Enemy doesn't mean we have to be at war....Russia is our enemy, so is iran... we don't have to be at war. You can still trade and talk to your enemies...
Your reckless use, of the term "enemy", clearly reveals your lack of understanding of international relations. As Ren tried to educate you, the diplomatic status between any two nations, at any given time, is either in a state-of-peace or in a state-of-war. Since there is no in-between, there can be no official "enemies", during a state-of-peace. For example, you typically can't do business or take a vacation in a so-called "enemy nation", during a time-of-war.
Currently, the diplomatic relations between the US empire, Russia, China, and Iran are all in a state-of-peace. Hence, being "strategic competitors", as Ren pointed out, is a very accurate way to describe the legal relationship, among those nations. In the case of the DPRK and the ROK, they are still in a state of war, since there was no peace treaty, to officially end the Korean War, that started in the last century. Hence, it would be legally accurate to say the DPRK and the ROK are still official "enemies" of each other.
Consequently, when politicians throw out the term "enemies" or "cold war", during a state-of-peace, that is their common propagandistic way to sway the masses to go to war, with the demonized nation, that may not necessarily be in the best interests, of its own people.