Is it acceptable to omit the main clause in 只要～ phrase? Is the following sentence over 人民網:

朝鲜最高领导人金正恩在20日举行的劳动党中央委员会第七届第三次全体会议上宣布，朝鲜将从21日开始，不再进行任何核试验和洲际弹道导弹发射，废弃朝鲜北部核试验场。只要朝鲜不受核威胁挑衅，朝鲜绝对不使用核武器，不泄露核武器和核技术。

When you use 只要～, it needs a main clause, which includes either 就 or 便. But this sentence does not carry such words.
So I wonder why it does not have. Is it grammatically correct to omit it, and how can I know what it would mean in the main clause? There would not be any one-fit-for-all clause here, as I came up with multiple main clauses (correct me if something is wrong in the comment). For example:

中国政府就支持朝鲜的恒久发展。
亚洲和世界全体的和平就实现了。

etc...
Ah. I think the tone matters here ( from MY own perspective).
When we read 只要……就 sentence, you may perceive that the stress is on 只要…… part. We are emphasizing the condition and 就 part is not as strong as the condition （就 weakened the tone）.
However, here Kim Jong-un is making a  vow that North Korea will NEVER USE NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND ......, unless she is threatened by nuclear annihilation (this is more like a supplementary condition). So 就 is supposed to be omitted to enhance the momentum.
PS. You may let a native read the sentences with and without 就 for you and try to feel the subtle difference.
试比较：

只要你不在此捣乱，我（就）决不撵你出去。( There could be a 就，but I prefer not.)
只要你不在此捣乱，我就不会撵你出去。