South Korea Reacts to President Yoon’s Averted Martial Law Declaration
On Wednesday afternoon, a palpable sense of anger and confusion permeated the area outside South Korea’s National Assembly following President Yoon Suk Yeol’s startling announcement of martial law, which was ultimately quashed.
Many South Koreans were taken by surprise after a night filled with unforeseen events that challenged their democracy in a way they hadn’t experienced since the 1980s.
Under a clear winter sky, numerous citizens assembled at the assembly building to express their discontent. Concurrently, protests erupted throughout the capital, with demonstrators demanding Yoon’s resignation.
“I couldn’t sleep at all, anxiously following events as they unfolded,” recounted Son Jung-hee, who had traveled an hour from Gyeonggi province to join the protest. Holding a handmade pink sign calling for Yoon’s impeachment, she described her presence as a duty of an “ordinary citizen” aiming to safeguard the parliament as the “last line of defense.”
“I feel a deep sense of shame. We believed that our democracy had progressed, yet we’re confronted with this absurdity,” she remarked, gesturing towards the crowd around her. “Look at the daily lives that people cherish—how could a president act in defiance of the will of his citizens?”
That preceding night, the assembly had been encircled by hundreds of law enforcement officers while military personnel roamed the interior and helicopters hovered above, creating an atmosphere reminiscent of a dramatic film rather than reality.
Cho Tae-ik, in his 60s, voiced painful memories stirred by recent events. “I witnessed the Gwangju Democratic Movement in its entirety,” he stated, referencing the critical pro-democracy uprising of 1980 that was violently suppressed, resulting in many deaths.
“Democracy shouldn’t operate this way. Trust between the populace and the government is indispensable, yet this administration lacks that,” he lamented.
President Yoon defended his declaration of martial law as essential for “protecting the free Republic of Korea from North Korean communist threats” and for “eliminating pro-North Korean anti-state factions.” His statements echoed past fearmongering strategies and drew on language from South Korea’s controversial National Security Act, which criminalizes actions categorized as “anti-government”—a term historically utilized to undermine dissent under the pretext of countering North Korean risks.
While tensions with North Korea are a significant concern, many believe claims of a substantial pro-North movement within South Korea are, at best, exaggerated.
Yoon’s proclamation sparked swift condemnation across the political landscape. Even the conservative Chosun Ilbo newspaper, usually supportive of his administration, characterized his actions as a “horrendous overreach” and labeled it an “embarrassment for a top ten democracy.”
A university student from Seoul, who chose to remain anonymous, expressed disbelief: “This felt like a coup d’état; I thought such things belonged to history books… I could never have imagined this would happen. It’s humiliating.”
However, this crisis did not emerge without prior warning. In September, opposition member Kim Min-seok and several others raised concerns regarding Yoon’s systematic placement of his high school acquaintances in critical security roles, including within the defense ministry and defense counterintelligence command. They worried that these appointments, coupled with Yoon’s increasing use of “anti-state” language toward his critics, hinted at preparations for martial law. At the time, their warnings were dismissed as overly alarmist.
Min Hee Go, an associate professor of political science at Ewha Womans University, criticized the administration’s handling of the situation as a “foolish and nonsensical decision.”
“The president seems to lack understanding of the representative nature of political parties and the assembly,” she asserted. “This nation is on the verge of experiencing significant turmoil, and calls for his resignation or impeachment are warranted.”
Although opposition parties are pursuing impeachment, the path forward appears complex. They would require at least eight members from Yoon’s party to achieve the necessary two-thirds majority in parliament. Even then, the constitutional court, currently operating with only six justices, lacks the minimum seven judges needed to consider such a case.
Yoon’s administration has been embroiled in ongoing scandals, including allegations that his wife, Kim Keon Hee, received a luxury 3 million won (£1,675) handbag as a gift from a religious leader. Yoon and his allies have dismissed these allegations as politically motivated attacks.
Observers have noted a decline in democratic practices under Yoon’s leadership; the V-Dem Institute recently ranked South Korea 47th worldwide for liberal democracy, a significant drop from 28th last year and 17th in 2021.
Civicus, a global alliance for civil society, has raised alarms about the degradation of civic freedoms since Yoon assumed office, specifically pointing to actions aimed at restricting media independence and targeting labor unions.
“I doubt the president knows how to cope with these pressures through political means—like opening dialogue and fostering communication,” stated Prof. Go. “Given his background as the prosecutor general, he likely rose in a rigid hierarchy surrounded by a homogeneous team. This has fostered a culture that punishes dissent.”
For many South Koreans, this brief attempt at martial law has reinforced their worst fears regarding the authoritarian inclinations of Yoon’s administration.
Outside the national assembly, protester Son reflected on the uncertain path ahead. “Nobody imagined we would see a day like this again… Yet here we are, basking in the warm sunlight, fighting to defend our democracy once more.”
