In downtown Seoul, South Koreans reacted intensely to the court’s decision to remove President Yoon Suk Yeol from office. Emotions ran high, with dancing, consoling hugs, jubilant cheers, and screams of anger echoing through the masses. The court’s verdict illuminated the significant political division in the nation, as both supporters and opponents of Yoon expressed their heartfelt responses.
With South Korea gearing up to elect a new president, the political rift appears set to deepen. A key point of contention is Yoon’s decision on December 3, when he declared martial law, leading to his impeachment and eventual removal from power. His supporters argue he acted to protect the democratic integrity of the nation from North-Korea-friendly politicians. In contrast, liberals claim he used this as a diversion from corruption allegations against him and his wife.
The controversy over Yoon’s decision to encircle the National Assembly with heavily armed troops is central to the upcoming election campaign. In a country still dealing with the legacy of military rule from previous decades, the deployment of troops to civilian streets holds particular sensitivity. This move has highlighted enduring divides in South Korea, touching on aspects such as political alignment, national security, economic class, gender, and age.
South Korea’s history is marked by division, with the Korean Peninsula split by Soviet and U.S. forces in 1945 and becoming two independent countries in 1948. After the Korean War, the military boundary was drawn at the Demilitarized Zone in 1953. These historical fractures resonate as the political atmosphere intensifies with the forthcoming presidential election.
Yoon’s allies argue that he was blocked at every turn by the liberal opposition, particularly the Democratic Party, which controls the parliament. They maintain that declaring martial law was necessary to thwart efforts by Pyongyang and Beijing to undermine democracy via cyberattacks and misinformation. The Democratic Party has consistently refuted these claims.
Concerns among Yoon supporters include false allegations of election fraud, with fears that they might undermine faith in future electoral outcomes. On the day martial law was declared, Yoon mobilized troops to probe alleged vulnerabilities in the National Election Commission’s computer systems, a claim lacking substantiation but raising alarms about electoral integrity.
Critics of Yoon suggest a different narrative—that of a leader consumed by conspiracy theories, attempting to cast himself as a victim of pro-North Korean opposition interference. They label him as an ineffective politician who failed to negotiate effectively with his political adversaries.
Others propose a more personal rationale, suggesting Yoon sought to shield himself from corruption investigations. Democratic Party floor leader Park Chan-dae pointed to Yoon’s martial law decision as a means to distract from “shameful” allegations involving him and his wife, which had eroded public approval.
The allegations center on accusations that Yoon and first lady Kim Keon Hee improperly influenced the conservative People Power Party in selecting a parliamentary by-election candidate in 2022. Yoon has denied any misconduct. The timing of martial law, coinciding with the potential handing over of incriminating communications, raised suspicions among many that this was no coincidence.
Investigations suggest multiple factors led Yoon to enact martial law, including political disputes over budget issues and baseless election fraud accusations, with the ongoing scandal part of the broader context. The opposition and Yoon’s party, which faces internal chaos post-court ruling, confront significant hurdles as the election approaches. The resolution of the political confrontation has high stakes for South Korea’s democratic future and its international relations, particularly with North Korea, the United States, and China.