Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Just the Facts: North Korea’s Nuclear Program Any More. Have We Reached an Agreement?

Just the Facts: North Korea’s Nuclear Program Any More. Have We Reached an Agreement?

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and U.S. President Donald Trump inside the demilitarized zone (DMZ) separating the South and North Korea on June 30, 2019 in Panmunjom, South Korea.

Getty Images, Handout

The Fulcrum strives to approach news stories with an open mind and skepticism, striving to present our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, we remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces. However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.

We haven't heard much about North Korea's nuclear program lately, not because there's been a breakthrough agreement, but because the situation has largely hardened into a new, more dangerous normal.


Why the Silence? Not Inactivity—but Entrenchment

North Korea has not reached any agreement to denuclearize. In fact, quite the opposite:

  • Kim Jong Un is quietly expanding the country’s nuclear capabilities. Satellite imagery and IAEA reports confirm new construction at the Yongbyon nuclear complex, likely for uranium enrichment.
  • North Korea has enshrined its nuclear status into law, declaring its arsenal a permanent fixture and rejecting international calls for disarmament.
  • The regime views nuclear weapons as the ultimate guarantor of survival, especially after observing the fate of non-nuclear states like Iran under military pressure.

Strategic Shifts: From Isolation to Alignment

North Korea is no longer just a rogue state—it’s becoming a strategic node in a new axis of resistance:

  • Partnerships with Iran and Russia have deepened, involving missile tech, sanctions evasion, and military cooperation.
  • These alliances are not transactional—they reflect a reorientation of global power, with North Korea positioning itself as indispensable to this emerging bloc.

Why Is There No Diplomatic Breakthrough?

  • The U.S. and its allies have limited leverage. Sanctions haven’t worked, and military threats only reinforce Pyongyang’s nuclear resolve.
  • North Korea has rebuffed overtures, including recent ones from Donald Trump, and continues to brand the U.S. as a “hostile force”.
  • The regime is now focused on strategic autonomy, not negotiation. Its nuclear program is seen as essential, not negotiable.

Is There a New Possible Framework for Discussions?

Some analysts argue that traditional diplomacy is obsolete. Instead, they propose a “Korean Dream”—a civilizational vision rooted in shared identity and democratic ideals, aiming for peaceful unification rather than coercive denuclearization. It's ambitious, but it acknowledges the deeper structural issues: division, distrust, and existential insecurity.

Thus, we’ve reached a stalemate, one that’s quieter but more entrenched. The question now isn’t just how to denuclearize North Korea but how to reimagine the entire framework for peace and security on the Korean Peninsula.

What Is the Trump Administration’s Current Policy (2025):

  • Public Messaging vs. Policy Reality. Trump has publicly referred to North Korea as a “nuclear power,” a notable rhetorical shift that previous administrations avoided to prevent legitimizing Pyongyang’s arsenal.
  • Despite this, the White House insists that it still seeks the “complete denuclearization of North Korea,” echoing language from Trump’s first term.
  • Strategic Posture. Trump’s team is reportedly exploring a “nuclear freeze” deal—where North Korea halts production of new weapons in exchange for lifting non-military sanctions. This reflects a more pragmatic, transactional approach: less focused on full disarmament, more on limiting escalation and stabilizing the region.
  • Diplomatic Dynamics. Trump has expressed interest in re-engaging Kim Jong Un, calling him a “smart guy” and indicating plans to “reach out.” His administration includes Korea specialists and is reportedly preparing for renewed negotiations.

What public comments has President Trump made about North Korea or Kim Jong Un since his inauguration in January:

  • January 20, 2025 – Inaugural Ball Video Call with U.S. Troops. While speaking to troops at Camp Humphreys in South Korea, Trump casually asked: “How’s Kim Jong Un doing? You would say that although I developed a pretty good relationship with him, he’s a tough cookie.” This was interpreted by many as a signal that Trump might resume talks with Kim during his second term.
  • February 7, 2025 – Joint Press Conference with Japanese PM. At a press conference with Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, Trump stated: “We will have relations with North Korea and Kim Jong Un.” He reiterated his past rapport with Kim and hinted at potential future engagement.
  • January 23, 2025 – Fox News Interview. In a televised interview, Trump said: “Kim [is] a smart guy… not a religious zealot.” When asked if he would reach out again, he replied: “I will, yeah.” This continued his pattern of portraying Kim as a rational actor and himself as uniquely capable of diplomacy.
  • February 20, 2025 – B-1B Bomber Drill as a Signal. While not a direct quote, Trump’s administration conducted a joint U.S.–South Korea bomber drill near North Korea. The White House reaffirmed, “Complete denuclearization of North Korea remains President Donald Trump’s priority.” This was widely seen as a strategic warning to Kim Jong Un amid stalled diplomacy.
  • Contextual Fallout from Iran Bombings (June 2025). Though not directly about Kim, Trump’s aggressive strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities were interpreted by analysts as reinforcing North Korea’s belief in nuclear deterrence. Trump said: “Iran’s key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and obliterated.” This posture may indirectly affect how Kim views future talks, reinforcing his commitment to nuclear weapons as a shield against U.S. intervention.
David Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

Read More

Texas redistricting map
A map of new Texas Senate districts can be seen on a desk in the Legislature.
Tamir Kalifa/Getty Images

SCOTUS Upholds Texas Map, Escalates Gerrymandering Crisis

In the closing weeks of 2025, a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court moved our democracy in the wrong direction by clearing the way for a gerrymandered congressional map in Texas to be in place for the 2026 midterm elections in its Abbott v. LULAC decision. Aside from the fact that the new Texas map illegally discriminates to weaken the voting power of the state’s Black and Latino voters, the Supreme Court’s ruling is deeply problematic on a number of other levels.

Most disturbingly, the majority in this opinion takes an appalling new turn on the issue of partisan gerrymandering. To illustrate the Court’s backward slide, consider that in 2004 then-Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote as a concurrence to an opinion in a key redistricting case that, if a state declared it would redistrict with the goal of denying a certain group of voters “fair and effective representation” for partisan reasons, then the Court “would surely conclude the Constitution had been violated.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Two people with two books, open in front of them.

At Expand Democracy, scholarship is a democratic tool. How research on elections, representation, and governance shapes reform.

Getty Images, Pichsakul Promrungsee

Why Academic Work Matters for a Movement

When I began publishing research on elections and representation, I always imagined the audience as primarily academic - political scientists, methodologists, perhaps a few practitioners who hunt for new data. But as my work with Expand Democracy deepens, I find myself reflecting on how scholarship shapes the public conversation and why academic writing is not necessarily a detour from democracy but can be a foundation for it.

This essay reflects on that specific interaction: how academic work contributes to our understanding of democratic institutions, why it remains essential for reform movements, and how my own research aligns with Expand Democracy’s evolving mission.

Keep ReadingShow less
Lady Justice

Despite a spike in executions, public support for the death penalty is collapsing. Jury verdicts and polling reveal democracy at work.

the_burtons/Getty Images

The Spirit of Democracy Is Ending America’s Death Penalty

At first glance, 2025 was not a very good year for the movement to end the death penalty in the United States. The number of executions carried out this year nearly doubled from the previous year.

High-profile killings, like those of Rob Reiner and his wife, made the question of whether the person who murdered them deserves the death penalty a headline-grabbing issue. And the Trump Administration dispensed its own death penalty by bombing boats of alleged drug smugglers.

Keep ReadingShow less
The statue of liberty.

David L. Nevins writes how President Trump’s $1 million “Gold Card” immigration plan challenges America’s founding ideals.

Getty Images, Alexander Spatari

Give Me Your Rich: The Gold Card and America’s Betrayal of Liberty

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

These words, inscribed on the Statue of Liberty, have long served as a moral and cultural statement of America’s openness to immigrants and those seeking freedom. They shape Lady Liberty as more than a monument: a beacon of hope, a sanctuary for the displaced, and a symbol of the nation’s promise.

Keep ReadingShow less