Recent intelligence indicates that the U.S., South Korea, and North Korea hold differing views on the initial stage of the government’s new approach to denuclearization, known as Phase 1 (Halt → Reduce → Denuclearize). While the U.S. and South Korea envision a complete cessation of North Korea’s nuclear development—including stopping nuclear material production—Pyongyang seems to suggest that although nuclear tests and missile launches would be suspended, fissile material production would continue, according to analysis on Monday.
Following the government’s introduction of its three-phase denuclearization plan, sources reveal that Washington and Seoul are actively discussing the precise English terminology for the halt phase. The South Korean government reportedly expressed a preference for using stop instead of freeze, and U.S. officials responded favorably.
A South Korean government official told News1 that originally, it used freeze at the government level, but they have recently shifted to stop. They are now coordinating this terminology with the U.S. and other partners.
The term freeze is widely recognized in international nuclear diplomacy—not just with regard to North Korea. It implies halting nuclear weapons production and testing, completely stopping fissile material production, and subjecting the process to verification measures, including on-site inspections by the international community. A notable example is the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) nuclear inspection in North Korea in 1992.
However, given the current geopolitical climate, Seoul opted for halt rather than freeze, acknowledging that Pyongyang is unlikely to accept traditional freezing measures, such as external inspections.
In a recent critique of Seoul’s denuclearization principles, North Korea notably used the English term suspension (implying postponement or temporary deferral). During his speech at the Supreme People’s Assembly on September 20 and 21, Kim Jong Un dismissed South Korea’s three-phase denuclearization theory of halt-reduce-denuclearize as merely a rehash of previous administrations’ failed attempts to disarm them.
Official English translations of this speech, released on September 22 by the ruling party’s Rodong Sinmun and the Korean Central News Agency, explicitly used the terms suspension – reduction – denuclearization. In diplomatic parlance, suspension typically denotes temporary or conditional measures rather than comprehensive, permanent actions, making it a weaker commitment than stop.
It is worth noting that in April 2018, approximately a week before the inter-Korean summit, North Korea declared a discontinuation of nuclear tests and intercontinental ballistic missile launches during a Supreme People’s Assembly meeting. Experts interpret discontinue as implying a more permanent action, akin to an abolition or termination.
In this context, analysts suggest that North Korea may be signaling to Washington and Seoul its unwillingness to undertake measures beyond limited steps—such as suspending nuclear weapons tests—even if nuclear negotiations resume. This implies that Pyongyang considers the continuation of fissile material production at facilities like Nyongbyon and Kangson as non-negotiable for any potential talks.
This stance may indicate that Kim’s internal criteria for maintaining nuclear state status now depends on the operational state of nuclear facilities. This marks a shift from 2018, when North Korea used the term discontinue and had even considered dismantling the Nyongbyon facility. In his recent Supreme People’s Assembly speech, Kim invoked the nuclear force policy law established in 2022, arguing that demanding denuclearization is tantamount to asking them to violate its constitution.