S. Korea, U.S., Japan diplomats reaffirm goal of N. Korea denuclearization

Welcome to Within The Frame, where we bring the most pressing issues across the globe into focus, I'm Kim Mok-yeon.

The chief diplomats of South Korea, the U.S., and Japan reaffirmed their resolve to rid the Korean Peninsula of nuclear weapons, easing concerns over a potential shift in U.S. policy.

The three countries also made it clear in a joint statement that they reaffirmed their commitment to the complete denuclearization of North Korea.

This gave reassurance to Seoul, particularly after Trump's comments referring to the North as a "nuclear power" raised concerns in South Korea, as they led to speculation that Washington could be shifting away from its focus on denuclearizing North Korea.

Despite this unity, challenges remain in aligning diplomatic strategies.

With North Korea rejecting talks, expanding its military capabilities, and deepening ties with Russia, questions arise about the effectiveness of sanctions and the future of diplomatic engagement.

For a deeper discussion on this, we're joined in the studio by Go Myong-hyun, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for National Security Strategy. Welcome back.

Dr. John Nilsson-Wright, Head of the Japan and Koreas Programme at the Centre for Geopolitics, the University of Cambridge

(GO) 1. So at the trilateral meeting in Munich, diplomats from Seoul, Washington and Tokyo signed a trilateral statement emphasizing strong deterrence against North Korea's military activities. How do you assess the current state of extended deterrence provided by the U.S. to its allies, especially with the second Trump administration, and what additional measures might be necessary?

(NILSSON-WRIGHT) 2. How about you Dr. John Nilsson-Wright? The Biden administration, and now the second Trump administration, have both maintained a strong stance on North Korea's denuclearization. Given the apparent lack of progress, do you see a need for a shift in diplomatic strategy, or is maintaining pressure the best course of action?

(GO) 3. Despite keeping its official stance of the complete denuclearization of North Korea, the U.S. State Department separately emphasized its "openness to dialogue" with North Korea following the foreign ministers' meeting. Dr.Go, What does this discrepancy suggest about the alignment between Seoul and Washington on North Korea policy?

(NILSSON-WRIGHT) 4. North Korea has flatly dismissed denuclearization as a "failed dream of the past" adding that it rejects Washington's action in the most resolute tone. But some experts are putting meaning to whom these words came from, which was the regime's foreign ministry and not Kim Jong-un himself, leaving room for negotiations. Dr. John Nilsson-Wright, how do you read into this?

(NILSSON-WRIGHT) 5. So if Washington continues to do this, what are the chances of a direct Washington-Pyongyang summit soon?

(GO) 6. North Korea reportedly deployed tactical surface-to-surface guided missiles to North Korea's long-range artillery positions and command facilities. How significant is this development and what is it capable of Dr.Go?

(NILSSON-WRIGHT) 7. Meanwhile, Pyongyang's military cooperation with Moscow continues to deepen. Daily NK says North Korea has recently dispatched a defense technology delegation to Russia to upgrade the regime's missile and radar technologies. North Korea aims to establish a fully operational aircraft assembly line by the end of this year. It seems like the cooperation is further helping North Korea's weapons development, how much should we be concerned Dr. John Nilsson-Wright?

(GO) 8. Alongside military cooperation, reports suggest North Korea is planning to export pharmaceuticals to Russia, which is against UN resolutions. What does this imply about the evolving economic ties between Pyongyang and Moscow?

(NILSSON-WRIGHT) 9. The UN has strict sanctions on North Korea's trade, yet Pyongyang continues to find ways to circumvent them. Dr. John Nilsson-Wright, How effective are these sanctions in their current form, and should the international community consider alternative approaches? What options are available?