Ahead of Seoul-Washington Summit, CSIS Victor Cha warns of alliance stress points

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

As tensions across the Korean Peninsula evolve, the ROK-U.S. alliance is once again being tested, not just by North Korea's behavior, but by shifting expectations inside the alliance itself.

With the next Seoul-Washington summit set for August 25th, and talks of a possible Trump–Kim meeting later this year, key decisions lie ahead on everything from defense cost-sharing to troop structure, human rights, and diplomatic strategy.

And as Washington looks to re-engage Pyongyang, questions are also growing about how closely Seoul will be involved in shaping the process.

To break down where things stand and where they may be headed, we're joined by Dr. Victor Cha, Korea Chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. A big welcome.

Let's begin with what many see as the core friction point in the alliance.

In your recent CSIS brief from late July, you noted that defense cost-sharing has become Trump's primary pressure tool against Seoul.

When or where exactly did he make that shift clear in your view, and what message does it send as OPCON and troop structure come back into focus?

Staying with the topic, if the U.S. reduces ground forces while expanding air and naval presence, can deterrence still hold?

Or does that shift invite miscalculation from adversaries like North Korea or China?

Since OPCON always comes back during times of strategic recalibration, do you think it could become a political bargaining chip under Trump's "self-defense" framing?

And how might that reshape the pace of U.S.–ROK military coordination?

Now let's move on to the upcoming August 25 summit between Seoul and Washington.

Though there are a wide range of topics for the two to discuss, what do you see as the real strategic objective for the Trump administration?

And are there risks Seoul may be underestimating as the two leaders sit down?

Now as for North Korea, you've previously mentioned possibilities for a Trump–Kim Jong-un meeting during APEC period.

But just this morning, North Korean leader's sister Kim Yo-jong rejected such possibilities.

How do you see the chances? and if the summit does happen, what would actually be on the table? is denuclearization even part of the equation anymore?

And on that note, In the past months, Pyongyang has openly rejected denuclearization as a precondition.

So at this point, do you think the U.S. should change how it defines success in negotiations?

Would starting with a freeze or step-by-step deal be the only realistic option now?

Broadening out to regional dynamics, You've warned that North Korea's growing military ties with Russia now intersect directly with U.S. priorities in Ukraine and beyond.

Has Pyongyang moved from a regional threat to a global spoiler?

Meanwhile, the inter-Korean channel remains frozen.

If any meaningful progress towards a Washington-Pyongyang summit happens, How can South Korea push back against being sidelined again? and do you think Washington sees it as a concern if Seoul gets left out of the process?

Now shifting to the human rights narrative, South Korea is considering suspending its annual North Korea human rights report, while the latest U.S. report significantly softened its tone.

Do you see this as diplomatic restraint, or a deeper shift in priorities on both sides?

And finally, looking ahead to the close of 2025, are we entering a window of cautious engagement, or another dangerous cycle of provocations and miscalculation?