Korea-US joint fact sheet delayed amid final wording adjustments on security issues

President Lee Jae Myung welcomes U.S. President Donald Trump ahead of a special state dinner hosted by the Korean president at the Hilton Hotel in Gyeongju, North Gyeongsang Province, Oct. 29. Yonhap

Final adjustments to the joint fact sheet summarizing recent Korea-U.S. summit talks and related negotiations on tariffs and security are taking longer than expected, mainly due to ongoing “language coordination” in the security section, Seoul officials said Friday.

A senior presidential official told reporters that the release of the document, which had been expected this week, has been delayed amid continued fine-tuning of the text.

According to the official, the document comprises two major parts regarding security and tariffs, with a near-complete draft being prepared. However, “recently, on the U.S. side, there has been an additional interagency review process required by their system, during which some departments requested further input, and that review process has caused some delays," the official said.

“In particular, we needed to incorporate new security-related discussions raised during the Gyeongju summit,” the official added, referring to the bilateral talks between President Lee Jae Myung and U.S. President Donald Trump in Gyeongju, North Gyeongsang Province, in late October on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation meetings.

He noted that, given the evolving situation, it remains difficult to predict when the joint fact sheet will be finalized.

“The situation continues to change, so we cannot say for certain when it will be completed,” the official said. “Nonetheless, we intend to maintain a consistent stance and continue consultations with patience to ensure that our position is fully reflected.”

Defense Minister, Ahn Gyu-back, meanwhile, announced Sunday that the joint fact sheet's release was imminent, citing U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s pledge to aggressively push its release.

Addressing speculation that the upcoming Korea-U.S. fact sheet could be invalidated or subject to renegotiation if the U.S. Supreme Court rules the Trump administration’s tariff policies unconstitutional, the presidential official downplayed such concerns.

“I don’t think it will go that far,” the official said. “It’s unlikely the administration would be rendered powerless by such a ruling, and even if that happens, it wouldn’t automatically nullify the agreement.”

The official also addressed the topic of Korea developing a nuclear-powered submarine. After the summit, Trump approved the development and said the submarine would be built at Hanwha Philly Shipyard in Philadelphia, which is owned by Korea's Hanwha Ocean. Under the current bilateral nuclear agreement, Korea is prohibited from enriching uranium or reprocessing spent fuel for military purposes without Washington's consent.

According to the official, throughout the two presidents’ summit talks, it was assumed that Korea would build the submarine hulls and install domestically developed reactors, while the U.S. would supply the nuclear fuel — a different stance from Trump's statement that the submarines would be constructed in Philadelphia.

“From the beginning to the end of the discussions, the premise was that the submarines would be built in Korea,” the official said. “President Lee also made it clear that we would construct them here. The idea of building them in the U.S. emerged later, which caused some confusion, but during the leaders’ talks, we discussed building them in Korea.”

The official added that Korea aims to develop submarines tailored to its own security needs and maritime environment, rather than adopting the U.S. Virginia-class design.

“We must build a model that offers the best balance between cost and effectiveness, considering Korea’s defense requirements and the geography of our waters,” the official said. “In the case of nuclear-powered submarines, the reactor type determines the level of uranium enrichment. Some use lower-enriched fuel, while the Virginia-class submarines use 90 percent enriched uranium for attack missions. Such capabilities are unnecessary for us and extremely expensive — roughly twice the cost of what we envision.”

The official further clarified that highly enriched uranium would not be required for Korea’s reactors, adding that the country plans to receive nuclear fuel of an appropriate enrichment level from the U.S.