According to the new US National Defense Strategy, the United States places primary responsibility for “deterring” North Korea on the Republic of Korea.

A Brief Overview of the Strategy

This is a continuation of the doctrine in which the US understands that its resources and capabilities are grand but not infinite. Therefore, it must first set its own house in order, or at least establish order in the Western Hemisphere. Afterwards, it can return better prepared for the upcoming struggle for global leadership.

Korea’s Place in the New Document

As it was in the 2022 version of the National Security Strategy published by the White House in December 2025, the 2026 NDS does not mention the denuclearisation of North Korea. In general, only a couple of paragraphs with trivial content were dedicated to North Korea. “The DPRK poses a direct military threat to the Republic of Korea (ROK) as well as to Japan, both of which are U.S. treaty allies. Although many of North Korea’s large conventional forces are aged or poorly maintained, South Korea must stay vigilant against the threat of a North Korean invasion.” “North Korea’s missile forces are also capable of striking targets in the ROK and Japan with conventional and nuclear weapons as well as other weapons of mass destruction… These forces are growing in size and sophistication, and they present a clear and present danger of nuclear attack on the American homeland.”

The main point regarding the ROK in the strategy boils down to the following: “With its powerful military, supported by high defense spending, a robust defense industry, and mandatory conscription, South Korea is capable of taking primary responsibility for deterring North Korea with critical but more limited U.S. support.” Such a position aligns with America’s interests in “modernising” the US armed forces on the Korean Peninsula.

What does the phrase “critical but more limited support” mean? According to analysts, it signifies America’s commitment to using its nuclear weapons under the framework of “extended deterrence” against North Korea, taking into account the ROK’s superiority in conventional weapons. The term “extended deterrence” per se is absent from the text, which is a concern for conservatives. In last........

© New Eastern Outlook