "halt" can be satisfied simply by stopping further development and advancement.

Experts also noted differences between what Lee said in his UN General Assembly speech and what he told foreign media. In an earlier interview with The New York Times, Lee said a deal trading sanctions — which he described as not particularly effective — for a halt to the development of additional nuclear weapons and intercontinental ballistic missile technology would be of considerable value.

Shin said that while Lee spoke of a halt in his UN address, he made no mention of sanctions relief as the price. "It may reflect the formal nature of the occasion, or he may have stepped back after seeing the domestic reaction to the interview," Shin said.

Others were sharply critical. The main objection centered on Lee's characterization of sanctions against North Korea as effectively an ineffective tool.

Yang Uk, a research fellow at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies, said the South Korean government must hold firm on sanctions and principles even if every other country questions their necessity. "It is problematic for President Lee to speak as though sanctions have had no effect," Yang said.

Yang added that while the proposal carries the label of a denuclearization road map, it has in practice become a road map for accepting North Korea's nuclear status. "It is an act of self-harm that neutralizes the means of pressure on the North," he said.

Whether North Korean leader Kim Jong-un or Donald Trump will respond positively remains an open question.

Shin noted that at the 2019 Hanoi summit, Trump had insisted that facilities beyond Yongbyon also be frozen before any sanctions relief would be granted. "Easing sanctions at the level of a mere halt, as proposed now, would be a bad deal even by Trump's own standards," Shin said. He added that it would not be easy for Trump to reverse his previous position and make concessions first.

Shin also said North Korea, which seeks recognition as a nuclear state, would likely be dissatisfied with any proposal that still invokes the word "denuclearization."

"At this stage, no one can be fully satisfied," Shin added. "Dialogue with North Korea and a real opportunity for denuclearization will only open when the international situation changes. The South Korean government's room to maneuver is inherently limited under current conditions."

Yu said the key question is how any halt in North Korea's nuclear and missile capabilities would be verified and linked to sanctions relief. "It must go beyond simply stopping nuclear tests or missile launches — it needs to impose real constraints on the further advancement of nuclear capabilities, including the production of fissile material and the expansion of the nuclear warhead stockpile," he said.

Yu also stressed that sanctions relief must be phased in step with concrete actions by North Korea, and that close coordination between Seoul and Washington, along with a firm combined defense posture, would be essential to ensure the process ultimately leads to full denuclearization.


youknow@heraldcorp.com
rimsclub@heraldcorp.com