North Korea openly seeks nuclear-armed ICBMs capable of threatening the United States. Its precise military requirements for such a weapon are, however, unknown.
U.S. President Donald Trump’s faulty assumptions and unrealistic expectations could doom prospects for peacefully deescalating one nuclear standoff—and applying these misguided lessons to Iran could manufacture yet another.
Despite the positive nature of the joint statement by the Korean leaders pledging to make progress on long-standing problems, the reality is that there is much hard work to do if the U.S.-North Korean summit is to be a success and lead to real progress.
Unless the United States changes its priorities, Korean diplomacy is probably doomed.
What was actually agreed at the inter-Korean Summit, and what are the roadblocks ahead? A closer look at what the Panmunjom Declaration means for the Korean Peninsula.
In the aftermath of the inter-Korean summit on April 27, and ahead of planned U.S.-North Korea talks, please join Carnegie for a deep dive on the practicalities and politics of denuclearizing North Korea.
Netanyahu presumably only presented a small fraction of what he has but what he presented seemed largely consistent with what the International Atomic Energy Agency had previously reported.
The positive short-term outlook for a summit between Kim Jong Un, and President Donald Trump should not obscure the serious long-terms risks created by the latest spate of high-stakes diplomacy.
Nuclear disarmament, arms control, and nonproliferation policies are increasingly affected by declining regional security, increasing militarization of U.S. foreign policy, and changes to the global normative nuclear order.
The risks for a Trump-Kim summit remain high, and Trump’s notorious inconsistency and irritability cannot be dismissed.