North Korea

President Lee Jae Myung on Monday expressed regret over drone flights by individuals into North Korea, saying that such behavior has caused unnecessary military tension with Pyongyang.

Lee made the remarks during a Cabinet meeting, after prosecutors last week indicted three individuals accused of flying drones into North Korea between September and January.

Those indicted include a graduate student in his 30s, an employee of the National Intelligence Service and a military officer.

“Although this was not an act by our government, I express regret to the North Korean side over the unnecessary military tension caused by such reckless behavior,” Lee said.

Lee has previously criticized the drone incursions on several occasions, but this marks the first time he has expressed regret directly to North Korea.

He said civilians are prohibited from engaging in unauthorized, private acts that could provoke North Korea, stressing that even when such actions are deemed necessary for national strategy, they must be handled with the utmost caution.

“It is deeply regrettable that individuals carried out such provocative acts toward North Korea on their own,” he said, calling such actions “unacceptable.”

Lee also addressed concerns among residents near border areas, noting that the incident had caused significant anxiety.

“We need to carefully consider who such actions are really meant to benefit,” he said, urging relevant ministries to revise regulations and take swift measures to prevent recurrences.

Amid a rapidly shifting global landscape, Lee emphasized the importance of Seoul’s responsible role in maintaining peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula.

“We should closely monitor the changes in the harsh international order, which requires more responsible action to ensure peace on the Korean Peninsula,” he said.

Lee has extended an olive branch to resume dialogue with Pyongyang since taking office in June 2025, but North Korea has rebuffed those overtures, formally describing South Korea as the “most hostile state” in a parliamentary speech last month.

Copyright (c) Yonhap News Agency prohibits its content from being redistributed or reprinted without consent, and forbids the content from being learned and used by artificial intelligence systems.

SEOUL, March 31 (UPI) — The United Nations Human Rights Council adopted a resolution condemning North Korea’s human rights violations, with South Korea joining 49 other countries as a co-sponsor despite speculation it might withhold support as it seeks to improve relations with Pyongyang.

The resolution was adopted by consensus at the Council’s 61st regular session Monday in Geneva. It expresses “deep concern about the systematic, widespread and gross human rights violations in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea [and] the pervasive culture of impunity and lack of accountability for such violations.”

The measure urges Pyongyang to undertake sweeping reforms, including dismantling political prison camps, ending forced labor and ensuring freedom of expression and movement.

The Council has adopted a North Korean human rights resolution every year since 2003.

South Korea had reportedly weighed opting out of co-sponsorship this year, as the administration of President Lee Jae Myung pursues renewed engagement with the North and seeks to ease tensions on the Korean Peninsula.

However, Seoul ultimately decided to join as a co-sponsor “following in-depth consultations among relevant government agencies,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Park Il said at a press briefing Tuesday.

He pointed to the resolution’s references to humanitarian issues such as abductions and reunions for separated families, as well as language supporting dialogue and engagement.

“It was by taking all these aspects into account that we decided to participate as a co-sponsor,” Park said.

South Korea also backed a similar U.N. resolution at the General Assembly in November. Seoul had co-sponsored such measures from 2008 through 2018, but stepped back during a period of inter-Korean detente between 2019 and 2022 under then-President Moon Jae-in.

The latest resolution comes as Seoul weighs how to balance engagement with Pyongyang against pressure to address its human rights record.

President Lee has taken conciliatory steps since taking office in June, including restricting activist groups from sending propaganda leaflets across the border.

Last week, Human Rights Watch and more than two dozen organizations and individuals urged Lee’s government to continue supporting the resolution, warning in an open letter that recent policy moves “signal a troubling shift away from support for the victims of the North Korean government repression.”

“Sustainable peace on the Korean Peninsula cannot be achieved by excluding human rights,” the letter said. “Dialogue and engagement need to go hand in hand with the protection of human rights and accountability.”

North Korea has long rejected such resolutions as hostile acts, accusing the United Nations and Western countries of using human rights as a pretext to undermine its government.

Speaking at a session ahead of the vote Monday, North Korea’s deputy permanent representative to the United Nations in Geneva, Kang Myong Chol, said Pyongyang “categorically rejects” the measure.

“We condemn it as a falsified document motivated by ulterior political objectives of undermining the dignity of my country and discrediting its ideology and system,” Kang said.

A recent report by the U.N. special rapporteur found that the country’s human rights situation has “shown no improvement” over the past decade and in many cases has worsened, despite limited engagement with international mechanisms.

The report cited persistent restrictions on movement, expanded surveillance and the continued use of forced labor, as well as growing difficulty for citizens attempting to leave the country.

The resolution was adopted without participation from the United States, which withdrew from the Human Rights Council after President Donald Trump signed an executive order ending U.S. membership in February 2025.

March 27 (UPI) — All 32 NATO nations met or exceeded the alliance’s target for defense spending last year, Secretary-General Mark Rutte said, as Canada and several ally nations increased their investment in defense amid war in Europe and the Middle East.

“We see clearly that our world is constantly changing. And we are adapting to ensure we remain prepared,” he said during a press conference in Brussels, as he released the alliance’s 2025 Annual Report.

“The threat picture across 2025 made clear that we need to do more. And throughout the year, NATO continued to come together to ensure that we are ready and able to respond to any threat, across all domains, both now and in the future.”

The defensive military alliance has called on member states to invest at least 2% of their gross domestic product in defense since at least 2006, with allies in 2014 pledging that those below the guideline would move toward it within a decade — though few nations did so for years.

Amid what he described as a more dangerous security environment — including Russia’s war against Ukraine, the Kremlin’s support from China, Iran, North Korea and Belarus, as well as the broader instability centered on Iran — countries are stepping up, he said, calling 2025 “a landmark year for NATO.”

Amid the protracted war in Europe and uncertainty about the United States’ cooperation with the alliance, defense ministers last year made a commitment to investing 5% of GDP annually in core defense requirements by 2035.

Among nations Rutte highlighted for reaching the 2% benchmark was Canada, which, under the Liberal government of Prime Minister Mark Carney, has sharply increased its defense spending as its once iron-clad relationship with the United States has frayed under the weight of U.S. President Donald Trump‘s incendiary rhetoric, threats of annexation and tariffs.

In the last 10 months of the Carney government, Canada has spent more than $23.8 billion on defense and security, pushing it over the 2% threshold for the first time since the end of the Cold War — and well ahead of the 2032 pledge made by former Defense Minister Bill Blair in 2024.

“As a result of our efforts, this morning, NATO confirmed that Canada has achieved its 2% defense expenditure target — half a decade ahead of the original schedule,” Carney said during a press conference held Thursday aboard a Royal Canadian navy vessel in Halifax Harbor.

“Canadians are responding to our renewed commitment and call to serve.”

The Liberal leader described the 2% target as “the foundation” for further investment in the country’s defense expenditure, as he announced a further $2.1 billion defense package for Atlantic Canada.

“Over the past 11 months, one of our government’s key priorities has been to reinvest in rebuilding and rearming the [Canadian Armed Forces] to provide you with the support you need to achieve mission success,” he said.

“We will continue our efforts with the same speed and determination that we have shown from the very beginning.”

Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko gifted North Korean leader Kim Jong Un a gun after the two countries signed a friendship treaty during the Belarusian’s first official state visit.

March 18 (UPI) — Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard defended U.S. military strikes on Iran during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing Wednesday, calling them a strategic success.

Senators challenged Gabbard to reconcile the words of President Donald Trump with the intelligence her department has received on Iran. When pressed, Gabbard yielded that Trump has the final say on what threats the United States faces.

When the United States performed strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in June, Trump said Iran’s nuclear capabilities were “obliterated.” Earlier this month, he said Iran’s development of nuclear weapons posed an imminent nuclear threat to national security, justifying military action.

Gabbard affirmed Wednesday that Iran’s nuclear enrichment program was “obliterated” in the June strikes.

“It is not the intelligence community’s responsibility to determine what is and is not an imminent threat,” Gabbard said. “That is up to the president, based on a volume of information he receives.”

Gabbard was once a vocal opponent of engaging in a war with Iran, even selling shirts that read “No War With Iran” in 2019 while she campaigned for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Iran is one of the United States’ top adversaries, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s “Annual Threat Assessment” said. China, Russia and North Korea are also on that list.

In the 19 days since the war with Iran began, Gabbard said the Iranian regime “appears to be intact but largely degraded.”

“Even so, Iran and its proxies remain capable of and continue to attack U.S. and allied interests in the Middle East,” Gabbard said. “The IC assesses that if a hostile regime survives it will seek to begin a yearslong effort to rebuild its missiles and UAV forces.”

North Korea and China resumed an international passenger train service linking their capitals Thursday for the first time in six years, with a train spotted crossing the border bridge between the two countries.

A nine-car train traveling from Pyongyang to Beijing was seen by Yonhap News Agency passing over the Amnok River bridge, also known as the Yalu River bridge, connecting North Korea’s Sinuiju and China’s Dandong, at around 4:23 p.m.

Some train cars had closed curtains, while passengers were visible in others.

According to China’s Xinhua News Agency, a five-car passenger train departed from the Chinese border city of Dandong at 10 a.m. and was scheduled to arrive in Pyongyang at 6:07 p.m.

The Dandong-Pyongyang passenger line will operate daily in both directions, Xinhua said, quoting a Chinese official as saying the service will serve as a “dynamic link strengthening the friendship between these two nations.”

Also on Thursday, North Korea and China were set to resume a rail route connecting their capitals, Pyongyang and Beijing.

The resumption marks the first cross-border passenger train service between the two countries since operations were suspended in 2020 following the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Last year, North Korea resumed direct flight and train services between Pyongyang and Moscow, Russia’s capital.

The reopening of the North Korea-China rail services comes as the two countries appear to be aligning more closely as they seek to repair relations frayed by Pyongyang’s military cooperation with Russia, amid speculation that the United States may seek to reengage Pyongyang for talks.

Copyright (c) Yonhap News Agency prohibits its content from being redistributed or reprinted without consent, and forbids the content from being learned and used by artificial intelligence systems.

SEOUL, March 12 (UPI) — North Korean leader Kim Jong Un inspected a munitions factory that produces light arms, state-run media reported Thursday, where he test-fired newly developed pistols alongside his daughter Ju Ae.

Kim visited the factory on Wednesday accompanied by officials from the ruling Workers’ Party, according to the official Korean Central News Agency. The report did not specify the location of the facility.

During the visit, Kim stopped at the factory’s shooting range to test-fire a pistol that he said was “superior in its structural performance, rate of hits, concentration fire and combat utility,” KCNA reported.

Kim “expressed satisfaction over the development of a really excellent pistol,” the report said.

The handgun was approved for production at a meeting of the party’s Central Military Commission last month, according to KCNA. The factory operates under North Korea’s Second Economy Commission, which oversees the country’s weapons production and defense industry.

While Ju Ae was not mentioned in the KCNA report, photographs released by state media showed her accompanying her father during the inspection. The pair wore matching leather jackets and fired pistols at the factory’s indoor range alongside senior officials.

Ju Ae, believed to have been born around 2013, has appeared alongside her father at public events with increasing frequency, including missile launches, military demonstrations and major political gatherings.

On Wednesday, she was also seen beside Kim as he oversaw the test-firing of strategic cruise missiles from a naval destroyer via a video feed.

South Korea’s National Intelligence Service said last month that Ju Ae appears close to being designated as Kim’s successor.

The factory visit comes in the wake of last month’s Workers’ Party congress, where Kim outlined defense priorities for the next five years. While Pyongyang continues to prioritize the expansion of its nuclear arsenal, the North Korean leader has also emphasized strengthening conventional weapons production.

During the congress, Kim presented newly developed sniper rifles to senior officials and military commanders, with state media releasing images of Ju Ae inspecting and firing one of the weapons.

During Wednesday’s visit, Kim stressed the importance of factories producing pistols and other light arms to strengthen “the combat efficiency of the army, public security forces and militia forces,” KCNA said.

He also announced plans to convene a meeting of the party’s Central Military Commission next month to review plans for modernizing munitions factories and allocating funds to upgrade three key defense production facilities.

The inspection comes as the United States and South Korea conduct their annual Freedom Shield joint military exercise, which Pyongyang routinely condemns as a rehearsal for invasion. Earlier this week, Kim Yo Jong, the powerful sister of the North Korean leader, warned the drills could bring “unimaginably terrible consequences.”

South Korea said it remains capable of deterring threats from North Korea even if the United States redeploys some weapons stationed on the Korean peninsula to the Middle East amid the war involving Iran.

The comments by South Korean President Lee Jae Myung come after reports that key U.S. missile defence systems and military assets could be moved from Asia to support operations linked to the Iran conflict.

The potential redeployment has sparked concern among Asian allies that shifting military resources could weaken regional deterrence against China and North Korea at a time of heightened geopolitical tensions.

Seoul Says Deterrence Remains Strong

Speaking at a cabinet meeting, Lee acknowledged that reports about the relocation of U.S. military equipment had triggered controversy in South Korea.

He said that while Seoul had expressed opposition to the removal of certain weapons, it could not dictate U.S. military decisions.

However, Lee emphasised that South Korea’s own defence capabilities are strong enough to maintain deterrence against North Korea even if some American systems are temporarily relocated. He noted that South Korea’s defence spending and conventional military strength significantly exceed those of the North.

South Korea hosts about 28,500 U.S. troops as part of the long-standing alliance designed to deter aggression from nuclear-armed North Korea.

Missile Defence Systems May Be Redeployed

Officials have indicated that the U.S. and South Korean militaries are discussing the possible redeployment of Patriot missile defense system batteries to the Middle East.

South Korean media reported that some missile batteries may have already been shipped from Osan Air Base and could be redeployed to U.S. bases in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

There were also reports that parts of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system could be moved from South Korea to the Middle East.

While Patriot systems provide lower-tier defence against shorter-range missiles, THAAD systems are designed to intercept ballistic missiles at high altitude.

United States Forces Korea declined to comment on the possible relocation of equipment, citing operational security.

Analysts Warn of Miscalculation Risks

Military analysts say that although South Korea possesses strong military capabilities, the presence of U.S. forces and weapons in the country serves as a crucial signal of Washington’s commitment to the region.

According to Choi Gi-il, a military studies professor at Sangji University, the removal of some systems could carry strategic risks.

He warned that North Korea might interpret the redeployment as a weakening of allied defences and could attempt limited provocations to test the alliance’s response.

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has recently signalled a more aggressive posture, pledging to expand the country’s nuclear arsenal and describing South Korea as its “most hostile enemy.”

Wider Regional Impact

The redeployment of U.S. assets reflects the broader strategic impact of the Iran conflict on global military posture.

Japan, which also hosts major U.S. bases, has seen two U.S. guided-missile destroyers stationed in Yokosuka deployed to the Arabian Sea to support operations linked to the Iran campaign.

The movements have raised concerns in Tokyo as well, with opposition politicians questioning whether U.S. forces stationed in Japan should be used for operations outside the region.

The developments highlight how the conflict in the Middle East is beginning to reshape global military deployments, drawing resources away from Asia and prompting questions about the balance of security commitments across different regions.

With information from Reuters.

SEOUL, March 11 (UPI) — North Korean leader Kim Jong Un oversaw the test-firing of strategic cruise missiles from a naval destroyer, state media reported Wednesday, as the United States and South Korea began a large-scale joint military exercise this week.

The North’s Choe Hyon destroyer launched the missiles at island targets in the Yellow Sea on Tuesday, the official Korean Central News Agency said, with Kim watching via a video feed. The missiles flew for roughly two hours and fifty minutes before striking their targets, KCNA said.

Pyongyang described the weapons as “strategic,” a term it typically uses for systems capable of carrying nuclear warheads.

The launches came days after North Korea conducted a similar cruise missile test from the destroyer ahead of its commissioning.

The test also coincided with the start of the allies’ annual Freedom Shield exercise on Monday, an 11-day program of command-post simulations and field training drills.

North Korea has long condemned the joint exercises as rehearsals for invasion. On Tuesday, Kim Yo Jong, the powerful sister of Kim Jong Un, warned that the drills could destabilize the region and lead to “unimaginably terrible consequences.”

After observing the launch, Kim praised the “superiority of the destroyer’s integrated combat system,” according to KCNA.

“The components of our war deterrent are now being included in the very sophisticated operational system … and the country’s nuclear forces have made a switch to the phase of multifaceted operation,” Kim said.

Images released by state media showed Kim watching the test alongside his daughter Ju Ae, who has appeared frequently with her father at major events. South Korea’s spy agency said last month that Ju Ae, believed to have been born in 2013, appears close to being designated as Kim’s successor.

Pyongyang launched the Choe Hyon, its first 5,000-ton destroyer, last April as Kim called for strengthening the country’s naval capabilities. North Korean reports say the vessel carries a range of weapons, including nuclear-capable cruise missiles and tactical ballistic missiles.

Photos released by state media show the ship’s missile and radar systems resembling those found on Russian vessels, prompting speculation Pyongyang may have received technical assistance from Moscow.

North Korea has deployed troops, artillery and weapons to support Russia’s war in Ukraine and is believed to be receiving financial support and advanced military technology in return.

A second destroyer, the Kang Kon, suffered an accident during its launch ceremony last year that left it listing on its side before it was repaired and relaunched in June.

Kim has ordered another 5,000-ton destroyer completed by Oct. 10, the anniversary of the founding of the ruling Workers’ Party of Korea.

Cruise missiles were seen launching into the sky as North Korean leader Kim Jong Un oversaw tests from a new naval destroyer aimed at assessing the warship’s capabilities.

The deterrence posture against North Korea will not be hindered regardless of a potential shift of military assets owned by the U.S. military stationed in South Korea, a senior official at Cheong Wa Dae said Wednesday, amid media reports that the U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) has shipped out some of its air defense assets from the Korean Peninsula.

“Given our level of military capability, defense spending, defense industry capacity and the high morale of our troops, there is no problem with deterrence against North Korea regardless of whether some USFK assets are relocated overseas,” the official said.

The official, however, declined to comment on media reports that parts of a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system and other air defense units owned by the USFK were moved from South Korea amid a raging war in the Middle East.

“It is not appropriate for our government to comment on military operations between Korea and the U.S.,” the official said.

The official said South Korea and the U.S. have remained in close coordination to maintain a robust combined defense posture.

“Korea and the U.S. will maintain a robust combined defense posture to contribute to peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and in the region,” the official said. “To that end, the two countries will continue close communication and coordination.”

Copyright (c) Yonhap News Agency prohibits its content from being redistributed or reprinted without consent, and forbids the content from being learned and used by artificial intelligence systems.

Train service linking Pyongyang and Beijing will resume this week for the first time since it was suspended six years ago due to the COVID-19 pandemic, sources said Tuesday.

The Beijing-Pyongyang train route will resume operations Thursday, running four times a week, on Monday, Wednesday, Thursday and Saturday, an official at China State Railway Group told Yonhap News Agency.

The train will depart from Beijing at 5:26 p.m. and arrive in Pyongyang at 6 p.m. the following day, stopping once at the Chinese border city of Dandong en route. The last two train cars will be reserved for passengers, according to sources.

The resumption marks the first cross-border train service between the two countries since operations were suspended following the outbreak of the pandemic.

Last year, North Korea resumed direct flight and train services between Pyongyang and Moscow, Russia’s capital.

The Chinese official said the upcoming Beijing-Pyongyang train will primarily serve diplomats and those on official business trips, while plans to accommodate general passengers will be considered if empty seats are available.

China’s foreign ministry said maintaining a regular passenger train service between China and North Korea takes on “significance” in facilitating exchanges of personnel between the two nations.

“China supports creating more convenient conditions for both sides’ exchanges of personnel by strengthening communication between relevant authorities of the two nations,” Guo Jiakun, spokesperson at the ministry, told a press briefing.

The move comes as North Korea and China appears to be seeking to promote cooperation amid the fluid international situation, highlighted by U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran and the subsequent intensifying conflict in the Middle East.

North Korea also seems to be trying to expand cooperation with China as speculation arises that U.S. President Donald Trump may seek to resume diplomacy with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un on the occasion of his planned trip to Beijing on March 31-April 2.

North Korea’s ties with China, the North’s traditional ally and economic benefactor, became cool amid Pyongyang’s deepening military cooperation with Russia on the occasion of Moscow’s war with Ukraine.

Kim held summit talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing in September last year on the occasion of a Chinese military parade and discussed ways to improve bilateral ties.

But relations between Pyongyang and Beijing do not appear to be restored in a full-fledged manner with no signs of high-level exchanges of personnel spotted.

“The government is closely monitoring the development of Korean Peninsula affairs, including North-China relations,” an official at South Korea’s foreign ministry said.

Copyright (c) Yonhap News Agency prohibits its content from being redistributed or reprinted without consent, and forbids the content from being learned and used by artificial intelligence systems.

North Korea’s Kim Yo Jong said the annual ‘Freedom Shield’ exercises could lead to ‘unimaginably terrible consequences’.

Kim Yo Jong, the powerful sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, has accused the United States and South Korea of “destroying the stability” of East Asia, as the two countries start their annual 10-day joint military exercises on the Korean Peninsula.

“The muscle-flexing of the hostile forces near the areas of our state’s sovereignty and security may cause unimaginably terrible consequences,” Kim Yo Yong said on Tuesday, according to the state-run Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).

“The enemies should never try to test our patience, will and capability,” Kim said.

“We will watch to what extent the enemy violates the security of our state and what it is playing at,” she continued.

Kim’s remarks follow the start of the joint Freedom Shield exercises on Monday, which will run for 10 days and involve 18,000 South Korean and US military personnel.

The military manoeuvres are designed to “enhance the combined, joint, all-domain, and interagency operational environment, thereby strengthening the Alliance’s response capabilities,” United States Forces Korea said.

This year’s Freedom Shield will involve 22 field training drills, according to South Korea’s Yonhap News Agency, which is fewer than half the number carried out last year.

Kim added on Tuesday that there was no justification to hold the exercises, which have been called a “defensive” action by Washington and Seoul in the past.

“No matter what justification they may establish and how the elements of the drill may be coordinated, the clear confrontational nature of the high-intensity large-scale war drill staged by the most hostile entities in collusion at the doorstep of [North Korea] never changes,” she said.

“The recent global geopolitical crisis and complicated international events prove that all military manoeuvres of the field warfare troops, to be conducted by the enemy states, assume no distinction between defence and attack, training and actual warfare,” she continued, in an apparent reference to the US-Israel war on Iran.

South Korea and North Korea have technically been at war since 1953, when an armistice agreement paused fighting but did not formally end the armed confrontation.

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un said in 2024 that he would no longer pursue reconciliation with South Korea, although it remains Seoul’s long-term goal.

An official at South Korea’s Ministry of Unification told Yonhap that Kim’s remarks on Tuesday were relatively muted by North Korean standards.

The statement did not refer directly to the US or threaten to use nuclear weapons, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

“Kim appears to have limited her response to merely pinpointing the South Korea-US exercise, taking the current security situation into account,” the official told Yonhap.

SEOUL, March 9 (UPI) — The United States and South Korea began their annual Freedom Shield joint military exercise on Monday, as speculation swirled that Washington may be shifting some military assets from the Korean Peninsula to the Middle East amid its widening conflict with Iran.

About 18,000 South Korean troops will participate in the exercise, which runs through March 19 and includes command-post simulations and field training drills. U.S. Forces Korea has not disclosed the number of American personnel involved.

The drills come as local media reports have raised questions about whether U.S. military equipment stationed in South Korea could be redeployed to support operations in the Middle East.

South Korea’s Yonhap News Agency reported Sunday that U.S. C-5 and C-17 transport aircraft landed at Osan Air Base in Pyeongtaek, south of Seoul, late last month before departing between Wednesday and Saturday.

The aircraft movements followed reports that U.S. Forces Korea relocated some Patriot missile defense systems to Osan from other American bases in the country.

Two Patriot batteries deployed with USFK were temporarily rotated to the Middle East in June last year during strikes targeting Iranian nuclear facilities, before returning to South Korea in October.

The Patriot system detects, tracks and intercepts drones, cruise missiles and short-range or tactical ballistic missiles at low- to mid-range altitudes. It forms a key component of South Korea’s layered missile defense network designed to counter threats from North Korea.

U.S. Forces Korea said last week it could not comment on the relocation or movement of its assets due to operational security.

South Korea’s Defense Ministry also declined to address the reports directly during a briefing Monday.

“There is constant communication between the U.S. military and our side,” ministry spokeswoman Jeong Bit-na told reporters. “We are always communicating closely to ensure that there are no security concerns or gaps.”

She added that the Freedom Shield exercise was proceeding as planned.

“The South Korea-U.S. joint exercise is being implemented normally regardless of the situation in the Middle East, and we are thoroughly implementing it as agreed and planned,” Jeong said.

The drills come as the administration of South Korean President Lee Jae Myung seeks to stabilize relations with Pyongyang, which routinely condemns the allies’ joint exercises as rehearsals for invasion.

The number of field training exercises during this year’s Freedom Shield has been reduced to 22, down from 51 conducted during the previous iteration of the drills under the conservative government of impeached former President Yoon Suk Yeol.

North Korea recently concluded a major congress of the ruling Workers’ Party, where leader Kim Jong Un pledged to expand the country’s nuclear arsenal and improve its delivery systems and operational capabilities.

At the same time, Kim appeared to leave the door open to future negotiations with the United States, saying there was “no reason” the two sides could not improve relations if Washington abandons what he described as its hostile policy.

Kim has previously said he has “fond memories” of U.S. President Donald Trump, whom he met three times during Trump’s first term. South Korean officials have pointed to Trump’s planned visit to China later this month as a possible opportunity to revive diplomacy with Pyongyang.

Kim has continued to take a hostile tone toward Seoul, however, recently describing South Korea as “the most hostile entity.”

March 7 (UPI) — The author prefers to use the lowercase “n” to challenge the Kim family regime’s legitimacy.

Calls for an end of war declaration on the Korean peninsula return with steady rhythm. Each time they appear, they promise a step toward reconciliation.

The latest proposal came when South Korea’s Unification Ministry urged a political declaration formally ending the Korean War as part of a broader effort to restart dialogue with north Korea and move toward a peace regime.

The argument is simple: A declaration would signal political will for peace and reduce tension on the peninsula.

The desire for peace is genuine. Koreans want peace. Americans want peace. Soldiers who have stood watch along the Demilitarized Zone for seventy years want peace.

The real question is not whether peace is desirable. The real question is whether a declaration contributes to peace when the military reality remains unchanged.

Paper and rhetoric do not trump steel.

The Military Reality That Has Not Changed

The Korean War ended in July 1953 with an armistice agreement, not a peace treaty. The armistice halted the fighting but preserved the underlying conflict.

The security architecture that followed rests on deterrence. It rests on the Republic of Korea-U.S. alliance, the presence of American forces in Korea, extended deterrence and the readiness of combined forces.

Across the DMZ sits the fourth largest army in the world, as north Korea fields roughly 1.2 million troops.

More than seventy percent of those forces remain deployed between Pyongyang and the Demilitarized Zone. Their posture is offensive. Their purpose has not changed since 1950.

The Republic of Korea’s forces are organized differently. They are structured for defense. They rely on alliance integration and American reinforcement in crisis. The combined posture has deterred major conflict for seven decades.

None of that changes with a declaration.

Artillery remains within range of Seoul. Ballistic missiles remain deployed. Nuclear weapons remain part of the regime’s strategy.

Words do not move artillery tubes.

The Strategic Misreading Behind the Proposal

Supporters of an end of war declaration often argue that symbolic gestures can change political dynamics in Pyongyang.

The belief is that such a declaration would demonstrate that the alliance is abandoning what the regime calls its “hostile policy.” This signal, the argument goes, might restart negotiations and encourage denuclearization.

This logic rests on a misunderstanding of the Kim family regime.

For more than seventy years the regime has pursued the same strategic objective. It seeks to dominate the Korean peninsula under its rule. The tools have changed over time, but the objective has not.

The regime uses coercion, subversion, diplomacy, and military pressure in combination. Negotiations are not an alternative to this strategy. They are part of it.

When the regime speaks about hostile policy, it does not refer to rhetoric. It refers to the structural pillars of deterrence. The regime defines hostile policy as the ROK/U.S. alliance, the presence of U.S. forces in Korea, and the nuclear umbrella that protects South Korea and Japan.

Removing these pillars is central to the regime’s long-term strategy.

How a Declaration Can Undermine Deterrence

Advocates often describe an end of war declaration as symbolic and not legally binding. That may be correct in a narrow legal sense. In strategic terms, however, symbolism matters.

Politics follows narrative.

Once the war is declared over, critics of the alliance will ask a simple question. If the war is over, why are U.S. forces still stationed in Korea?

The argument will not remain academic. Political factions in both countries will push for reductions in American troop presence. They will question combined exercises. They will challenge extended deterrence.

The declaration would not cause these debates, but it would accelerate them. It would provide rhetorical oxygen to arguments that already exist.

From Pyongyang’s perspective this outcome would be ideal. The regime has long defined the alliance and U.S. military presence as the central obstacles to its objectives. Weakening alliance cohesion through political pressure achieves what military confrontation cannot.

The Political Warfare Dimension

An end of war declaration would not occur in a vacuum. It would unfold in a contested information environment shaped by political warfare.

north Korea, China, and Russia have repeatedly used narrative and diplomacy to shape perceptions about security on the peninsula. If negotiations over a declaration stall, the narrative battlefield will shift quickly.

Pyongyang will argue that peace is blocked by American hostility. Beijing and Moscow will echo that message in international forums. The United States will be portrayed as the obstacle to reconciliation.

Sanctions policy will become the central battleground. north Korea has already signaled that meaningful progress requires sanctions relief. Yet the United Nations Security Council resolutions remain in force precisely because of the regime’s nuclear and missile programs.

If sanctions remain in place, the regime and its partners will claim that Washington refuses to embrace peace. The propaganda line will be clear. The United States talks about diplomacy while clinging to confrontation.

The goal is not persuasion alone. The goal is alignment. By shaping public debate in South Korea and internationally, these narratives seek to weaken alliance unity and pressure policymakers.

This is political warfare conducted through diplomacy, media narratives, and strategic messaging.

Diplomacy Without Illusions

None of this means the United States or South Korea should reject diplomacy. Peace on the peninsula remains the long-term objective of the alliance.

Diplomacy, however, must be grounded in reality.

An end of war declaration can only contribute to security if it is tied to concrete military measures. Negotiations would need to address conventional force deployments near the DMZ. They would need to include ballistic missile programs and nuclear weapons. Verification would be essential.

Absent those steps, a declaration would alter language while leaving the balance of power untouched.

The alliance cannot afford that illusion.

Strategic Theater Versus Strategic Stability

Political leaders understandably seek symbolic achievements that demonstrate progress toward peace.

A declaration ending the Korean War would carry powerful historical meaning. But symbolism is not strategy.

A declaration without corresponding changes in military posture risks becoming strategic theater. It produces headlines but not stability. Worse, it may erode the deterrent structure that has preserved peace for generations.

The paradox is clear. A gesture meant to signal peace could weaken the very mechanisms that prevent war.

The Question That Matters

The central question remains unchanged.

Will the Kim family regime behave like a responsible member of the international community?

If it reduces conventional forces, dismantles nuclear weapons, and abandons its hostile posture, then an end of war declaration could become part of a genuine peace settlement.

If those conditions remain absent, the declaration becomes something else. It becomes leverage in a broader campaign aimed at weakening the alliance.

History suggests caution.

For seven decades the regime has used negotiations to gain concessions while preserving its core capabilities. It has advanced nuclear weapons even during diplomatic engagement.

Why should a symbolic declaration suddenly transform that pattern?

Conclusion

Peace on the Korean peninsula is a worthy goal. It is a goal shared by Koreans, Americans, and the broader international community.

But peace is not achieved through declarations alone.

It is secured through credible deterrence, alliance unity, and diplomacy grounded in the behavior of adversaries rather than hopes about their intentions.

The ROK/U.S. alliance has preserved stability for generations because it rests on credible military power. That credibility depends on readiness, presence, and integration. Until the military threat from the north changes, the war cannot truly be declared over.

Paper and words do not trump steel.

David Maxwell, executive director of the Korea Regional Review, is a retired U.S. Army Special Forces colonel who has spent more than 30 years in the Asia-Indo-Pacific region. He specializes in Northeast Asian security affairs and irregular, unconventional and political warfare. He is vice president of the Center for Asia Pacific Strategy and a senior fellow at the Global Peace Foundation, where he works on a free and unified Korea. After he retired, he became associate director of the Security Studies Program at Georgetown University. He is on the board of directors of the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea and the OSS Society and is the editor at large for the Small Wars Journal.