North Korea’s state media is playing down Kim Jong-un’s pledge to pursue denuclearisation, made at a summit with South Korea, raising the stakes for Donald Trump’s upcoming talks with the young leader.

Eliminating the nuclear weapons that North Korea claims could hit US cities is Washington’s core objective in talks with Pyongyang. It wants a process that is “complete, verifiable and irreversible”.

Experts, however, have long warned that Kim is unlikely to give up missiles and warheads that have taken decades of work to build, particularly when they are the very reason the US president is coming to the negotiating table.

Q&A What are the possible outcomes of the Korea summit? Show Hide While North Korea has repeatedly signalled it is willing to give up its nuclear weapons, the conditions for that to happen may be too high a price to pay for the US and its allies. “The worst case scenario is learning the North Korean definition of denuclearization is untenable with international community’s expectations,” says Jenny Town, the assistant director of the US-Korea Institute at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. “When they think of denuclearization, they think it will come about over decades.” “It’s also dependent on having good relations with the US, and North Korea has seen the US pull out of many international agreements, so they won’t trust a simple promise, they want to build trust over time.” Kim is acutely aware of the fate of Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi, who gave up his weapons programmes only to have European and US forces bomb the country during an uprising against him. Other possibilities include a meeting relatively light on substance, focused on building goodwill between both sides and positive photo opportunities instead of touching on issues that could cause conflict. There is little chance of a concrete agreement of any kind resulting from the summit. Beginning negotiations with a meeting between the two leaders, before any details have been hammered out, is always risky. The meeting will likely be followed by months, if not years, of negotiations at the lower levels before anything is signed. Read a full explainer on the Korea summit here

“It would be extremely strange – by basically any theory of human or political behaviour – for Kim to give up a deterrent right after attaining it,” said Alex Wellerstein, a historian of science and nuclear weapons. “Nothing is impossible, but it would be very unexpected, the strangest possible outcome.”

North Korea’s state media only published details of the historic summit with South Korea on Saturday, the day after the rest of the world watched the meeting unfold on live television.

State TV’s semi-retired anchor Ri Chun Hee, who has announced most major news in the isolated state for decades, returned to the nation’s screens to report on the talks with the South Korean president, Moon Jae-in.

The meeting also filled a number of pages of the Saturday edition of the official Rodong Sinmun newspaper, including dozens of photos.

Among the images of the leaders, their wives and the summit site, the text focused mostly on promises to try to bring lasting peace to the peninsula, rather than the goal of getting rid of nuclear weapons.

“The emphasis is all on peace, the nation, dialogue and unification. Denuclearization is a small side issue,” wrote Peter Ward, a north Korea watcher based in Seoul, wrote in a detailed analysis of coverage in Pyongyang’s paper of record on Twitter.

The Rodong Sinmun reproduced the two leaders’ joint declaration in full, which mentioned denuclearisation.

It did not specify any details, however, and the newspaper did not otherwise touch on the issue, despite Trump’s repeated insistence that destroying North Korea’s nuclear capacity lies at the heart of US concerns.

After months of sabre rattling, many in Seoul and further afield saw the talks as a welcome move to reduce tensions and the risk of miscalculations.

North Korea, however, has a history of seeking rapprochement with the south, brokering deals to limit its nuclear ambitions in return for aid or other support – and then breaking them.

Q&A What's the history of conflict between North and South Korea? Show Hide North and South Korea have been divided since the end of the Korean War (1950-53), and except for about a decade ending in 2008, relations between the two have remained frosty. The two nations technically remain in a state of war, since a peace treaty was never signed. There have been occasional outbreaks of violence, most recently in 2010 when 50 people were killed when a South Korean navy corvette was sunk and several islands close to the border were attacked. This meeting could touch on a formal truce but this is also not the first time North Korea has expressed a willingness to abandon its nuclear ambitions. A deal with the US, Japan and South Korea in the 1990s was meant to give the North civilian nuclear power without the ability to build a weapon, but the reactor was never finished. North Korea pledged to relinquish its nuclear programme in 2007 in exchange for sanctions relief and fuel, but later pulled out of that agreement and expelled inspectors in 2009. Read a full explainer on the Korea summit here

“Glad to see North and South Korea making what appear to be earnest efforts to reduce tensions and short-term possibility of war,” Wellerstein said. “But let us not forget history: DPRK strategy has long been one of oscillation between good and bad relations with regard to the Republic of Korea [South Korea].”

Trump has warned that Washington will not be “played” by Kim, and that he will keep up a campaign of maximum pressure until the nuclear weapons are gone. If the two sides are unable reach a deal he will walk out of any summit, he has said.

North Korea has its red lines too. The fate of leaders such as Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi, who gave up illegal weapons programmes and were then toppled by the west or western-backed movements, is well known in Pyongyang, and likely to add to Kim’s reluctance to abandon the country’s nuclear project.

“It is still unclear whether North Korea still believes that it can have its cake and eat it too,” said Victor Cha, who until January was in the running to become US ambassador to South Korea.

The meeting had positive atmospherics but did not clarify whether Kim was genuinely considering giving up his nuclear weapons or just hoped to freeze programmes in return for sanctions relief and aid, he told the Associated Press.