North, South Korean leaders pledge peace, denuclearization but world awaits action to match symbolism

The two most powerful men on the Korean peninsula held hands as they ushered each other across the military demarcation line separating their two countries. They hugged and promised a new era that will place an end to war, replacing a 65-year-old armistice with a more permanent peace agreement. They together signed a declaration that “confirmed the common goal of realizing, through complete denuclearization, a nuclear-free Korean peninsula.”

Kim Jong-un, the North Korean dictator, even called his Friday meeting with South Korean president Moon Jae-in a “heart-pounding” affair. By the time night fell, the two men were standing holding hands watching a slide show of their day, which marked the first time since the Korean War that a Northern leader has set foot on Southern soil.

If solutions to the Korean nuclear crisis lie in friendly sentiment, then the single-day summit undoubtedly delivered. It overflowed with symbolism, images of goodwill and sunny phrases. Mr. Moon agreed to travel to Pyongyang in the fall and the two men appeared to genuinely enjoy each other’s company.

Open this photo in gallery:

But their lengthy discussions on Friday failed to yield specific commitments to dismantle or otherwise limit Pyongyang’s nuclear arsenal and did little to resolve the issues that have made North Korea a target of global concern and economic sanctions.

North Korea’s formal assent to denuclearization marks an important shift for a country whose tests of ever-larger nuclear devices in recent years have created global fears. But Mr. Kim himself avoided discussion of denuclearization, saying only “I hope that we will be able to live very peacefully in the future as soon as possible.”

“We will totally end war on the Korean peninsula,” added Mr. Moon, promising a “new era of peace.”

But it’s unlikely the broad commitment to denuclearization will achieve the relaxation of international pressure that North Korea has sought, nor does it commit Pyongyang to dismantling its nuclear capabilities. Instead, Mr. Kim agreed to language on the nuclear issue little different from that previously used by North Korea, which has historically offered concessions conditional on the removal of U.S. nuclear-security guarantees from South Korea.

“I don’t think the White House will be willing to ease up on sanctions until North Korea pledges to agree to CVID” (complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearization), said Bonnie Glaser, senior adviser for Asia and the director of the China Power Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

However, she said “I’m not very optimistic we will get very far along in this process.”

Mr. Kim and U.S. President Donald Trump are expected to meet in May or June, and the agreement on Friday is “a step toward” their summit and their discussion of denuclearization, said Christopher Green, an expert on North Korea with the Brussels-based International Crisis Group.

“What we have now is a situation where much hinges on the capacity of the United States and North Korea to make progress on that issue during their own talks.”

Mr. Trump, on Twitter, said: “KOREAN WAR TO END! The United States, and all of its GREAT people, should be very proud of what is now taking place in Korea!” In a separate tweet, he added: “Good things are happening, but only time will tell!”

Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Lu Kang congratulated the Korean leaders for the “positive outcomes of the summit,” while calling on them to “maintain the momentum for dialogue and work together to promote the denuclearization of the peninsula.”

In Washington, Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland praised Mr. Moon for doing “hard and difficult diplomatic work,” saying Canada “has always believed that a diplomatic solution is both essential and possible.”

In Japan, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said he welcomed “positive moves,” but called for “concrete action,” saying “I will keep watching North Korea.”

Assembling an arsenal of deadly weaponry has been a time-consuming and expensive effort to guarantee the security of Mr. Kim’s regime, and scholars have expressed doubt that he will give it up.

On Friday, however, he shed some of his image as a secretive tyrant. For 30 extraordinary minutes in the afternoon, he sat across an outdoor table from Mr. Moon on a boardwalk, while reeds swayed behind them in the breeze. Mr. Kim smiled, adjusted his glasses, leaned in and wrinkled his brow in thought. Mr. Moon leaned toward him, gesturing as he spoke. They could have passed for old friends or, given the age difference, father and son.

The entire half-hour was broadcast live on television, silent, save for the sound of birdsong. It was the sort of genuine-looking moment the meticulous stage managers of this summit had sought – a picture of peaceable collaboration they hope will endure and inspire renewed ties between the two countries.

For now, the two Koreas agreed to a Panmunjom declaration – named after the village where the 1953 armistice was signed – containing a series of lesser measures, including a non-aggression agreement that “precludes the use of force in any form against each other,” establishment of a joint communication office, creation of a maritime peace zone “to prevent accidental military clashes” and modernization of roads and railroads along an “eastern transportation corridor.” For families split by the military demarcation line, a reunion event will take place in August.

The most significant measure is a pledge to terminate the Korean War: “Bringing an end to the current unnatural state of armistice and establishing a robust peace regime on the Korean peninsula is a historical mission that must not be delayed any further.” The two countries will pursue talks with the United States, or perhaps the United States and China, they said.

Open this photo in gallery:

But their language was carefully calibrated. It did not, for example, mention a peace treaty.

“What they said was they would terminate the armistice and move onto discussing the peace regime on the Korean peninsula. To be signing a peace treaty – that’s a long-term project,” said Kim Jin-ah, a researcher at the Korea Institute for Defence Analysis.

Indeed, the inventory of commitments largely amounts to “just a wish list,” said Prof. Matthias Maass, an international-studies scholar at Yonsei University in Seoul. “Are these promises that will not be kept? We’ve seen that tactic from North Korea in the 1990s, almost on a weekly basis,” Mr. Maass said. “Or has there been a change in strategy on the part of North Korea?”

Mr. Kim has made a series of concessions this year, including a pledged halt to nuclear and missile tests, as well as shuttering of the mountain used in nuclear testing. But that came with the proviso that the North Korean nuclear program is already “complete.”

Still, if Mr. Kim is intent on seeking change with South Korea, he is in a rare position to do so. Unlike the previous two summits between Korean leaders, this one comes early in the term for the South Korean President, providing time to build a relationship between Pyongyang and Seoul and set in place more difficult objectives.

Unable to discern firm answers from political science, some in South Korea look instead to behavioural analysis for clarity on the future of their peninsula. Sang Min Whang, a renowned local commentator and psychologist who has taught at the country’s top universities, described the meeting between Mr. Kim and Mr. Moon using the term gunghap, which is used to describe marital harmony.

“I think they might have good gunghap,” he said. “It depends on whether they can understand and accept each other’s wants and objectives.”

With files from Adrian Morrow and with reporting by Cynthia Yoo