In recent days, the nuclear energy cooperation negotiations between South Korea and the United States have entered a "fast track." With Washington clearly supporting Seoul's access to civil uranium enrichment and spent fuel reprocessing rights for peaceful purposes, the South Korean government has acted swiftly, establishing a cross-departmental working group and increasing the frequency of meetings, in an effort to secure substantial results before the U.S. midterm elections.

The current round of negotiations began with a joint statement released by South Korea and the United States in November last year. After two summits between President Lee Jae-yong of South Korea and President Donald Trump, the U.S. broke its long-standing restrictions, for the first time explicitly supporting South Korea's development of peaceful nuclear fuel cycle capabilities.

This breakthrough is significant — according to the current bilateral nuclear energy agreement revised in 2015, South Korea had previously been limited to uranium enrichment and spent fuel reprocessing with less than 20% enrichment, only with U.S. approval. The new consensus has opened the door for broader authorization.

To seize this "policy window," the South Korean government has shown remarkable speed. According to diplomatic sources, a special working group established internally by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has planned to increase meeting frequency to once a week, while higher-level director-level working groups will meet at least every three months.

Last week, the first meeting was held by the interdepartmental working group led by Kim Gyeong-su, the representative of South Korea-U.S. nuclear energy cooperation. Officials from multiple departments including the Ministry of Science and Information and Communications Technology, the Ministry of Climate and Energy Environment, and core institutions such as the Korea Nuclear Safety Commission and the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute attended, highlighting South Korea's high level of emphasis on this negotiation.

Notably, South Korea has reserved flexibility in the negotiation path. Although it is widely expected that both sides will revise the 2015 agreement, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs deliberately omitted the word "revised" in the working group's name, reserving the possibility of obtaining nuclear rights through simplified procedures such as separate arrangements.

This flexible strategy reflects South Korea's urgent need to achieve results — analysts point out that the policy momentum of the Trump administration may fluctuate depending on the outcome of the midterm elections. If no substantial progress is made before November, subsequent negotiations may face uncertainties.

In fact, the advancement of this nuclear energy cooperation between South Korea and the United States relies on the alignment of strategic interests on both sides. For South Korea, gaining the capability of uranium enrichment and spent fuel reprocessing not only reduces reliance on external nuclear fuel supplies but is also seen as an important symbol of enhancing national energy independence and technological strength.

For the United States, under the Trump administration's efforts to revitalize the nuclear industry and expand nuclear energy exports, easing nuclear restrictions on South Korea is an important measure to consolidate the alliance relationship, and can also create new opportunities for the export of American nuclear technology and industrial recovery.

However, the negotiations still face multiple challenges. Constraints of the non-proliferation system, balance of regional security patterns, and uncertainties in domestic U.S. policies are all major obstacles facing both sides.

Whether South Korea can achieve its goals within a few months depends not only on the efficiency of its negotiation team, but also on the political maneuvering within the United States. This game over nuclear rights not only concerns the future direction of the South Korea-U.S. alliance, but will also have a profound impact on the geopolitical landscape of Northeast Asia, and is worth continuous attention.

Original: toutiao.com/article/7594779809432093222/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author alone.