Why fourth Trump-Kim summit would be on North Korea’s terms: ‘the ground has shifted’
Trump seems keen to rekindle their ‘bromance’ but a nuclear-emboldened Kim Jong-un has little reason to rush into talks, analysts say
The United Nations Command, which administers the southern side of Panmunjom, has declined to comment on whether the suspension is connected to a potential summit.
While there has been no official contact between Washington and Pyongyang, Trump administration officials have privately discussed setting up a meeting with Kim, according to CNN.
If Trump were to come to Pyongyang, Kim might welcome him there
“The ground has shifted,” said Doo Jin-ho, a senior defence analyst at the Korea Research Institute for National Strategy.
“Kim has little reason to rush into a meeting with Trump when he already gains substantial benefits from Russia and China.”
“If Trump were to come to Pyongyang, Kim might welcome him there,” Doo added, noting that such an unprecedented visit to the country’s capital by a sitting US president “would elevate his authority in the eyes of the North Korean people”.
‘Diplomatic confidence’
Kim’s primary diplomatic goals are securing international recognition of North Korea as a nuclear power and weakening the US–South Korea alliance, according to former US intelligence officer Sydney Seiler, now a senior adviser on Korea at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies.
“Even a low-deliverable, ‘let’s talk and renew our good relationship’ meeting would be of value to Kim in that regard,” he said, noting that Pyongyang’s “growing nuclear and missile capabilities and great-power diplomacy with Moscow and Beijing” would further boost Kim’s “diplomatic confidence”.
Yang Moo-jin, president of the University of North Korean Studies in Seoul, agreed that a fourth meeting with Trump could bolster Kim’s international standing.
“Improving relations with Washington would also help Pyongyang hedge against the risk of its ties with Russia and China weakening once the war in Ukraine ends,” he said.
Although North Korea is seeking sanctions relief to finance its “20x10” development project – aimed at building modern factories in 20 cities and counties each year for a decade – “the likelihood of Kim meeting Trump in the foreseeable future is low”, according to Yang.
He characterised the suspension of civilian visits to Panmunjom as “nothing more than a working-level contingency measure” rather than a preparatory step towards a summit, adding: “No officials are engaged in serious preparatory work for such a meeting.”
South Korea’s Ambassador to the US Kang Kyung-wha has likewise played down the prospect of an imminent Trump–Kim meeting.
“President Trump has said he is open to dialogue and North Korea has also shown an inclination towards it, but there is no sign yet that anything will materialise on the occasion of the Apec summit,” she told lawmakers at Seoul’s National Assembly on Friday, referring to the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum set to be held in Gyeongju, South Korea, from October 31 to November 1.
Former CIA intelligence analyst Bruce Klingner, now a senior fellow at the US-based Mansfield Foundation specialising in Korean affairs, told a seminar on Friday that he thought a fourth Trump-Kim summit was “a low-probability but high-impact scenario”.
By some estimates, Pyongyang had earned US$20 billion or more from its missile and ammunition sales to Moscow, Klingner said: “So right now he [Kim] is feeling … he’s in a very strong negotiating position.”
Rather than negotiate, North Korea is more likely to escalate its actions in the strategic “grey zone”, according to security analyst Markus Garlauskas – leveraging its nuclear deterrent and lessons learned from drone warfare in Ukraine while skirting the threshold of outright conflict.
“For the Kim regime, passivity would lead to destruction,” said the director of the Atlantic Council think tank’s Indo-Pacific Security Initiative.
“It’s aggression, it is coercion, it’s illicit trade. Those are the very things that keep the regime alive.”
Seoul to build its first public nuclear fallout shelter as North Korea’s threats grow
The 1,000-person bunker, being built under a new public housing complex in South Korea’s capital city, is intended as a pilot project
Seoul Metropolitan Government’s plan reflects both the growing unease over Pyongyang’s advancing nuclear arsenal and broader global instability, analysts say.
City officials have confirmed that the underground fallout shelter will be built beneath a new public housing complex in southeastern Seoul’s Songpa district by 2028.
Designed to withstand nuclear, chemical and biological attacks, the facility aims to offer refuge to up to 1,000 people for as long as two weeks in the event of a nuclear explosion, according to city planners.
“We need to address this new security environment,” Ko Dae-il, leader of Seoul Metropolitan Government’s Emergency Planning and Civil Defence Team, told This Week in Asia.
He said the project aimed to both protect residents and enhance the value of flats built atop the shelter, potentially setting a precedent for future developments.
“Given the evolving nature of security threats, we are expanding the concept of civil defence facilities through this pilot project,” Ko said. “The goal is to secure effective protection for citizens through a stronger urban security infrastructure.”
Asked if he thought the shelter could heighten public anxiety about an attack, Ko said: “It would be unthinkable for us to do nothing in the face of mounting nuclear threats from the North.”
Fortifying Seoul
The shelter, a joint venture between the city government and the Seoul Housing and Urban Development Corporation, will be located beneath a 999-unit apartment complex, featuring 20 floors above ground and three basement levels.
It is primarily intended as an emergency refuge for residents, though city officials hope it will also serve as a model for future expansion.
Design work on the project is already about 70 per cent complete and Ko said authorities expect the project to proceed quickly. Construction is set to begin next month, with completion earmarked for 2028 at an estimated total cost of 3.4 billion won (US$2.4 million).
The bunker forms part of the South Korean capital’s “Defence Seoul 2030” strategy, unveiled in March last year.
Security experts have welcomed the move as a necessary step in shoring up civil protection.
Kim Yeol-soo, a security specialist at the Korea Institute for Military Affairs, described the shelter as a “significant start” in addressing vulnerabilities to nuclear threats.
“Few fallout shelters for civilians could withstand the mechanical and thermal effects of a nuclear explosion and radioactive fallout,” he said, highlighting the shortcomings of South Korea’s existing 18,000 public emergency shelters – more than 3,000 of them in Seoul – that were largely designed to withstand conventional explosives.
According to the Seoul Shinmun daily, only the underground Chungmu facility beneath City Hall currently offers comparable protection. Some luxury private villas in Gangnam have also attracted attention for having their own bespoke bunkers.
Seoul has been exploring ways to strengthen its protective infrastructure, including the launch of a security forum in 2023, bringing together military and civilian experts.
The city’s mayor, Oh Se-hoon, has made defence a political priority, arguing for the development of more fortifications.
“As the municipality responsible for the lives and safety of 10 million citizens, we will work to fortify the defence posture of Seoul,” he said at the first security forum in 2023.
South Korea ostensibly falls under the US nuclear umbrella, but public scepticism over Washington’s commitment to the country’s defence has grown in recent years.
“It is time to discuss securing the capabilities necessary for nuclear deterrence and reviewing potential nuclear capacities at a level similar to Japan’s,” Oh told reporters at a forum in February.
This is nothing but political theatrics
The project has its detractors, however, who accuse the mayor of exploiting security anxieties for political gain ahead of next year’s local elections, where he is expected to run for another term.
“This is nothing but political theatrics that is feeding on North Korea’s nuclear threats,” said Chang Yong-seok of Seoul National University’s Institute for Peace and Unification Studies.
Others questioned the feasibility of replicating the bunker initiative elsewhere in the densely populated metropolis.
“Politicians should focus on efforts to bring the North back to dialogue to reduce tensions and build sustainable peace instead of feeding on fear for political purposes,” said Yang Moo-jin, head of the University of North Korean Studies.
