Is North Korea’s constitutional shift a move towards ‘peaceful coexistence’ with South?

North Korea has removed references to “national reunification” from its constitution and newly defined its territory as land bordering South Korea, a move analysts say may signal Pyongyang’s intent to avoid direct conflict with Seoul. The constitutional overhaul is widely seen as aligning with the North’s evolving stance towards Seoul – shifting away from reunification and towards a more formalised state-to-state relationship. Pyongyang took more than two years to revise the constitution after leader Kim Jong-un declared that inter-Korean ties should be redefined as those between “two hostile states” and ordered the change to be codified. Accordingly, phrases from the previous constitution that emphasised “independence, peaceful reunification, and great national unity” have been deleted, along with a pledge to “struggle to achieve national reunification”. References in the preamble to reunification-related achievements of state founder Kim Il-sung and former leader Kim Jong-il were also removed. Notably, the revised constitution introduces a territorial clause for the first time. Article 2 defines North Korea’s territory as land “bordering the People’s Republic of China and the Russian Federation to the north, and the Republic of Korea to the south, including territorial waters and airspace established on that basis”. The previous wording referring to the “northern half” of the Korean peninsula has been deleted. Analysts say the move effectively codifies Kim’s “two-state” framework, under which North and South Korea are treated as separate and opposing states. The explicit use of South Korea’s official name, the Republic of Korea, in the constitution reinforces that stance. “By removing phrases calling for reunification and limiting its territory to the northern half of the peninsula, North Korea’s new constitution makes clear that the South is no longer an official target for reunification,” Cho Han-bum, a senior research fellow at the Korea Institute for National Unification, told This Week in Asia. The revised document, however, does not incorporate Kim’s January 2024 directive to explicitly label South Korea as a “primary enemy” in constitutional language. Cho said this omission could align with Pyongyang’s decision to send a women’s football team to an international competition in the South later this month – marking the first visit by North Korean athletes to South Korean soil in eight years. “This may signal that, barring provocations from the South, North Korea is prepared to let the two Koreas coexist as separate countries with minimal interaction,” Cho said. “Ironically, this could herald a form of peaceful coexistence.” Yang Moo-jin, a professor at the University of North Korean Studies, said the revision effectively recognised the division of the Korean peninsula: the northern half belonging to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the southern half to the Republic of Korea. “This clearly underscores a policy direction of treating the two Koreas as separate states,” he said. “By removing the reunification clause, the constitution sends a message that neither side should encroach upon the other’s territory.” While the new territorial clause specifies land borders with China, Russia and South Korea, it does not define a precise maritime boundary – an omission experts say may be deliberate. “North Korea’s decision not to delineate specific sea borders likely reflects an effort to maintain ambiguity and avoid triggering disputes,” Yang said. According to Yang, the current land and maritime boundaries are based on the Korean Armistice Agreement, signed by North Korea and China on one side and the US-led United Nations Command on the other. Despite Kim’s earlier rhetoric, elements of “hostility” are not explicitly reflected in the constitution. Analysts say this is not unusual, as few countries formally designate another state as an enemy in their laws due to the risk of diplomatic isolation. Lee Jung-chul, a political-science professor at Seoul National University, said while the new territorial clause reinforced statehood, it avoided explicitly hostile language. The constitution’s title has also been shortened to the “Constitution of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea”, dropping the word “socialist”. Analysts say this may reflect Pyongyang’s effort to present itself as a more conventional state. “North Korea appears to have redesigned its constitution to project the image of a normal state,” Lee said. For Yang, hostility is more likely to be expressed through policy, ideology and education rather than constitutional language. “Therefore, the absence of hostile phrasing should not be interpreted as abandoning the two-state policy,” he said. At the same time, the removal of militant expressions referring to “imperialists” suggests an attempt to soften the country’s image as a pariah state. Structurally, the document has been reorganised along lines similar to other constitutions, beginning with provisions on the state’s name, territory and citizens. The amendments also significantly strengthen the authority of the country’s top leader. For the first time, the chairman of the State Affairs Commission – currently Kim Jong-un – is listed ahead of the Supreme People’s Assembly and formally defined as the “head of state”. The constitution also defines the chairman of the State Affairs Commission as the “head of state” (Article 86), replacing the previous title of “supreme leader”, thereby granting him representativeness of the state. A new clause also grants the chairman explicit command authority over North Korea’s nuclear forces. Article 89 states that control over the nuclear arsenal rests with the chairman, who may delegate launch authority to a designated command body – marking the first time such powers have been codified. “Under the new constitution, Chairman Kim’s authority has been significantly strengthened,” Lee said. The ideological framework has also shifted. References to “Kimilsungism-Kimjongilism” have been replaced in the preamble with the “people-first principle”, the governing philosophy promoted by Kim Jong-un.

Is North Korea’s constitutional shift a move towards ‘peaceful coexistence’ with South?

.css-1c6uqr6{color:inherit;font-weight:inherit;font-size:inherit;font-family:inherit;line-height:inherit;overflow-wrap:break-word;}Pyongyang has dropped references to ‘national reunification’ and redefined borders in its revised constitution

Pyongyang has dropped references to ‘national reunification’ and redefined borders in its revised constitution