Both the Democratic and Republican parties have removed the term ‘denuclearization’ from their platforms ahead of the November U.S. presidential election, sparking concerns that the U.S. may be shifting its approach to addressing North Korea’s nuclear threat.
This change is particularly concerning as it comes at a time when North Korea continues to refuse dialogue while ramping up its nuclear capabilities and increasing provocations.
The removal of this key term has raised worries that the international community, particularly the U.S., might be less committed to the principle of ‘complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization’ (CVID). This principle has been central to efforts in dealing with North Korea’s nuclear weapons, and now some fear that the resolve to achieve this goal may be weakening.
While the removal of ‘denuclearization’ in the party platforms doesn’t exactly mean that the U.S. government recognizes North Korea as a nuclear state, it does suggest that both major U.S. political parties increasingly see denuclearization as a goal that is very difficult to achieve. Some analysts even view this as a declining interest in negotiating with North Korea over its nuclear program.
The Democratic Party’s 92-page platform, adopted during the ongoing national convention through delegate votes, mentions that President Joe Biden has worked with allies to address the threat posed by North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs, which violate multiple UN Security Council resolutions. It also highlights the importance of strengthening trilateral cooperation between the U.S., South Korea, and Japan to maintain peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and beyond.
Although the platform mentions North Korea six times, it does not include the goal of denuclearization that was part of the party’s 2020 platform. Four years ago, the platform expressed a commitment to building a sustained and coordinated diplomatic effort aimed at achieving denuclearization in the long term. This time, however, any reference to denuclearization is notably absent.
As a result, some experts in Washington think this might indicate that the U.S. is open to negotiating a reduction in North Korea’s nuclear weapons rather than pushing for complete denuclearization. Such negotiations typically occur between nuclear-armed states, which could be interpreted as a tacit acceptance of North Korea’s nuclear status. This is a position that North Korea has long sought.
