North Korea → United States
This score represents North Korea's relationship toward United States. The reverse direction is calculated separately and shown alongside it.
SIX-COMPONENT MODEL
Current component scores
Component values run from −100 to +100 and are combined with the published weights.
3 documented factors produce the -65 security assessment.
Why this score?
- -40Nuclear and missile programs sustain a severe security rivalryBaseline rule · 2015
The official 2015 record identifies North Korea's nuclear and ballistic-missile programs as a direct and continuing security threat opposed by the United States.
- -25Weapons development and Russia cooperation intensify the rivalryActive event · 2025
The official defense assessment records continued nuclear and missile development and expanding Russian support and deployments.
- -0Hanoi summit ends without agreementActive event · 2019
The second summit ended without a sanctions or denuclearization agreement, halting the preceding diplomatic momentum.
3 documented factors produce the -25 diplomacy assessment.
Why this score?
- -15Deep unresolved nuclear and human-rights confrontationBaseline rule · 2015
The parties remained divided by denuclearization, sanctions, proliferation and human-rights disputes with no normalized political relationship.
- -10Weapons development and Russia cooperation intensify the rivalryActive event · 2025
The official defense assessment records continued nuclear and missile development and expanding Russian support and deployments.
- -0.1Hanoi summit ends without agreementActive event · 2019
The second summit ended without a sanctions or denuclearization agreement, halting the preceding diplomatic momentum.
No reviewed evidence met this component’s scoring threshold.
Why this score?
The model starts every component at zero. No documented condition or active event currently changes this one.
Coverage gap: North Korea-reported 2015 trade is unavailable, so no frozen economic baseline rule is activated.
2 documented factors produce the -45 alignment assessment.
Why this score?
- -30United Nations voting alignmentBaseline rule · 2015
A rolling three-year comparison of UN General Assembly votes activates the alignment threshold.
- -15Weapons development and Russia cooperation intensify the rivalryActive event · 2025
The official defense assessment records continued nuclear and missile development and expanding Russian support and deployments.
No reviewed evidence met this component’s scoring threshold.
Why this score?
The model starts every component at zero. No documented condition or active event currently changes this one.
Coverage gap: The reviewed sources establish a strategic security confrontation but not a direct bilateral territorial or boundary dispute under the frozen rubric.
No reviewed evidence met this component’s scoring threshold.
Why this score?
The model starts every component at zero. No documented condition or active event currently changes this one.
Coverage gap: No evidence met the frozen threshold for sustained national-scale societal exchange.
-21 in 2015 → -33 in 2026
The change is generated from sourced events and frozen scoring rules, not retrospective editorial adjustment.
0 points
North Korea → United States and United States → North Korea remain independent assessments.
View the reverse direction →ACTIVE EVIDENCE
Events affecting the current score
Weapons development and Russia cooperation intensify the rivalry
The official defense assessment records continued nuclear and missile development and expanding Russian support and deployments.
Hanoi summit ends without agreement
The second summit ended without a sanctions or denuclearization agreement, halting the preceding diplomatic momentum.
This analytical score is not an objective fact, endorsement or prediction. Confidence reflects evidence coverage, while incomplete or unavailable observations remain explicit. Differences below 5 points are treated as practical ties rather than a meaningful ranking.
Explore the full timeline and sources in the atlas →