본문 바로가기
IFANS Focus Trump-Kim Bromance 2.0? The Differences between 2018 and 2025 HWANG Ildo Upload Date 2025-01-23 Hits 34560
facebook twitter kakaotalk

Send Email

* All fields are required.

* Recipient email
* Content address
* Title
* Message
1. Trump’s Calculations: Immediately after the Inauguration 
2. Kim Jong Un’s Calculations: Immediately after Trump’s Inauguration
3. Challenges after Resumed Nuclear Negotiations?
4. Conclusion

Seven years is no short time in the ever-shifting landscape of international politics. Since 2018, the geopolitical realities surrounding the Korean peninsula have undergone significant transformations. Perceptions of key actors and the relationships among states have evolved dramatically. And another variable was added to this complexity with Trump’s return to the White House.
To forecast Trump’s policy toward North Korea in his second term, it is essential to recognize these changes and consider the administration’s shifting policy priorities. Simply predicting a reemergence of the Trump-Kim “bromance” or revisiting the negotiation models of 2018–2019 would fail to account for the new realities.
One of the most significant shifts has occurred in the international dynamics of the North Korean problem. During Trump’s first term, North Korea’s nuclear problem was largely an isolated issue disconnected from other global problems. However, it has been increasingly linked with the Russo-Ukrainian War due to its alignment with Russia and its deployment of military forces to Russia. North Korea’s linkage with other countries such as Iran has been increased as it embraced the “multipolar world order” narrative championed by Moscow and Beijing. Since the outbreak of the Russo-Ukrainian War, Pyongyang has officially abandoned its previous focus on negotiations with Washington. Instead, working with Moscow, North Korea has tried to undermine the international sanctions regime. In addition, North Korea has sought to build solidarity with other sanctioned states, promoting an alternative economic development model that becomes member of an “anti-American economic bloc.”
Another factor worth noting is that North Korea has dramatically advanced its nuclear capabilities. As North Korea has demonstrated its ability to use tactical nuclear weapons on the Korean peninsula and in the region, it is now actively pursuing a more ambitious goal: achieving assured retaliation capabilities against the U.S. homeland, which is a shift bolstered by its growing alignment with Russia. North Korea’s advanced nuclear capabilities mean more than the addition of new items to the negotiation table; it fundamentally alters the stakes for Washington. With the North’s increasing nuclear capabilities, the burdens for Washington have increased significantly compared to 2018. In contrast, Pyongyang likely perceives that this is elevating its negotiating position.
The last issue revolves around the contrast between the past three years and the upcoming four years. Over the past three years, global geopolitics has been largely defined by the confrontation surrounding Russia, particularly in the wake of the Russo-Ukrainian war. This has been particularly evident in the stark confrontation between the United States and Russia.
Looking ahead, if Trump’s return results in an early negotiation to end the war in Ukraine and he pursues a policy of economic decoupling from China by imposing a 60% tariff on Chinese imports which could be tantamount to a containment, the focal point of international conflict would likely shift from the U.S.-Russia standoff to the U.S.-China rivalry in the next four years. Putting aside the long-term outcomes of this rivalry, it will likely accelerate the trend toward the formation of blocs. 

*Attached File #Trump #NorthKorea #Nuclear #Russia
Download
37c18ea670174bff92af25f6c48661de.pdf
Prev
Background and Implications of the Israel-Hamas Ceasefire
Next
The 61st Munich Security Conference amid the Rapidly Shiftin...
Prev