North Korea News Podcast by NK News - What South Korea’s presidential candidates are saying about North Korea

Episode Date: May 27, 2025

Just one week remains until South Koreans head to the polls in the snap election to replace impeached President Yoon Suk-yeol, setting up potential changes in how Seoul approaches North Korea, the U.S. alliance and more. NK News Executive Director Jeongmin Kim joins the podcast to unpack where the major and minor candidates stand on […]

Explore the unofficial world of DPRK-inspired apparel at NK News Shop. Dive into a captivating collection of North Korea-themed t-shirts, hoodies and more at the NK News Shop. From the popular Daedonggang beer t-shirts to the adventurous air choreo designs, each and and Hello listeners and welcome to the NK News podcast. I'm your host, Jaco Zwetslu, and this is Tuesday, the 27th of May. I'm joined here in the NK News studio by Jongmin Kim. Jongmin, welcome back on the show. Thanks for having me.

It is exactly one week before the South Korean snap presidential elections. And of course, this is the NK News podcast, we don't do Korea Pro here. So we've got to talk about something with a North Korea flavor. And so let's talk about the different candidates and their pledges or statements about North Korea. Well, to start with, let's start with the officially submitted 10 top pledges. Is that a rule? Does everyone get 10? Is that how it works? Yeah, so NEC asks this mandatory list to fill up by all the candidates that register, officially register as presidential candidates. And these are usually different categories, but sometimes when you are a minor party candidate like

Lee Joon-seok that has a specific focus on a certain area like youth policies, they would sometimes use multiple categories for the same same area. But usually the legacy two major parties, they go for all different categories per section. You can see the priority by how they order things. And it was pretty clear from the start that neither Kim Moon-soo or Lee Jae-myeong, foreign policy or North Korea policy, were the main things. And that used to be a real defining distinguishing factor between the so-called conservative party and the so-called progressive party.

And to now not mention it, it's like, oh, what's the difference now? So that was interesting because they do mention them because it is in their party rule book as well, the general policy guideline, and they do mention the things that are traditionally associated with the conservatives or the progressives, but they both tone down a little bit.

For Kim, PPP candidate, the former labor minister Kim Moon-soo, he did repeat a lot of unit administration era policies, But for Kim, PPP candidate, the former Labor Minister Kim Moon-soo, he did repeat a lot of UN administration era policies, but added to it with a lot of nuclear things. So this is a change from the 2020 to official pledges. UN did mention things like preemptive strike and whatnot, or nuclear weapons related issues later in the years, right?

Preemptive strike was, I think, in his first press conference as a candidate, but it was not really a major thing in the pledge. But Kim Moon-soo focuses on three axes, the kill chain, the air and missile defense and the retaliation and punishment sort of defense strategies in a way that it sounds really much like Giiyun, but he adds using tactical nuclear weapons in Guam, US tactical nuclear weapons just for South Korea protection or a redeployment of tactical nuclear weapons on the peninsula and things like that in the pledges. Can he do that? Those aren't

his nuclear weapons to pledge. That's what I'm saying. So I'm not sure if the US gave him an OK sign for that, but he is saying that he will do that with through consultation with the US and get the permission basically. And he also mentions them as options, right? Like not complete pledges. One interesting thing in Kim Un-soo's one that was not in Yoon's pledge in the past

is updating the mutual defense treaty with the US to include a nuclear attack guarantee, a protection against nuclear attack guarantee so that the US forces will directly attack North Korea if South Korea gets attacked. Wow. Okay. So it sounds like very much a sort of piece through strength, very, very strong deterrence. Some might say a hawkish stance on North Korea. Right, hard line or hawkish. I know that some people don't like that word but it is

pretty hawkish and pretty hard line and he also adds that he wants to build a sky dome which would be like an upgrade of an iron dome. I don't know where that word came from but he does pledge that. I'm thinking of baseball stadium stadium. Yeah me too. Yeah so that is another... It is called the Gochok Skydome. That's the name of the thing right? I think so yeah. So I think that's one of the trends with Lee Jae-myeong and Kim Moon-soo ones. They use big words, big numbers that the root is sort of unclear. So that's Kim Moon-soo. Hold on is there any room for engagement in Kim Moon-soo's stance on North Korea? No, he actually does not say anything generic, like we are open to the idea of dialogue or whatnot. But it's overtly about deterrence.

Beating up defense. Right, and North Korean human rights issues also did not get much mention in Kim Moon-soo's pledges compared to Yoon. Now, when I first met Kim Moon-soo 20 years ago, it was at a North Korean human rights event. I think it was at the National Assembly. So he was very passionate about that back in the day. And he was also very passionate about engagement as well. Although he's now associated as conservative, he used to be Gyeonggi Province governor before Lee Jae-myeong, right?

And so when he was in that province where it has one of the two provinces that has borders in South Korea with North Korea. He used to do a lot of things like peace marathon, engagement related projects that he was pursuing for the sake of the provinces economy sort of, but those are all not in his pledges. So he is rebuilding himself a little bit, which is a trend we see with Lee Jae Myung as well.

Lee Jae Myung's official NEC pledge, the foreign relations, defense and security all just are all merged into one. And North Korea does not get a standalone mention. It's within the general global security framework, which is actually quite similar to UN. Yeah, because it's also kind of recognizing that North Korea is a separate country, right?

If you've got North Korea in with foreign affairs, you're kind of saying we're not really talking about unification right now. So that is I think the undertone that he is going for. He never really say like we are separate countries. He sort of directly said that he won't go down that road because that is against the DP party guidelines basically. But in the NEC version, he does mention things like, he also does not mention Japan. He only mentions four major countries, sort of implies that Japan is included into that. And Lee says that whichever regional powers that South Korea has to deal with, it should be prioritizing national interest, and it should be pragmatic. So he does not pledge anything very, very specific or solid when it comes to foreign

relations. He does not mention foreign wars. He does not mention South Korea's involvement in that. He just mentions that North Korea, when it comes to North Korea, the peninsula denuclearization direction should be what Lee Jae Myung will be sticking to because that is per the previous progressive administration's policies since Kim Dae Joon. should be what Lee Jae Myung will be sticking to because that is per the previous progressive administration's policies since Kim Dae Joon, right? So he reiterates that. But there is not much detail in the NEC version about North Korea itself. Did Lee Jae Myung not say earlier,

separately, not part of the NEC 10 platforms, that he would like to go back to the comprehensive military agreement between North and South Korea and putting that back into play again? C-10 platforms that he would like to go back to the comprehensive military agreement between North and South Korea and putting that back into play again? Oh right that was in the speech and that is I think mentioned slightly but not directly a CMA but sticking to inter-Korean agreements it is in his pledge Kwon Young-guk the Democratic Labor Party the formerly Justice Party candidate is the only person that is directly mentioning 9.19 South-West Military Agreement, CMA.

That we have to restore that. And Kwon also goes into a very, very traditional progressive line of Eurasia Initiative, economic, you know, the one market sort of idea, like economic engagement with North Korea, using the whole peninsula so that the train can sort of idea like economic engagement with North Korea using the whole peninsula so that the train can sort of link South Korea. Oh, that's the Eurasian. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So the Poussin de Paris. Right.

Okay. The Moon era ideas that he pledged that are not in Lise but in Kwan's. So that's interesting. Okay. But after the NEC versions, to be fair, Kim Moon-soo did not have much time to prepare for that because of the party drama. Oh yeah, right, the way that he was in and then he was out and then he was back in again

and so they really had to rush to get those 10 platforms out there. Right, so it's important to not just look at the NEC platforms but also the debates, three debates. Yes. One on economy, then society, then politics. Politics is today actually, Tuesday as we record. So they may go more into North Korea on that. I think so because in politics, it's usually mentioned.

North Korea is mentioned as a constitutional matter. And it's a wedge issue, isn't it? It is. In South Korean politics, you're the source of a lot of num-num culting, the inner intra-South Korea friction. Which Lee Jang-myeong is saying that is counterproductive. He keeps saying that ideology does not matter anymore in this day and age.

After the pragmatists now. Yeah, so he keeps saying that, although Kim Moon-soo and Lee Joon-seok, the reform party candidate and the PPP candidate in the past two debates continue to attack Lee for being pro China and pro North Korea, looking at his past remarks. So it is still there as one of the debate issues.

And Lee did go into more detail this week about the North Korea and Foreign Relations Pledge. Okay. Give us a couple of highlights there. Right. So the National Interest First Pragmatic Foreign Policy is the main policy direction that Lee is going for, which is in line with what he has been saying in the past few months. Interestingly, the US alliance is in the forefront. It is higher up. He mentions that the US alliance should be strong and three-axis system extended

deterrence. He all mentions that. And in the debate- Hang on. This is the same three-axis system that Kim Woon-soo- Kim Woon-soo mentioned. Okay. Getting confused now. Right. But three-axis system, to be fair, it wasn't really a only conservative thing. It used to be, it is one of the cores of South Korea defense mechanism.

No matter who's in the Blue House already. Right, right, but the language differs a little bit, whether you talk about retaliation more or air and missile defense more. So that's kind of different, right? You used to say much more about preemptive strikes, for instance, more kinetic. But Democratic Party used to be more about defense, and that's why Moon administration increased the budget for that, right? So he does mention that, but the way that he mentions extended deterrence is very much in line with what we have seen basically throughout the Biden administration. And just a side mention of that is Kim Moon-soo actually said, attacked Lee with

his defense pledges saying that, oh, I want to retain this option of nuclear latency, tactical nuclear weapons redeployment, we have to go for nuclear balance and so on and so forth. What is your pledge, Lee? And then Lee mentioned all of that that you mentioned Mr. Kim is called extended deterrence. And we already have that and we have NCG, we have consultation mechanisms. So what you're suggesting is not new. Like he wasn't referring to tactical nuclear weapons part,

three axis part. So he included that into his own separate defense pledges, Japan relations, he didn did mention this week. For our listeners there, the Democratic Party has traditionally been quick to get hostile and angry with Japan when Japan does something or says something. Right. And also just a few months ago, Lee Jammong used to say like certain PPP members are like pro-Japan, whatever, and Fukushima, the treated water issue as well last year. But he is basically just repeating what the Moon administration said before, which is two track approach, the past history issue,

which should follow the principles of South Korean national interest and the economic and cultural cooperation should be future oriented. How about military cooperation? He does not directly mention that. But in his past interviews with economists and so on and so forth, he did mention that South Korea has nothing to fear when it comes to military and security cooperation with Japan and also trilateral because South Korea is strong enough. He is using this pride sort of characteristic framing his entire platform, especially coming

after the martial law. China, he also mentions. He says that he will manage it stably. It's very, very generic. This usually is a code word for gray area strategy, ambiguity. They won't take sides. It will follow like China is the biggest trade partner. All that jazz that usually

what Yun used to say and Moon used to say and Nali is saying. So he's not really touching on that too much. And Russia issues as well, he's saying that he will approach it from national interest perspective. So you see the trend, right? I think when it comes to the separate foreign policy and defense pledge, I think the most important thing that stood out to me was the column length that he spent on North Korea policy compared to Moon administration. It's kind of short compared to the past. It's of course longer than the NEC version. He also uses different wordings when it comes to denuclearization in the in the debate and in the NEC version, he says Korean Peninsula denuclearization But now it seems that he is going back and forth like UN administration between North Korea denuclearization Yeah, and he's saying in the NEC version as well. He was going for risk reduction

Approach rather than I will make sure that North Korea denuclearizes by this year. He didn't go for that. And importantly, he mentions OPCON. And all of his foreign relations sort of pledges. Kwon Young-guk, he's not even saying that. That's operational control of the Korean military back to the Korean government from the current combined forces command, which are led by US General. Right. But he's being slight, he's being calculative about that. He is not mentioning time-based or condition-based. He just mentions op-contrast for great.

Maybe we should pursue it. He is leaving it at a very generic level, but it's interesting that he's the only one that mentions that. In the minute or so remaining to us, are there any platforms relating to North Korea in the very, very minor candidates? So Lee Jun-sok, Hwang Gyo-han, the fellow with the interesting name Gu Ju-han. Do they have anything interesting to say about North Korea? Their platforms actually focus a lot on domestic political reforms, namely their thoughts about

election rigging, the claimed election rigging. And so, in linkage to that, North Korea is mentioned as anti-state forces, the threat, deterrence and everything. But it is a usual minor conservative party level. Also, it's interesting this time around that Kwon Young-guk is the only minor progressive candidate. All the others are minor conservative candidates. And are they a little bit more to the right of Kim Moon-soo? Kim Moon-soo is trying to be shown as centrist, right? Lee Joon-seok is trying to be shown as centrist. And all the others, aside from Kwon minor party candidates, they are far more to the right. And so you will see a lot of familiar nature, sort of pledges when it comes to

North Korea, framing North Korea as the primary threat. Right, enemy number one. Okay. Well, so a week from today, we'll have the election and then after that, probably the two episodes from now, we'll know who the next president is and what that policy will be. So stay tuned. Thank you very much, Jong-Win, for coming back on the show. Thanks for having me. Looking to stay informed about South Korea's fast evolving political, business and cultural landscape? Join us on Korea Pro, the go-to resource for in-depth analysis, expertly curated by top-tier professionals.

And now you can pick the membership level that best suits your needs, thanks to our new subscription packages. Starting at just $199 annually, you can access daily analysis and our weekly podcast. Or try our Premium Membership Package, which offers additional perks such as executive briefings, monthly reports and forecasts, networking receptions and event opportunities, as well as much, much more. To find the best fit for you, just head to signup.careerpro.org and become a member today.

Ladies and gentlemen, that brings us to the end of our podcast episode for today. Our thanks go to Brian Betts and Alana Hill for facilitating this episode and to our post-recording producer genius, Gabby Magnuson, who cuts out all the extraneous noises, awkward silences, bodily functions, and fixes the audio levels. Thank you and listen again next time.