[North Korea and the World] Kim Yo Jong's Messages to South Korea and the U.S. and the Possibility of Inter-Korean Dialogue

YouTube Link : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Mu5yYE6Mrc

Video script

I believe that a summit between North Korea and the United States is possible around next year. At that moment, space may open up for South Korea, and we need to wait until we can break through inter-Korean relations. Hello. Thank you to everyone watching Park Won-gon's North Korea and the World. Today, we will discuss North Korea further. It has been a little while, but a very important statement was released by North Korea. Those interested in North Korea have likely seen it, but on July 28th and 29th, Kim Yo Jong, the Vice Department Director of the Workers' Party of Korea, whom you all know very well?

North Korea's Policy Toward South Korea: 'Hostile Two-State Theory' and Severance of Relations

Kim Jong Un's sister. She first delivered a message to South Korea through the Korean Central News Agency, and the very next day, she delivered a message to the United States. Among the recent messages from North Korea to South Korea and the United States, I believe this is the clearest statement of their perceptions, positions, and policies. Today, I will analyze and discuss this part. To summarize in one sentence, North Korea will not engage in relations with South Korea in any form, while on the other hand, it leaves the possibility of dialogue with the United States open, but with conditions attached. This would be the one-line summary. First, I will discuss the characteristics of the statement toward South Korea. As I have mentioned several times on this program, at the 8th Central Committee's 9th Plenary Meeting at the end of 2023, North Korea completely changed its line toward South Korea and unification.

The line toward South Korea was declared as the 'hostile two-state theory,' and they claim that South Korea is no longer a fellow countryman. The implication is that unification will no longer be a national objective. They describe this change in policy as, to quote North Korea directly, 'a programmatic conclusion, an important policy decision, and a fundamental shift in direction.' Therefore, they are stating it is a very important and fundamental change in policy. They have defined inter-Korean relations not as a dynamic relationship or a homogeneous relationship, but as a relationship between two hostile states, two belligerent nations engaged in war.

More than a year and a half has passed since then. This policy remains in effect and is clearly confirmed in Kim Yo Jong's statement on July 28th. Setting aside other aspects, the title of Kim Yo Jong's statement alone clearly reveals North Korea's policy. The title was: 'The relationship between Joseon and Han has completely moved beyond the concept of fellow countrymen.' You may find 'Joseon' unfamiliar, as we are accustomed to the term 'inter-Korean relations.' However, North Korea no longer uses the term 'inter-Korean relations,' nor does it use the term 'South Joseon.' Instead, it refers to South Korea by its official name, 'Republic of Korea.' When North Korean media refers to the 'Republic of Korea,' they do not simply write it; they enclose it in quotation marks. These quotation marks have a specific meaning.

It means, in English, 'so-called Republic of Korea,' implying a dismissive or derogatory tone. Regardless, the important point here is that 'Joseon-Han relations' refers to the relationship between the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, i.e., North Korea, and the Republic of Korea. Thus, they are discussing this as a relationship between states, which is very different from what was previously discussed. This implies that the Republic of Korea is a complete 'other,' a state with no concept of fellow countrymen, and that inter-Korean relations themselves are being referred to as Joseon-Han relations.

Furthermore, North Korea refers to itself as the 'Kim Il Sung nation.' The concept of fellow countrymen has also been altered; they are no longer the same fellow countrymen. They consider themselves the 'Kim Il Sung nation,' while referring to South Korea as the 'Republic of Korea clan.' This indicates a complete change in the concept of fellow countrymen. Additionally, the statement mentions that Kim Yo Jong reiterated that regardless of the political nature of the South Korean government, they will not associate with it. The use of the word 'reiterated' is significant because a very similar statement was made in Kim Jong Un's speech at the 8th Central Committee's 9th Plenary Meeting in December 2023, as mentioned earlier.

At that time, they said, 'The vicious ambition of the puppets who seek to collapse our system and regime is no different, whether they profess democracy or wear the guise of conservatism.' This was released in December 2023. Then, in her July 28 statement, Kim Yo Jong stated, 'Regardless of whether they profess democracy or wear the guise of conservatism, South Korea can never be an object of reconciliation and cooperation.' This is the same message. Therefore, North Korea's stance has not changed at all from December 2023 to the present. Furthermore, Kim Yo Jong's statement declared, 'No matter what policies are established in Seoul, there will be no discussion with South Korea going forward.' This reiterates their official position. I believe this statement clearly reaffirms North Korea's firm resolve not to engage with South Korea in any form of contact. I also find it quite significant that this statement was released approximately 50 days after the launch of South Korea's new government. Kim Yo Jong's statement mentions that South Korea's new government made sincere efforts, but South Korea...

...halted loudspeaker broadcasts, leaflet distribution, and broadcasts to North Korea. Notably, the Ministry of Unification suspended broadcasts to North Korea, which it had conducted for 52 years. They even dismantled loudspeakers. North Korea acknowledges all of these as sincere efforts. However, if we consider this further, these efforts, which North Korea desires and acknowledges as 'sincere efforts,' involve situations where South Korea possesses few of its non-symmetric advantages over North Korea. What do I mean? Information infiltration into North Korea is what North Korea is most sensitive about. We can see from numerous cases how sensitive North Korea reacted to information circulating within North Korea through loudspeakers or leaflets. A relatively recent example is the 2015 landmine incident, which some of you may recall. At that time, the Park Geun-hye administration resumed loudspeaker broadcasts after our military suffered casualties due to the landmine incident. North Korea then threatened to conduct targeted fire...

...creating tension, but eventually, North Korea initiated dialogue, and at the end of that dialogue, North Korea apologized to the South Korean government and people for the landmine incident for the first time since the Korean War, I believe it was two years ago. This demonstrates how sensitive the issues of loudspeakers, leaflets, and information infiltration into North Korea are. However, South Korea's new government, without being asked by North Korea, made what North Korea would call 'sincere efforts,' so North Korea had no reason not to accept them. But from now on, North Korea will no longer seek anything from South Korea. No matter how much I ponder it, North Korea has nothing more to expect or receive from the South Korean government. For example, there is the September 19 Military Agreement, but it does not contain matters of private interest to North Korea. Moreover, the September 19 Military Agreement has been effectively nullified by North Korea. Therefore, we are back to the situation prior to that agreement, and in all aspects, it appears North Korea has nothing more to expect from the South Korean government...

...which is why I believe they have taken the action of drawing a line with the South Korean government again through Kim Yo Jong's statement at this juncture. Additionally, North Korea may have demanded one or two other things from South Korea, such as the dissolution of the Ministry of Unification. Dissolving the Ministry of Unification implies accepting their stated 'theory of two states of hostility.' Another demand was the cessation of the ROK-US joint military exercises, which North Korea always talks about. However, the issue is that all of these demands from North Korea, the dissolution of the Ministry of Unification, and the ROK-US joint military exercises, are actually being partially scaled down, with some exercises planned for August being postponed to September for the UFS (Ulchi Freedom Shield) exercise.

Even if we accommodate what North Korea wants and make sincere efforts, the possibility of North Korea engaging in dialogue with South Korea remains very low. This is because North Korea has overtly shifted its course. Even within North Korea's sole leader system, or rather, its one-person rule system, Kim Jong Un cannot suddenly change the entire course overnight. There must be internal struggles for the path, and this change in course must be institutionalized through something like a plenary session of the Party Central Committee or a Party Congress. Although there is a 9th Party Congress scheduled for next year, I believe the possibility of North Korea changing its course by then, or even after, is very low.

North Korea's Strategy Towards the US: 'Tongmi Bongnam' and Demand for Nuclear Disarmament Negotiations

Therefore, it is likely that North Korea will maintain severed relations with South Korea for a considerable period. Regardless of any sincere measures taken by the South Korean government, North Korea's course will not change. Their statement regarding the US is completely contrary. I interpret this as a form of 'Tongmi Bongnam'—keeping communication channels open with the US and maintaining contact possibilities, while thoroughly isolating South Korea. This is also akin to the currently popular concept of 'Korea Passing.' I will now outline the characteristics of the statement regarding the US. Firstly, it is noteworthy that Kim Yo Jong's statement adopts a very cautious attitude towards President Trump. It is remarkably so. Because it is not typical of North Korean statements. North Korea has often shown harsh reactions towards the US, but the language used regarding the current Trump administration is uncharacteristic. For example, 'North Korea does not wish to attach any meaning to the dialogue proposed by the US for the complete denuclearization of Korea.' Why do I use this expression? Because the Biden administration has made similar statements. This indicates that North Korea is not interested in discussing denuclearization at all. The Biden administration also demanded North Korea's denuclearization. North Korea's response was, 'It justifies an illegal and immoral hostile policy.' Other expressions include, 'An enemy to be fought to the end.' Furthermore, they referred to President Biden as a 'gangster boss' and a 'doting old man,' though such terms were also used during the Trump administration. In 2017, using such language provoked Trump. Regardless, compared to the expressions and criticisms used, the phrase 'does not wish to attach any meaning' is a neutral expression. It is not the kind of language we typically associate with North Korea. So, why would North Korea use such an expression?

I believe this is due to a learning effect from Trump's first term. Some of you may recall that in May 2018, a month before the Singapore summit agreement in June, North Korea criticized then-US National Security Advisor John Bolton. They officially stated through North Korean media, 'He is a security-destroying advisor who destroys peace and security. Such a flawed product should disappear as soon as possible.' This provoked Trump, who then sent a letter to Kim Jong Un. He publicly released it, and it contained the following: announcing the cancellation of the summit in June, he precisely stated, 'North Korea mentions its nuclear capability, but the US's is far more powerful, and I pray fervently that it will never have to be used.' This is quite a significant threat.

I believe this served as a kind of learning experience during Trump's first term. Some of you may recall that in May 2018, a month before the Singapore Summit in June, North Korea criticized then-U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton. North Korean media officially stated, 'He is a security-destroying advisor who destroys peace and security. Such a flawed individual should disappear as soon as possible.' President Trump reacted indignantly. He sent a letter to Kim Jong Un, which he then made public, stating the following: 'North Korea mentions its nuclear capability, but the U.S.'s is far more powerful, and I pray it is so strong that we never have to use it.' This was quite a significant threat.

North Korea experienced this. Therefore, they have used very cautious language towards President Trump since 2018, and I believe it has not changed significantly. Kim Yo Jong then speaks more overtly: 'I am referring to our sovereign, Kim Jong Un. I do not deny the fact that the personal relationship between him and the current US President is not bad.' In other words, she states that the relationship is not bad. This is also uncharacteristic language for North Korea. Through this statement, what North Korea wants to convey most importantly is something we are familiar with: they are a complete nuclear power. North Korea has a preferred term these days: 'irreversible nuclear power.' Where did this term come from? When discussing North Korea's complete denuclearization, we often use the term CVID: 'Complete, Verifiable, and Irreversible Denuclearization of North Korea.' North Korea has appropriated the 'I'—irreversible—to describe themselves as an 'irreversible nuclear power,' meaning...

...they will never give up their nuclear weapons. The core point emerges here. If I were to identify the most crucial expression in Kim Yo Jong's statement towards the US, I would say it is 'new thinking.' They are urging the US to adopt new thinking. Based on new thinking, a different approach to engagement is required. In other words, North Korea will not engage in denuclearization negotiations anymore. Therefore, they are asserting that the US must recognize North Korea as a 'de facto nuclear power' and engage in nuclear disarmament negotiations commensurate with that status. This is what North Korea is advocating for with its demand for 'new thinking' from the US.

Therefore, we can now confirm that the 2018 Singapore agreement is no longer valid. The Singapore agreement, as you may recall, consisted of three parts: improvement of US-North Korea relations, establishment of a peace regime on the Korean Peninsula, and denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. However, North Korea is no longer interested in improving US relations or establishing a peace regime as conditions for denuclearization. They are not interested in that anymore. Instead, North Korea proposes nuclear disarmament negotiations to reduce risks and manage the possibility of conflict between adversarial states, while maintaining their hostile relationship with the US. This is once again confirmed as North Korea's position. I believe that all these developments indicate that North Korea and the US have already begun negotiations. What do I mean? This statement was released on the 29th, and immediately after its release, the White House issued a statement. It said, 'President Trump remains open to communication with Chairman Kim Jong Un to achieve the complete end of North Korea's nuclear programs.'

Do you understand? It stated, 'complete end of nuclear programs.' Is this not referring to the complete denuclearization of North Korea? In the very statement where Kim Yo Jong declared they would not engage in complete denuclearization negotiations, the White House responded by stating they would engage in denuclearization negotiations. This signifies that negotiations have commenced, and the battle has begun over who will hold the initiative and who will set the agenda. Negotiations already began when Trump stated, 'I have a good relationship with Kim Jong Un. Kim Jong Un will welcome my return to the presidency.' I do not believe Kim Jong Un truly welcomes this. Therefore, Trump's message is, 'Because I have a good relationship with Kim Jong Un, you will come out when I want you to.' And Kim Jong Un's message, conveyed through Kim Yo Jong, is, 'Isn't that not the case? Only when the conditions are met—the cessation of minimal joint exercises and the deployment of strategic assets, and the shift from denuclearization negotiations to nuclear disarmament negotiations—will I come out.' Thus, their respective positions have already been publicly confirmed, and I believe negotiations have begun to determine who will seize the initiative and advance their agenda. The US's North Korea policy has not yet been officially announced. In my judgment, it is possible that North Korea's complete denuclearization will be included in the US's North Korea policy as a final goal. However, as we have always considered, whether the official policy of the US administration will compel Trump to adhere to that policy is very different. Trump's arbitrary judgment is very strong. Therefore, even if the official stance is complete denuclearization of North Korea, it is possible that Trump will not respect it and proceed in a different direction.

I would like to offer one piece of advice to the South Korean government regarding all these developments: Let us not rush. Even if the North Korean government takes any sincere actions, North Korea is unlikely to respond favorably and engage in dialogue for some time. I believe that by next year, the possibility of a US-North Korea summit cannot be ruled out. At that moment, there might be an opportunity for South Korea to act, and we should utilize that to break through inter-Korean relations. Until then, we need to wait patiently. What is needed now is for the South Korean government to establish a clear direction for its North Korea policy, which has not yet been definitively confirmed. We must focus on creating a clear policy framework. More importantly, since the US has not yet announced its North Korea policy, cooperation with the US is essential. This cooperation has become even more critical. North Korea intends to bypass South Korea and engage directly with the US.

Given that North Korea has openly declared its 'Tongmi Bongnam' strategy, South Korea must reduce North Korea's influence through cooperation with the US. Therefore, ROK-US cooperation is paramount. The newly inaugurated Yoon Suk-yeol administration needs to coordinate its North Korea policy in close consultation with the US and move forward with the same form, pace, and direction. I believe this is what our government must do at this time. Thank you.

I would like to offer one piece of advice to the South Korean government regarding all these matters: Let us not rush. Even if the North Korean government takes some sincere action, it is unlikely that North Korea will respond in kind for some time. I believe that a U.S.-North Korea summit is not out of the question by next year. At that moment, there may be room for South Korea to maneuver, and we need to wait without rushing until then, utilizing that opportunity to break through inter-Korean relations. What is needed now is to solidify our government's North Korea policy, which has not yet been clearly confirmed. We must focus on creating a clear policy direction toward North Korea, and more importantly, cooperate with the United States, as its North Korea policy has also not yet been established. This cooperation has become even more crucial. North Korea intends to bypass South Korea and deal directly with the United States.

Given that North Korea has openly declared its strategy of 'engaging with the U.S. while isolating South Korea' (Tongmi Bongnam), South Korea must reduce North Korea's influence through cooperation with the United States. Therefore, ROK-U.S. cooperation is extremely important. The newly inaugurated Yoon Suk-yeol administration needs to coordinate its North Korea policy in close consultation with the United States, moving forward with the same format, pace, and direction. I believe this is what our government must do at this time. Thank you.

■ Park Won Gon: Director of the North Korea Research Center, East Asia Institute. Professor of North Korean Studies, Ewha Womans University.

■ Managed and Edited by: Lim Jae Hyun: EAI Research Fellow
Contact: 02 2277 1683 (ext. 209) | jhim@eai.or.kr