Victor Cha said the United States must adopt a "cold peace" strategy to manage the threat posed by North Korea [1].
This shift in approach suggests that the U.S. should abandon its long-standing goal of complete denuclearization, which has failed to prevent the regime from expanding its nuclear capabilities.
Cha, the Korea Chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), said that the traditional framework for dealing with the hermit kingdom is no longer viable. He said that denuclearizing has not worked after three decades and seven presidential administrations [1].
According to Cha, the persistence of this failed policy has actually allowed the North Korean arsenal to grow [2]. He said the regime is one of the most challenging intelligence targets in the world [3].
During a CSIS Capital Cable event in Washington, D.C., Cha said a cold peace is the most realistic path forward for U.S.–North Korea relations [1]. This strategy focuses on containment and stability rather than the pursuit of a total disarmament that has remained elusive since the 1990s.
The proposal comes as the U.S. continues to struggle with monitoring North Korean military advancements. Cha said that the difficulty of gathering intelligence on the regime makes the current approach ineffective [3].
He said that the U.S. needs a new framework to manage the risk of escalation while acknowledging the reality of North Korea's nuclear status [2]. By shifting to a cold peace, the U.S. would prioritize risk mitigation over the unlikely prospect of immediate disarmament [1].
“Denuclearizing ... has not worked after three decades and seven presidential administrations.”
The proposal for a 'cold peace' represents a fundamental pivot from the 'complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization' (CVID) policy that has guided U.S. diplomacy for years. By suggesting the U.S. accept North Korea as a nuclear state to be managed rather than a problem to be solved, Cha is advocating for a strategy of containment similar to the Cold War era, prioritizing regional stability over the high-risk pursuit of disarmament.
