Reorienting US- North Korea Diplomacy Away from Denuclearization

Why the United States must shift from nuclear ultimatums toward humanitarian engagement to prevent strategic isolation in East Asia

John Quincy Adams Society  ·  May 2024

Executive Summary

The United States is at an impasse with North Korea. To make advancements towards peace in East Asia, it must reorient its foreign policy objectives away from ensuring Pyongyang's complete denuclearization toward one that encourages mutual benefits centered around human rights and humanitarian issues. The current approach — a passive, open call for diplomacy contingent on denuclearization — will continue to push North Korea closer to U.S. adversaries.

Why Diplomacy with North Korea Needs to Change

Today, long-term tension on the Korean Peninsula has evolved into a stalemate with both sides building up their militaries in case one side attacks. Despite the relative peace created by this stalemate, North Korea continues to pose a threat to the security of East Asia because of its aggressive rhetoric, missile testing, and antisocial behavior. The passiveness of the U.S. government and its perpetuation of the status quo through a militarized approach and the imposition of harsh sanctions increasingly alienates North Korea, driving it to be more aggressive.

North Korea is not a major priority for U.S. foreign policy. Rather than actively engaging Pyongyang, the United States is more concerned about ensuring the situation does not get worse and maintaining the status quo — preoccupied instead with the wars in Europe and the Middle East. Yet North Korea's eagerness to approach countries other than the United States is precisely why Washington needs to take an active role in engaging Pyongyang and pursuing normalized relations.

North Korea's relationship with Russia signifies a sharp shift in DPRK foreign policy. Kim and Putin's September 2023 meeting marked an important turning point, showing that North Korea is now firmly moving its foreign policy goals away from engagement with the United States — and that tactics Washington has historically used to influence North Korean behavior are largely ineffective. By building stronger relations with Russia, North Korea has a reliable partner for aid and resources, making it less dependent on a U.S.-backed financial order and less concerned about working with the United States on other interests.

Denuclearization: The View from Pyongyang

North Korea's rationale for retaining nuclear weapons makes considerable sense under a realist theoretical framework. Because it has a weakened conventional military, few willing allies, and perceives an existential threat from South Korea and the United States, it is strategically rational for North Korea to prioritize preserving its greatest security guarantee. U.S. actions abroad have reinforced this calculus — North Korea explicitly cites instances where denuclearization led to what it describes as "tragic consequences," notably in Libya, where the U.S. ultimately supported the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi after he gave up his weapons program.

With Kim's 2023 constitutional codification of North Korea's right to develop and use nuclear weapons, the path to denuclearization now faces insurmountable obstacles. The 2022 U.S. Nuclear Posture Review already implicitly accepts this reality, framing the relationship in terms of deterrence rather than denuclearization.

An Alternative Approach: Humanitarian Diplomacy

The United States should reorient its diplomatic strategy around humanitarian issues — health diplomacy, environmental cooperation, and people-to-people exchanges. These areas carry less political weight and can serve as a foundation for signaling intentions and building trust. This approach would reduce violent incidents on the Korean Peninsula and encourage North Korea to open channels of communication on other interests.

History supports this argument. Between 1994 and 2008, a period of active diplomatic engagement, security tensions with the United States remained relatively low, NGOs were able to enter North Korea to provide humanitarian aid, and approximately 800 to 1,000 U.S. citizens traveled to North Korea annually. In 2018, at the height of diplomatic summits between Trump and Kim, North Korea fired zero missiles — whereas in 2022, when North Korea had abandoned hopes for dialogue, it tested 42 missiles, seven times the number fired in 2021.

"Diplomacy is a useful tool and it should be used to achieve meaningful gains, not solely as a reward for acting in ways that align with U.S. beliefs."

The United States must be willing to pursue active diplomacy with North Korea — sustained, creative, and at times dramatic. Maintaining a stance centered on complete denuclearization keeps U.S.–DPRK relations permanently stagnant. Diplomacy is about finding common ground, not winning. America ought to remove the obstacles that prevent meaningful communication between the two countries, reduce the probability of accidental conflict, and begin the long process of building a sustainable peace in East Asia.

This is an excerpt from the full policy analysis. The complete paper, including full citations and policy recommendations across health diplomacy, climate cooperation, and people-to-people exchanges, is available at jqas.org.