North Korea has removed references to reunifying with the south of the Korean peninsula, signaling the latest push by the secretive state for a more hostile policy toward Seoul, experts believe.

“In North Korea’s eyes, the two Koreas are now no longer part of the same ‘Korea’—and this perception is now permanent,” Edward Howell, University of Oxford international relations lecturer, told Newsweek, who added the news only reinforces North Korean rhetoric that South Korea is the North’s principal foe and “most hostile” adversary.

North Korea’s constitution had claimed authority over the entire Korean Peninsula, as did South Korea’s own constitutional claim, and reunification was Pyongyang’s stated goal for decades.

But a clause calling for the “reunification of the motherland” that North Korea sought no longer appears in the latest version of the constitution, according to South Korean news outlet Yonhap.

What Did North Korea Change In Its Constitution?

The revision marks the first time North Korea has added a territorial clause to its constitution, according to Reuters, which said that it is believed to have been adopted at a meeting of the country’s legislature, the Supreme People’s Assembly, in March.

However, the removal of reunification from the North Korean constitution has been long-expected, said Howell, international relations lecturer at the University of Oxford, and author of the forthcoming book: ‘A New Axis of Upheaval: North Korea, Russia, China, Iran.”

The new Article 2 of the constitution says North Korea’s territory includes land bordering China and Russia to the north and “the Republic of Korea to the south,” as well as territorial waters and airspace based on that land, according to the text.

The clause also says North Korea “will never tolerate any infringement” of its territory, but does not specify where its border with South Korea lies nor mention disputed maritime boundaries such as the Northern Limit Line in the Yellow Sea.

According to Howell, the revised constitution has seen a somewhat clear delineation of North Korea, although “the precise location of the border between North and South Korea—on land and maritime—is undefined, which leaves open the possibility for North Korean provocations.”

The revised constitution designates Kim Jong Un as chairman of the State Affairs Commission, North Korea’s head of state, replacing previous ‌terms that listed the supreme leader as representing the state.

It also says command over North Korea’s nuclear forces rests with Kim, while a defense clause describes North Korea as a “responsible nuclear weapons state,” adding it will advance nuclear weapons development ⁠to safeguard the country’s survival.

“It is unsurprising that Kim Jong Un’s position as having command of North Korea’s nuclear forces has been consolidated, together with reference to North Korea’s self-declared status as a ‘responsible nuclear weapons state,’” added Howell.

Hazel Smith, professorial research associate in Korean Studies at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London, said it was significant that the constitutional change mentions South Korea in full, recognizing that it exists in international law. “Since 1953, there’s been an international recognition of two separate states, the DPRK and the Republic of Korea,” she told Newsweek, “and that’s what North Korea has formalized just now in its constitution.”

“This is a normalization and giving up on any hope that there could be a gradual unification,” she added.

What North Korea’s New Constitution Means for the U.S.

The constitutional revision comes as Pyongyang’s policy toward Seoul has become more hostile in recent years, rejecting repeated calls for dialogue from South Korean President Lee Jae Myung.

After the armistice that ended the Korean War in 1953, By codifying a permanent two‑state framework, Pyongyang is signaling it no longer sees integration, negotiation or reconciliation with the South as either desirable or inevitable.

For the United States, the shift by Pyongyang raises questions over whether it narrows the scope for engagement and makes any future agreement—whether on arms control, sanctions relief or crisis management—more transactional and potentially more fragile. It could also have regional implications for U.S. alliances, with Japan and South Korea relying on U.S. security guarantees based on preventing war and managing eventual peace.

The revised constitution strengthens Kim’s authority over North Korea’s nuclear arsenal by explicitly placing command powers in his hands. This reinforces Washington’s view of Pyongyang as a permanent nuclear state, rather than a provisional one negotiating toward denuclearization.

Smith said that the U.S. negotiations with North Korea since at least the end of the Cold War have focused on Pyongyang’s nuclear program and human rights rather than unification, which is seen as an issue between the North and the South.

“The Trump administration has been less concerned about the issue of formal recognition of the DPRK as a nuclear state or not and more concerned with having some sort of agreement where it could roll back North Korea’s nuclear ambitions,” said Smith.

However, North Korea’s legal definition of South Korea as a separate state—rather than part of a divided nation—may have its benefits. “The fact that North Korea has now recognized South Korea as a separate state in some ways makes negotiations, were they ever to take place, easier because states prefer to negotiate with other states,” said Smith.

“What’s interesting is that South Korea hasn’t changed its approach in terms of formal recognition that there are two separate states on the Korean Peninsula, whereas North Korea has.”