At the UN General Assembly’s general debate, North Korea exhibited a clear divergence in its approach toward the United States and South Korea. While no permanent representative, Kim Sung, attended Donald Trump’s speech, two diplomats were present throughout the session. By contrast, when South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol took the podium in the afternoon, no North Korean officials remained in the hall.

Last year, North Korea had sent observers to hear Yoon’s address. This year’s complete absence of engagement left Seoul visibly disappointed.

Yoon’s 17-minute speech referenced “peace” 19 times, emphasizing the need to end the Korean War and establish a peace mechanism. He also revised South Korea’s stance on North Korea’s nuclear program, shifting from demanding denuclearization to proposing reduced pressure in exchange for a freeze on nuclear and missile activities. The signal was unambiguous—but without an audience, the message carried little weight.

An additional detail underscores the growing distance: North Korea had initially been seated closer to the front, but during Trump’s address, it voluntarily moved to a rear position. South Korean media speculate this repositioning was intended to minimize physical proximity with the South Korean delegation, symbolizing a deeper psychological estrangement.

This shift reflects a fundamental change in North Korea’s constitutional framework enacted in March. The constitution removed references to “national reunification” and for the first time defined territorial boundaries, explicitly stating that “the south borders the Republic of Korea,” thereby legally entrenching inter-Korean enmity. At the same time, nuclear status was formally enshrined in the constitution, transforming it from a policy option into a core national identity—making external demands for denuclearization increasingly untenable.

In Pyongyang’s view, South Korea is now an adversary. With nuclear capabilities and strategic backing from China and Russia, North Korea sees no reason to heed Yoon’s appeals. Moreover, South Korea’s foreign policy has repeatedly shifted with changes in government, leading North Korea to lack confidence in any promises made by Seoul. Rather than focus on statements that could be reversed by a future administration, Pyongyang is prioritizing its constitutionally mandated nuclear posture.

North Korea’s willingness to listen to Trump stems from a desire not to rupture relations with the United States and to monitor U.S. intentions. However, Trump’s 40-minute address covered Iran, Ukraine, AI, and Cuba—but omitted any mention of the Korean Peninsula. In contrast to his first term, when he referenced North Korea three times, current U.S. attention appears significantly diminished.

Deputy Foreign Minister Kim Seon-gyeong has arrived in New York and is scheduled to speak on the final day of the General Assembly, reaffirming North Korea’s nuclear stance and issuing warnings to the United States and Japan.

The situation remains delicate. North Korea insists on maintaining its nuclear arsenal; the United States shows little inclination to deepen engagement; and only South Korea remains eager to reclaim wartime command authority. Yoon’s 19 calls for peace have failed to elicit even a moment of attention from Pyongyang—revealing both the stark reality of inter-Korean relations and the growing marginalization of the peninsula issue within broader U.S. strategic priorities. The deadlock will not yield to a single speech. A genuine breakthrough requires substantive adjustments to security concerns—a prospect that remains absent in the foreseeable future.

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1877182245691399/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.