Rodong Sinmun Sunday says in a bylined commentary in this regard:

59 years have passed since the conclusion of the AA in the DPRK, but situation far from durable peace has persisted on the Korean Peninsula.

Defusing military tension and ensuring peace on the peninsula are an urgent problem that brooks no further delay from the point of the trend of the times and the demand of the prevailing situation.

If the U.S. authorities are truly interested in the peace and security on the peninsula, there is no reason for them not to conclude peace agreement with the DPRK. The U.S. should hold full responsibility for having made AA something that can neither be adjusted nor revised, and respond to the call for the establishment of peace mechanism to replace it.

The U.S. rulers stated several times that it would not militarily threaten or invade the DPRK, so, there is no reason for it to hesitate concluding the peace treaty.

No one can vouch that there would not be a gunfire on the peninsula again where the state of cease-fire goes on.

A war on the peninsula would not be beneficial to the U.S., either.

The issue of replacing AA with a peace treaty is a touchstone showing whether one stands for peace or war. The U.S. should fulfill what it should do as the direct party responsible for ensuring the peace on the peninsula.