The resilience of South Korea’s democracy remains in doubt

Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free

Your guide to what the 2024 US election means for Washington and the world

The writer is president of the Geopolitics Department at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, professor at Georgetown University, and author of ‘Korea: A New History of South and North’

When President Joe Biden worries about Korea, his thoughts usually centre on North Korean leader Kim Jong Un’s unpredictability, brandishing of nuclear weapons and deployment of troops to support Vladimir Putin’s war in Ukraine. Yet this week’s political chaos in South Korea has raised the concern that a key US partner on Indo-Pacific strategy, semiconductor supply chains and combating Russia’s assault on Ukraine might become the latest victim of democratic backsliding.

President Yoon Suk Yeol’s declaration of martial law harkened back to the days of Korean military dictators almost half a century ago. His actions have opened up a protracted period of political instability in South Korea at a most inopportune time, with threats mounting from China, North Korea and Russia. The only identifiable outcome at this point is the removal of the incumbent president but the time and manner of this process could come at a high economic and political cost for Korea, the US and the world.

The dynamics of the political crisis in Korea should not appear unfamiliar to the west. Polarisation, the demonisation of democratic rivals and the weaponisation of government instruments drove the ruling and opposition parties into a headlong crisis. The groundwork was laid in April with the opposition party’s wresting control of the unicameral 300-seat legislature in national elections. Since then, the Democratic party has blocked legislation by the president and held up the national budget.

In addition, a political knife fight has raged along partisan lines. Government-affiliated prosecutors have gone after the head of the opposition party on charges of corruption, and anti-government elements demonised the president’s wife for extravagant taste in designer handbags and questionable gift hoarding. Political rumour mills on the streets of Seoul spoke of major street demonstrations in December against the government. It was a powder keg waiting to explode, and the ignition came with Yoon’s surprise decision to decree martial law on the evening of December 3.

This is not the first time that South Korea has seen political crises, but these have often ended in ways that reaffirmed the country’s democratic mettle. For example, in 2016, peaceful street protests began every weekend by business professionals, families, labourers and students and led to the impeachment of president Park Geun-hye the next year, followed by a constitutionally mandated, extraordinary election that was carried out flawlessly.

In 2022, Yoon was elected president by a narrower margin of victory margin, than Joe Biden in 2020. But no one claimed election fraud or ballot box stuffing, and no one stormed the capital as in Washington in January 2021. The loser conceded defeat within hours of the final count and congratulated the winner. These incidents underscore that South Korea is one of Asia’s most vibrant, if rambunctious democracies.  

But the resilience of democracy this time is uncertain. Even though Yoon returned the troops to their barracks after the national legislature over-ruled of his martial law decree, the crisis is far from over. More than 70 per cent of the public want Yoon out but the ruling party is not yet signing up to the opposition party’s call for impeachment. The crisis already has precipitated popular protests in central Seoul — these will only grow in the absence of a quick solution. The president has defiantly refused to resign and may try to put the opposition party leader in jail on corruption charges, disqualifying him from running in the next election. How this ends is uncertain, but the nightmare scenario would be a return of the military to the streets. Yoon’s anger and frustration could lead him to a second emergency declaration amid the political chaos.

Such a scenario would have dire implications for Korean democracy. The military would be under pressure to disobey its commander-in-chief. The stock market could nosedive and business confidence would face downward pressure. North Korea might be incentivised to exploit the political instability with some “grey zone” military action, such as carrying out its threat to declare a new maritime boundary with the South in the hope that Seoul would be too distracted to respond. 

The US so far has maintained a cautious stance, aligning with neither side and focusing on the need to respect the rule of law and the constitutional process while Koreans seek to resolve the crisis. But a second martial law declaration would force Washington’s hand against a South Korean president who has been a singularly staunch supporter of the alliance and of Biden’s overall foreign policies on Asia, economic security and the war in Europe.

There is irony in the fact that Yoon — who made support for democratic values and freedom the theme of South Korea’s global role and of his presidency — may be remembered for the most undemocratic of actions taken at home. His removal as leader is almost certain but, it is to be hoped, not at the cost of democracy, security and the prosperity of the country and all who work with it.