Yoon Suk Yeol, the president of South Korea, addressed the UK parliament only a year ago with a speech praising the nation as the birth of liberal democracy. He vowed that South Korea may work with the UK to advance freedom, peace, and success for the world community.
Yoon reportedly turned around this week and called for an end to the country’s support for democracy. In a televised address to the nation, he claimed there was a need to protect the country from” brazen, pro-North Asian, anti-state” forces. He added that South Korea needs to “rebuild and guard it from “falling into ruin.”
Within a few hours, Yoon’s determination was swiftly and decisively reversed by politicians inside the National Assembly room and by residents in the roads outside. South Korea’s politics at labor was clearly demonstrated.
It served as a reminder that this is a really unique Korea from the one that emerged from the hand of prolonged military dictators and numerous enactments of martial law in the late 1980s.
Members of the National Assembly, some of whom had climbed fences and pushed past martial walls to get into the room, voted overwhelmingly against Yoon’s dramatic order, declaring it unlawful. Yoon’s individual People Power party members claimed that he had gone very far. After the ballot, politicians sat outside the National Assembly tower and firmly and politely criticized the constitutionality of the phone for martial law.
Since becoming a lame duck leader in April of this year’s legislative elections, Yoon has faced growing hardships since winning the opposition’s flood victory. Having just won the presidency in 2022 by a small percentage, Yoon’s approval score had been weakened by frequent crises.
Public opinion surveys revealed that six out of ten South Koreans believed their republic was on a downward trend within Yoon’s first time. By 2024, Yoon had successfully pushed through unpopular policies like Japan’s maximum working days and international policy. Just 32.7 % of South Koreans reported being satisfied with the caliber of their democracy as a result of this.
Yoon has attracted the ire of the people by using his presidential filibuster to obstruct legislation being passed by the opposition since losing command of the National Assembly, more frequently than any other president since democratization. Additionally, Yoon vetoed separate inquiries into his wife’s alleged involvement with election candidate rigging, share manipulation, and other alleged ties to accepting lavish gifts.
The majority opposition’s efforts this week, which falls outside the purview of a political veto, were likely the breaking point.
Yoon resorted to a theme not well known to some on the straight of Korean politics after failing to get his way on the finances. He blatantly accused the liberal opposition of conspiring with North Korea to destroy his leadership.
These are dangerous says, with no foundation in modern North Korean politics. Similar allegations of North Korean involvement in southern private affairs in the 1980s led to the military massacre of residents in Gwangju, a city in the south. The protesters had been calling for Chun Doo-hwan’s then-president to abolish military rules.
Faith in politics
Although the South Korean public frequently harbors concerns about political backsliding, despite the fact that dictatorship is firmly established in the country’s past.
In 2017 thousands of protest took to the streets, later ousting the then-president, Park Geun-hye, following allegations of corruption and restrictions on freedom of conversation. Especially unhappy was her administration’s decision to blacklist hundreds of designers and performers from receiving political money.
Despite these instances, 80 % of South Koreans now claim to be proud of the efforts made by political movements to institutional advancement. It demonstrates South Korea’s belief in the people’s capacity to hold their officials accountable.
People of Yoon’s inner group must have known what was going to happen, even though Yoon’s unique party president quickly condemned his steps. In light of the immediate mass reaction, rumors are rife that those who supported the decision are miserably out of touch with the public.
It is likely that Yoon has has made his own destruction by calling for military rules in a very different Korea of the twenty-first century. By using such a drastic measure, he was putting himself at risk for both South Korea’s and the region’s economic and political balance.
Had the circumstance persisted, a state of martial law would have wreaked havoc on hard-won progress in Korea’s interest as a page of foreign investment, high-tech business collaboration, tourism and popular culture.
In the days and weeks ahead, Yoon will have many things to answer for, and the progressive opposition has already started the process. His political career is unlikely to survive the repercussions of this grave error of judgment.
Sarah A Son is senior lecturer in Korean Studies, University of Sheffield
This article was republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.