US President Donald Trump should negotiate a freeze on North Korea's nuclear production as well as its nuclear and missile testing, even though completely ending the program should be the goal, the New York Times said Monday.

The paper made the case in an editorial, arguing that "only a new round of engagement, backed by tougher sanctions, may hold any promise" and warning that the North now possesses the fuel for perhaps as many as 21 nuclear weapons and is steadily building its ability to deliver them with missiles

"Mr. Trump fancies himself a dealmaker. If he takes the time to consult the experts and approach the issue with discipline, he might have a chance at a negotiated solution in which the North could be offered inducements like the lifting of sanctions, economic assistance and a permanent peace treaty to replace the Korean War armistice," the editorial said.

"Ending the North's nuclear program needs to be the goal, but realistically what's potentially attainable is a freeze on nuclear fuel production and on missile and nuclear testing. Time is not on Mr. Trump's side," it said.

The editorial reflects growing calls in the US for stopping the communist nation from further bolstering its nuclear and missile arsenal, as the regime has significantly accelerated its nuclear development with two nuclear tests last year.

In October, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper also said that denuclearizing North Korea "is probably a lost cause" and the best possible solution to the North Korean nuclear issue may be "some sort of a cap" on the regime's nuclear capabilities.

But many experts, including former State Department diplomat David Straub, say the US should never settle for a freeze because it would amount to accepting the North as a nuclear weapons state and undermine the global nonproliferation regime.

Even if the North agrees to a freeze, the regime would still be running its nuclear and missile programs at undeclared facilities while rejecting full verification by outside experts, Straub said.

Past nuclear deals with the North were all about freezing the program, but all failed, he said.

Robert Gallucci, who negotiated the 1994 nuclear freeze deal with Pyongyang, also told a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing earlier this month that the US should not seek anything short of North Korea's complete denuclearization, saying a freeze is "unrealistic and dangerous."

Entering into negotiations with the North without the US declaring its goal of a non-nuclear North Korea would "appear to have the United States legitimize the North's nuclear weapons status, and thus increase the likelihood that before too long South Korea and then Japan would follow suit," Gallucci said. (Yonhap)