SEOUL — North Korea rebuffed President Trump's apparent bid to reengage with Pyongyang diplomatically this week, issuing rhetorical salvos aimed at Trump's last-minute orders to shorten U.S.-South Korea joint military exercises.
To reinforce its point, the North followed up Thursday with a barrage of about a dozen short-range ballistic missiles launched from around the capital, Pyongyang, eastward toward the sea, according to South Korea's Joint Chiefs of Staff.
The U.S. and South Korean militaries wrapped up their annual drills six days earlier than initially scheduled on Friday in a conciliatory gesture toward North Korea, though the North suggested the step isn't enough to convince it to return to talks.
In a statement carried by state media, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un's sister Kim Yo Jong said Pyongyang regards the scaling back of the annual exercises as "unworthy of comment," nor does it change, she added, the drills' "provocative and offensive" nature.
President Trump posted on social media on Monday that he had ordered the drills shortened because he thinks they are costly and send a hostile message to North Korea. He later said that he had reached out to Kim for a meeting and received a positive response.
Pyongyang "raises the price" of reengagement
Kim Yo Jong, however, dismissed what appeared to be Trump's latest overture. Responding to Trump's claim that he had been in contact with her brother, Kim said, "I am not aware of it at all."
But she acknowledged that while U.S. policies toward North Korea remain hostile, "the relationship between the two leaders is still excellent."
The implication of Kim's sister's message is that she is "raising the price of reengagement, rather than closing the door to a summit" between Trump and her brother, says Kuyoun Chung, a political scientist at Kangwon National University.
Since Trump's return to the White House last year, Pyongyang has repeatedly demanded recognition of its nuclear power status as a condition for resuming diplomacy. Washington has so far been unwilling to do so, because it would negate its long-standing policy of seeking the North's denuclearization, as well as U.N. Security Council resolutions.
As North Korea's nuclear programs have advanced, pressure on them to denuclearize has weakened. Seoul's policy is shifting from demanding denuclearization to seeking arms control, and calls in Washington for a similar approach have gained traction.
While Kim may see little point in meeting Trump, "it is entirely possible, in my view, that there could be a pro forma meeting, in which the two sides shake hands, sit down, have a nice chat, agree to discuss again," and go home, says Joseph Yun, who stepped down as acting ambassador to South Korea last October.
South Korea fears being sidelined again
During the first Trump administration, South Korean mediation paved the way for three Trump-Kim summits in 2018 and 2019. After the last summit failed to produce a deal, Kim bitterly accused Trump of playing him for an "idiot."
That led to a landmark shift in North Korea's foreign policy, which has strengthened Kim's position. In 2023, North Korea formally abandoned the goal of reunifying with South Korea. Kim also signed a mutual defense pact with Russia and revived ties with China, all but ruling out any role for South Korea as mediator.
Officially, South Korea said it hoped Trump's outreach would lead to renewed diplomatic engagement with North Korea.
But South Koreans have been shocked by this week's events, which have heightened their fears of being sidelined during a Trump-Kim summit. They fear that in order to seal a deal with Kim, Trump could withdraw U.S. troops from South Korea and lift economic sanctions on the North, while leaving their nuclear arms in place.
"The United States would simply reap the diplomatic benefits of the summit," Kuyoun Chung says, "while South Korea bears all the security consequences of the concessions to North Korea."
This week, South Korea sought China's help with North Korea. Visiting Foreign Minister Wang Yi pledged that China would continue to promote "peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula."
But asked whether China could help broker a summit between the U.S. and North Korea, Wang said the two countries should handle that themselves, and the U.S. should drop its hostile policies toward the North.
Transactional approach risks "eroding political trust"
Trump's curtailing of the military drills has fueled South Korea's unease about the future of the alliance with the U.S.
South Korean Foreign Minister Cho Hyun told lawmakers on Wednesday he'd do his best "to make sure the South Korea-U.S. alliance does not weaken" as the U.S. pursues dialogue with Pyongyang. Cho admitted that Seoul was caught off guard by Trump's orders.
But for Trump, Seoul has fallen short on his demands. In the same social media post on Monday, Trump also complained that South Korea had declined his request to join the U.S. in its operations against Iran.
Cho Hyun said Wednesday that Trump's order to shorten drills was intended in part to pressure South Korea to speed up its investment of $350 billion in the U.S., in exchange for lower tariffs.
The administrations of President Trump and South Korean President Lee Jae Myung "actually share several broad objectives," notes Yu Jihoon, a research fellow at the Korea Institute for Defense Analyses, a government think tank. They include restarting diplomacy with North Korea and increasing South Korea's responsibility for defending itself.
Where they differ is Trump's transactional approach.
"If South Koreans begin to believe that security commitments or military exercises can be used as leverage over unrelated issues such as Iran, investment, trade, or broader foreign policy disagreements," Yu says, "confidence in Washington's reliability could weaken."
Yu does not believe the South Korea-U.S. alliance is about to implode right away. "The greater risk is the gradual erosion of political trust," he says.
That erosion appears to be well underway. In a recent poll by the Joongang Daily newspaper and the East Asia Institute, 45.4% of respondents see the U.S. as a trustworthy partner, while 46% see it as untrustworthy.
And of the 43.6% of respondents who have a negative impression of the U.S., three-quarters attribute it to what they see as the United States' coercive behavior toward allies on issues including trade, investment and defense.
Copyright 2026 NPR
