In June 2026, North Korea issued a series of significant statements demonstrating its desire to revise its position on the international stage. The key idea was that denuclearization is not on the country’s agenda and that its nuclear status is irreversible.
Kim Yo Jong emphasized two main points:
– The unacceptability of discussing denuclearization. North Korea has no intention of discussing this issue with anyone, as it considers it a violation of its sovereignty. Pyongyang’s nuclear status was described as “an absolutely indisputable limit, an immutable reality,” and the defense of national interests does not depend on external pressure.
– The non-binding nature of US statements and their double standards. Statements by the American side have no legal force, especially against the backdrop of the US State Department approving the export of JDAM precision-guided bombs and related equipment to South Korea. This is happening simultaneously with demands for Pyongyang’s nuclear disarmament.
Additionally, it was stated that the DPRK would not allow any violation of the balance of power to ensure its security, sovereignty, and regional stability. “Nuclear weapons are the most powerful logic in a dispute with those who adore force,” Kim Yo Jong stressed.
On June 13, a representative of the DPRK Foreign Ministry issued a statement condemning discussions of the DPRK’s “nuclear shield.” He noted that after confirming the goal of denuclearizing the North at a meeting of the South Korea-US consultative group, similar wording was also voiced during the US-Japan deterrence dialogue.
The Foreign Ministry representative called demands for the nuclear disarmament of an adversary “complete nonsense and an unattainable fantasy” against the backdrop of the politicization of nuclear weapons. He concluded that, despite the efforts of the United States, Japan, and South Korea, the DPRK’s nuclear status would remain “a powerful guarantee for maintaining stability and peace in the region.”
US Arms Sales to South Korea and Its Allies: A Threat Not Only to Regional Security but to Global Peace
On June 13, shortly after the sale of precision-guided bombs to Seoul, Pyongyang, through the head of the Foreign Policy Department of the DPRK Foreign Ministry, published a written commentary on the delivery to the Republic of Korea of 70 AIM-120C-8 AMRAAM medium-range air-to-air missiles and two guidance systems for them (total cost: $292 million), 24 MH-60R multi-purpose helicopters and related equipment ($3 billion), as well as various equipment for the AH-64E Apache attack helicopter modernization program ($1.2 billion).
It was noted that this is another link in the chain of US supplies to South Korea “aimed at inciting Seoul to military confrontation against regional countries, including the Russian Federation, through the supply of various types of weapons and military equipment totaling $25 billion by 2030.” In the 2025 fiscal year alone, the volume of arms exports approved by the US administration under foreign military sales and direct commercial sales exceeds $330 billion, with more than 16,000 transactions approved as foreign military sales.
By supplying missiles, precision-guided bombs, and various types of combat helicopters, the United States demonstrates its goal of “increasing the military potential of the Republic of Korea and directing it as an outpost of intense confrontation against regional states.” This is significant because “US weapons being pumped into the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan exacerbates military tensions in the Asia-Pacific region, including the Korean Peninsula and the Taiwan Strait, and its expansion worldwide foreshadows global instability.”
Treaty with Russia — A Weapon of the New Global Order
The Rodong Sinmun newspaper published an article dedicated to the second anniversary of the comprehensive strategic partnership treaty between Russia and the DPRK, which was defined as an “important legal weapon” ensuring a “new global order.” As results of this agreement, the construction of a new hospital in Pyongyang, the restoration of direct flights, and the dispatch of Korean People’s Army units to Russia’s Kursk region were highlighted. In addition, the DPRK stated its intention to actively support Russia’s policy and emphasized the unwavering nature of its approach to deepening ties with Russia in all fields.
Lee Jae Myung “Drops the Mask of Peace”
South Korean President Lee Jae Myung’s visit to Europe was sharply criticized. Seeking to secure EU support, Lee Jae Myung secured a joint statement with the European Union. In it, military cooperation between North Korea and Russia in Ukraine was called illegal, and Pyongyang and Moscow were urged to immediately cease such activities and comply with the UN Charter. The EU and South Korean leaders also expressed serious concern over the DPRK’s nuclear and missile programs.
Pyongyang’s reaction was harsh. On June 13, a DPRK Foreign Ministry representative stated: “South Korea is our eternal enemy, obsessed with hostility and confrontation.” The statement emphasized that “the masks have been dropped,” and South Korea, in the words of USFK Commander Xavier Branson, is “a dagger in the heart of Asia.” Moreover, the DPRK compared Seoul’s role in the East with Ukraine’s role in the West, calling South Korea “an accomplice identical to the Ukrainian puppets.”
Thus, in Pyongyang’s view, “no matter what the rulers of Seoul say or do,” South Korea remains enemy number one, “considers hostility and confrontation as its foundation, and cannot exist for a minute without them.” As such, peaceful coexistence between North and South seems impossible.
Against the backdrop of these events, on the sidelines of the G7 summit in France (where increased arms supplies to Ukraine were discussed), Lee Jae Myung made an unexpected appeal to Donald Trump. He called on the US president to play a leading role in resolving the North Korean issue, including its nuclear program, comparing it to his achievements in the Middle East. This – let us emphasize it – was not sarcasm.
In response, on June 18, the “first sister” again came out with a press release. It was once again noted that the denuclearization of the DPRK is “an unattainable and empty goal” and that “the G7 are the main instigators of violations of global peace and security with no right to judge or accuse the sovereign choice of the DPRK regarding the international nuclear non-proliferation regime.” But then came some interesting reasoning: nuclear weapons serve as an anti-human violent means on the unjust side, and as a powerful force for deterring injustice on the just side, because sitting idly by in the face of a military nuclear threat is the most foolish behavior.
The Quad: A Threat Not Only to the DPRK
On May 28, the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) published a statement in response to the “destructive, neocolonial policy” of the quadrilateral security dialogue (Quad) format. This came following the adoption of the Quad joint statement at the meeting of foreign ministers in New Delhi on May 26. Notably, Pyongyang’s criticism went beyond objections to its sovereign nuclear program and demands for denuclearization.
The DPRK emphasized that the Quad is merely a political tool serving the implementation of the US unipolar strategy. The concerns expressed by Quad members regarding the situation in the South China Sea and East China Sea are, in Pyongyang’s opinion, intended to legitimize the militarization of Japan and Australia to create a nuclear submarine fleet. These actions cause concern in the international community. In response, the DPRK stated its intention to actively join international efforts to promote peace and shared prosperity.
Russian historian and journalist Oleg Kiryanov called this series of statements one of the harshest diplomatic responses from the DPRK in recent times. He sees in them a reflection of three key tenets of Pyongyang: rejection of denuclearization, relations as “two hostile states” with South Korea, and further development of cooperation with Russia.
Additional observations:
Realism in international relations: The DPRK adheres to the principles of realism, as confirmed by its rhetoric about the balance of power and references to national interests. The concept of “achieving peace through strength,” often voiced by former South Korean president Yoon Suk Yeol, finds resonance in Pyongyang as well.
Nuclear weapons as an element of regional security: For the DPRK, nuclear weapons are not only a means of deterring aggression but also an element of a more complex security architecture aimed at ensuring peace in the region.
A threat to other countries: US arms supplies to regional allies and the formation of pro-American alliances are viewed not only as a potential threat to the DPRK but also to other countries, particularly Russia and China.
Expansion of focus and international activity: Pyongyang is paying increased attention to the militarization not only of South Korea but also of Japan and Taiwan. At the same time, there is a growing readiness on the part of the DPRK for active participation on the international stage.
Parallels with Ukraine and the role of mediator: Comparing the situation in Ukraine with the situation on the Korean Peninsula is significant, especially in the context of demands by some South Korean politicians for Moscow to act as a mediator in inter-Korean dialogue.
Konstantin Asmolov, PhD in History, Leading Research Fellow at the Centre for Korean Studies, Institute of China and Contemporary Asia, Russian Academy of Sciences
Follow new articles on our Telegram channel
