Commentary: There is no going back for Yoon and South Korea after martial law crisis

SINGAPORE: On the chilly winter night of Dec 3, 2024, at 10.29pm, South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol delivered an unexpected televised address and made an even more unexpected announcement: The declaration of martial law. 

His political gamble backfired spectacularly in 153 minutes.

At 1.02am on Dec 4, the opposition and some ruling party legislators gathered at the National Assembly in an emergency session to pass a motion repealing the martial law.

Yoon was nowhere to be seen at that time, but he eventually appeared in another televised speech, accepting the National Assembly’s resolution and officially ending the martial law at 4.30am.

If the declaration of martial law seemed bizarre, Yoon’s acceptance of the National Assembly’s decision to revoke it was even more perplexing, since it was only a few hours before that he had called the Assembly an “anti-state” entity and “dictatorship”. 

While the craze of martial law is over, the political uncertainty it has produced is continuing. On Saturday (Dec 14), the National Assembly, in its second attempt, passed a motion to impeach Yoon, with 204 out of 300 legislators voting in favour.

Yoon, however, has vowed to “never give up”, describing his impeachment as a temporary pause. He also did not comply with a summons to meet prosecutors for questioning on Sunday over an insurrection probe.

Now the final say is with the Constitutional Court. Trial proceedings for Yoon’s impeachment began on Monday, but the court has up to six months to decide whether to sustain or reject the impeachment vote.

Until the court produces its ruling, South Korea will have to live with political uncertainty. 

WILL YOON STAY OR GO?

One silver lining in all this is that when a major political and constitutional crisis occurs in South Korea, the people turn to the constitution and due process to resolve it rather than opt for violence. 

It is not the first time South Korea is facing the impeachment of its president. In 2004, former president Roh Moo-hyun was impeached by the National Assembly, but the Constitutional Court rejected the impeachment and resuscitated Roh back to office.

In 2016, Park Geun-hye was also impeached by the National Assembly, but she did not have the same luck at the court, which upheld impeachment. 

Will the court uphold or reject Yoon’s impeachment? If the former, a new presidential election must be held within 60 days after the court’s ruling. If the latter, Yoon will return to power, which means the political stand-off between him and the National Assembly will resume.

The only difference is that Yoon will struggle to command political legitimacy. According to Korea Gallup’s opinion survey on Dec 13, Yoon’s public support has fallen to a record low of 11 per cent and 75 per cent of South Koreans supported impeachment.

What will the martial law saga mean for South Korea’s immediate and long-term future? For the time being, Yoon has been stripped of his presidential powers, so there is no possibility of him declaring another martial law.

Korean politics is already back to its usual business. Expecting that the court will uphold the impeachment, politicians are already making their moves or positioning themselves for the next presidential election. This may appear to increase political uncertainty, but this is usual politics in South Korea: Politicians’ egoistic behaviour even at the expense of public or national costs.

THE ROAD AHEAD FOR SOUTH KOREA

In the longer term, there could be significant implications in five areas.

First, political reform in South Korea. Most agree that the president wields too much power under the current constitution and hence favour some sort of political reform. Two major proposals are either to adopt parliamentary system or to shorten the presidential term to four years with the possibility of re-election. Regardless of which outcome, the focus will be on reducing presidential powers from the current level.

Second, political polarisation. It is what makes South Korean democracy vibrant, but it has also stifled political debate and substantive progress in the country. Whenever there is a turnover of political power in Korea, the winner has taken revenge on the other political group. This is why South Korean presidents have not fared well after retirement.

It also polarises South Korean society, with many residents following their favoured political parties or politicians almost with religious zeal, regarding them as saviours or martyrs fighting against some evil force. It is politicians who have produced such polarisation and antagonism, and it must be they who need to fix it.

Third, the place and legitimacy of the military in South Korean society. Yoon’s martial law turned what seemed like paranoia among Korea’s political left that the military could be used for domestic politics into a legitimate concern. It has further weakened the legitimacy of the military, which could affect its operation and capabilities.

This does not bode well for South Korea, which is technically at war with North Korea and hence needs a strong and well-disciplined military for national security.

Fourth, the future of the conservative party. Ever since the impeachment of Park Geun-hye, the conservatives have been mired in power struggles among themselves. Other than the previous presidential election that gave a narrow victory to Yoon, the conservative party has lost all other elections, often in landslide defeat.

Now that Yoon has been impeached with some ruling party members joining the cause, the conservative party will go into further in-house fighting and division, and this could give free reign to the main opposition party, Democratic Party, which already controls the National Assembly.

For democracy to function well, power must be checked and balanced, and this is why the conservative party must survive, but that will only happen if they can regain public trust. For that to happen, they must engage in serious self-reflection and soul-searching.

A POSSIBLE FOREIGN POLICY SHIFT?

And finally, foreign policy. The first motion put forward by the opposition parties to impeach Yoon stated that he “has neglected geopolitical balance under the pretext of value diplomacy, has antagonised North Korea, China and Russia, has insisted on a bizarre Japan-centred foreign policy, and has appointed people with pro-Japanese ties to key government posts, thereby inviting isolation in Northeast Asia, triggering a war crisis, neglecting national security and the duty to protect the people.”

If the statement reflects the opposition’s foreign policy preference, there could be a sea change in the direction of South Korean foreign policy should the opposition win the next presidential election. 

Although calm has now prevailed, there is no going back for Yoon and South Korea. 

It is mind-boggling that an individual’s rash decision over the course of a few hours can be so consequential for the future of national politics and foreign policy. But one remains hopeful that South Korea will emerge out of the current crisis, as it did in the past, to become a more mature democracy and vibrant economy. That is not only in the best interest of South Korea, but also for the region as a whole.

Ryu Yongwook is an Assistant Professor at Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, NUS. He specialises in International Relations, with a focus on East Asia.