The U.S. has no justification to oppose the DPRK's reasonable proposal for a peace treaty, Rodong Sinmun says, and goes on:

It is the principle of international law and international practice for the warring sides to take measures for putting an end to their hostile relations and normalizing the ties when ceasefire is effected.

The DPRK has consistently made every possible effort for denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula since the U.S. began introducing nuclear weapons into south Korea. However, the U.S. has openly challenged the DPRK's efforts for the denuclearization.

The DPRK and the U.S. are technically at war on the Korean Peninsula. It is sheer sophism that the U.S. occupying the half of the peninsula does not threaten the other side while staging saber-rattling.

In a word, the U.S. stand is to regard the DPRK as a belligerent party and enemy without concluding any peace treaty with it.

This cannot be interpreted otherwise than an intention to keep the state of ceasefire and finally carry out the scenario for invading the DPRK if an opportunity presents itself.

It is a great mistake for the U.S. to regard the DPRK's proposal for concluding a peace treaty as a gimmick or tactics to get a concession.

The U.S. should respond to the DPRK's just proposal for a peace treaty without delay.

Minju Joson in an article urges the U.S. to bear in mind that shaping a new policy for the Korean Peninsula, away from its old conception for confrontation, is good for itself.