Editor's note: Tom Fowdy is a UK-based political analyst. The article reflects the author's views, and not necessarily those of CGTN.
Several days ago the New York Times published an exclusive story that claimed the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) continued to operate and maintain a number of ballistic missile facilities outside of the knowledge of US authorities.
It subsequently claimed from these alleged findings that the DPRK was “cheating” on the agreements secured between leaders Kim Jong Un and Donald Trump in Singapore in June, inviting readers to react with a cause for concern.
This hysteria, however, is nothing to panic about. Korea experts have widely criticized the story, the government of the Republic of Korea (ROK) and even Trump himself for a wilful misinterpretation of the agreements in question.
South Korean President Moon Jae-in and DPRK leader Kim Jong Un attend a luncheon in Pyongyang, North Korea, September 19, 2018. /VCG Photo
While certainly, America's inflexible approach to negotiations is creating a notable stall and lack of progress on the issue. Nevertheless, there is no imminent risk of a return to the confrontations seen in 2017.
In response to the allegations set out by the New York Times, the DPRK watcher community has largely emphasized the fact that no agreement concerning all the country's ballistic facilities was ever incorporated into the Singapore and Panmunjom declarations, which largely focused on the country's nuclear specific assets.
Thus far, Pyongyang has agreed to suspend nuclear and missile testing, it pledged to dismantle one missile testing site, its nuclear testing site, and if concessions are made from the United States, it pledged to dismantle the Yongbyon nuclear research facility and potentially open up more nuclear assets to international inspectors. In terms of larger commitments, the country agreed to a “denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula” when the right conditions were made.
It has not yet to this point made any promise or pledge to close down all of its ballistic missile facilities as a whole or to deplete any assets in this area. Distrusting of American intentions, it will not give up its leverage easily, and it is unrealistic to expect a blanket disarmament.
As a result, several key voices rejected the story. This included the Blue House in Seoul, which specified the above fact that Pyongyang had never committed to doing so, nor had it been a strict pledge of talks.
Similarly, the claims were also denied by the White House. Trump reaffirmed on twitter that the story was “inaccurate” and that Washington “knows about the sites being discussed.” Thus, he emphasized that the development was “nothing new” or “out of the normal.”
An official from DPRK's Nuclear Weapons Institute talks on a walkie-talkie during the dismantlement process in Punggye-ri, North Hamgyong Province, DPRK, May 24, 2018. /VCG Photo
The tweet expressed an indication that the administration is not interested in looking for an opportunity to scupper talks, which may have been the agenda of some of the more hawkish voices in Washington trigger happy to return to confrontation, not least John Bolton.
Nevertheless, Washington's inflexibility is not helping developments. The zero-sum approach to denuclearisation and sanctions is drawing disgruntled reactions and implicit threats from Pyongyang, who is not interested in unilateral capitulation and expects reciprocal measures from the US.
Still, this does not add any weight to the misleading accusations published in the New York Times. Instead of the DPRK “cheating,” instead there is simply little incentive being given for the country to move forward. They haven't changed course to do anything new. Things are simply being frozen as they are.
Should we be concerned? Not yet. Talks seem fragile and on a knife edge, but neither side is genuinely committed to ending them. The DPRK may posture and play hard to get, but it cannot risk another confrontation with Trump.
Simultaneously, foreign policy priorities in the White House have shifted. After June, Trump declared the issue over and then turned his interest towards Iran and China. It is impossible to juggle all three of these at once, similarly, as his tweet shown he is still claiming political points and credit for opening up the talks in the first place. He isn't going to hurt himself by claiming he has failed just yet. As a result, expect this period to drag out a little longer, even if it gets nowhere.
(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, contact us at opinions@cgtn.com.)