Sadly, the situation is not yet in the past tense and is in progress. Yoon was impeached and impeachment is being litigated in the Constitutional Court. Yoon is arguing some ridiculous excuses which would have been funny if this was not serious.<p>For example, martial law decree no. 1 said "Activities of national assembly, local assemblies, political parties, and all political activities such as political association, assembly, demonstration are hereby forbidden". Decree was widely published and it is a strong evidence that Yoon intended to violate the constitution and disable the legislative branch. Yoon is now claiming "it was copy and pasted from old authoritarian martial law decrees by mistake". No, really. It doesn't make any sense by itself, but moreover, this can't possibly be the case because South Korean local rule was introduced after democratic transition so no mention of "local assemblies" is possible in old decrees. I mean, lying is pretty difficult, reality has surprising details...
Proof once more that the enemies of Democracy can be both foreign and domestic.<p>> The democracy movement isn’t just history but is also actively taught in schools as part of national identity.<p>Education is the beginning. "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." [1]<p>> Conservative leaders now have to choose between democratic principles and party loyalty.<p>To choose party (or any other) loyalty over democratic principles and the constitution is treason. For any voters to support such a party implies a deep failure to instill democratic principles and knowledge of history.<p>[1] _ <a href="https://www.monticello.org/exhibits-events/blog/eternal-vigilance/" rel="nofollow">https://www.monticello.org/exhibits-events/blog/eternal-vigi...</a>
Maybe they should just remove the president's post altogether? Seriously, almost every one of recent SK presidents were convicted of something after they left the post. How... why do such people regularly keep getting elected there, and why do they even bother to, since there is already an established pattern of criminal convictions, do they think they'll break it and get away with whatever they did?
> There are approximately 28,500 U.S. military personnel stationed in South Korea...<p>> A fully functioning UN Command is at the top of the chain of command of all forces in South Korea, including the U.S. forces and the entire South Korean military...<p>~ <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Korea#United_States_contingent" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Korea#United_States_cont...</a><p>Despite the headline, it would seem fair to claim that the US is acting as an anchor here to the South Korean government.<p>I wouldn't suggest there is anything improper here since the South Korean army is around half a million strong and can do what it wants, but in the event of a coup I imagine the US would be playing a significant deciding factor. How the military moves is what ultimately matters in an uprising, particularly the opinions of the top generals.
What concerns me the most is that I haven't heard talks of fixing the core problem, which was Korean's constitution.<p>You can argue if what Yoon did was illegal or not, but it was close enough to legal that the military obeyed his orders.<p>It's just out of a strike of luck that the martial law was retired.<p>That part of the constitution seems ludicrous to me, it means their democracy is in constant danger; it's amazing that both parties haven't prioritized fixing it.
Just barely. Had the military been just a bit more indoctrinated, they may have started shooting. Which, as far as I understand, were the instructions they received. If nothing else, if the legislators weren't able to get in, this would have gone a whole other way, and the coup could easily have been successful.
Has it really? I don't think the "movie is over" (as we colloquially say in India) and this was just the "opening scene" than the "climatic finish" that some think it is.<p>South Korea is an oligarchic democracy, and, as the paper points out, has developed deep political divisions between the left- and the right- in its society.<p>The deposed South Korean President was a favourite of the Biden administration ( <a href="https://www.rand.org/pubs/commentary/2022/07/yoon-suk-yeol-is-bidens-perfect-south-korea-partner.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.rand.org/pubs/commentary/2022/07/yoon-suk-yeol-i...</a> ) because of his pro-western and pro-business values and his political willingness to militarily commit to western / US foreign policies against China and Russia. (He is the first South Korean President to attend a NATO summit, has been public about his desire that South Korea be a part of an "Asian NATO" - Quad + Jarokus + AUKUS - supported sanctions against Russia and has even supplied Ukraine with the artillery they badly needed).<p>Some of Biden's and Yoon's foreign policies seem to have backfired on South Korea as North Korea's near-total alienation, that previous US and South Korean administration had achieved, to economically and military weaken it, is now over. (Russia and North Korea have signed a new political and military alliance, committed to help each other if the other is attacked and, North Korean troops will not only get upgraded armaments from Russia but are also getting battle trained in real warfare conditions in the Russia-Ukraine war). Many South Koreans are not thrilled about this, because the most serious and imminent threat for South Korea has always been from the North Koreans. While many South Koreans understand that a military alliance with the US means that they cannot disregard US foreign policy concerns, many in the left- are concerned that there was still enough room to manoeuvre to not aggravate both China and Russia so much that they are now openly hostile against South Korea too.<p>I believe this was one of the underlying tension between the Yoon's administration and the opposition - instead of trying to create a democratic political consensus in South Korea about his policies, he suddenly decided to deal with valid criticism about his domestic and foreign policies by attacking the opposition as <i>“pro-North anti-state forces”</i>. (This was stupid as even though latent anti-war sentiment amongst the South Korean working class is high, the left-leaning opposition Democratic Party are also inclined to the idea of joining the US lead anti-China military alliance and a consensus on foreign policies atleast was very much possible.)<p>His political bungling and attempt to tarnish the opposition as North Korean stooge now means forming political consensus will be now more difficult and further polarise South Korean polity, thus allowing Russia, China and the US to interfere more in their political affairs.<p>I fear democracy in South Korea is still under threat, just it is in many other parts of the world facing similar political polarisation.