Martial Law and Impeachment in South Korea: Diverging Conservative Reactions

South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol's short-lived declaration of martial law on December 3, 2024, was the first since military authoritarian rule in 1979-1980. It generated diverging responses among self-described conservatives and supporters of the People's Power Party. My colleagues and I are interviewing key activists and thought leaders and analyzing their writings. To inform readers, we briefly describe and share three perspectives.

The first is referred to as substantive radicalism. It agrees with political theorist Karl Loewenstein (1935) that some groups are existential threats to liberal democracy and that such "enemies of democracy" need to be defeated by whatever means necessary, even illiberal, authoritarian ones such as martial law. This perspective in South Korea supported Yoon's martial law declaration to forcibly remove the left threat. It wished that he had completely executed it, instead of giving up after a couple of hours.

Performative Radicalism

The second is performative, symbolic radicalism. This perspective sees dramatic, ostensible violations of existing laws or norms as actually performative (symbolic) protests. Performative radicals wish to protest against and "disrupt" institutions dominated by corrupt opponents. They prefer not to engage in any violent action. This is how many conservatives interpreted the December 3 martial law proclamation in South Korea, or the January 6 insurrection in the United States.

Yoon administration officials declared that the president had "taken a bold step as a champion of the constitution against forces seeking to destroy our liberal democracy" and sent "a warning to the Democratic Party."

For performative radical conservatives, the martial law proclamation represented a deliberate disruption intended to expose and counter systemic corruption. It reflected what they viewed as a necessary intervention during a moment of political crisis. They framed Yoon's move as a demonstration of decisive leadership rather than a departure from constitutional principles. This perspective reflects a preference for dramatic, highly symbolic actions that draw attention to perceived injustices and highlight moral urgency.

Rather than prioritizing long-term institutional reform, performative radicals focus on immediate, impactful gestures. These are designed to challenge entrenched power dynamics and rally public sentiment. By leveraging such acts, they aim to create a sense of embattlement, energize their base, and cast themselves as defenders of democracy against forces they perceive as corrupt or illegitimate.

Pro-institutional Conservatism

The third is a pro-institutional, Burkean conservatism. This perspective operates within existing institutions and rules. Even if certain groups (eg, the Democratic Party) threaten liberal democracy, the battle should be fought with the existing laws and norms, including that of open debate.

Likewise, the impeachment of President Yoon should not be rushed, but follow legal rules and customs. That includes a comprehensive political and judicial investigation of the legality of his actions. Institutionalists prioritize long-term institutional reform and agree with Max Weber: "Politics is a strong and slow boring of hard boards. It takes both passion and perspective."

Perspectives from Each Statement

Henceforth, we share some words from a member of each of the three perspectives. First is the "Conservative Activist." The second is a "Yoon supporter." Then, for the third, we share a complete public letter from Korea University students entering the Class of 2024.

Because the Conservative Activist and Yoon supporters were wary of leftist dominance and prosecution, they requested anonymity. The Korea University (KU) students posted a public letter on campus, using their real names and majors. Following convention, we partially block their identifications, but reprint an English translation in full.

Whether or not the reader agrees with the KU students, we can all applaud their commitment to open debate. At this moment, conservatives, especially on campus, feel more stigmatized than ever. Even if they opposed the martial law declaration, they are afraid to openly participate in public dialogue. But such stigmatization fuels radical, anti-institutional perspective, and is unhealthy for democracy. We oppose the stigmatization and silencing of any one political faction, absent sufficient evidence of illegality. That includes the stigmatization of the strongly progressive Lee Seok-ki and the Unified Progressive Party in 2014 or the supporters of the conservative People's Power Party today.

*President Yoon Suk-yeol delivers a speech at the South Korean presidential office in Seoul on December 12. (Photo provided by the presidential office, Yonhap News Agency via Kyodo)*

Comments of a Conservative Activist

Conservative Activist defended President Yoon's declaration of martial law as a necessary response to the unprecedented infiltration of subversive forces in South Korea's institutions, threatening its liberal democratic identity. Martial law was viewed as the only effective means to swiftly neutralize these threats and restore stability. The Conservative Activist criticized the National Assembly's reversal of martial law, labeling it a setback for national security and a missed opportunity to resolve the crisis. That delay allowed anti-state elements to regroup, exacerbating instability.

Conservative Activist acknowledged concerns about potential erosion of democratic principles. However, they argued that conventional measures were inadequate to counter organized subversion. Martial law was seen as the most viable tool to safeguard democracy during the crisis.

Also, Conservative Activist warned of dire consequences if President Yoon were impeached. They claimed it would lead to a radical socialist agenda under Lee Jae-myung and weaken South Korea's liberal democratic identity. His grassroots organization opposed impeachment efforts, emphasizing the need to protect the Republic's foundations.

Conservative Activist highlighted corruption within the National Election Commission, undermining trust in elections. Martial law was seen as essential to restoring transparency. He criticized the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) for alleged influence in media narratives aligning with anti-state elements.

Furthermore, Conservative Activist addressed conservative hesitations stemming from Yoon's involvement in President Park Geun-hye's impeachment. The focus should be on the broader goal of protecting South Korea's future, he urged. He stressed the importance of unity among conservatives to counter existential threats and preserve the nation's democratic identity.

Conservative Activist also called for conservatives to set aside internal disputes and rally behind President Yoon. That would best defend South Korea's sovereignty and uphold its liberal democratic values, he said.

Yoon Supporter

A supporter of President Yoon explained her view:

"Generally, an emergency martial law declaration involves the deployment of armed troops to control public security and overall administration. The basic rights of the people can be significantly restricted, and military trials can be held.

"However, in this emergency martial law declaration, the military was deployed but was not armed. The number of troops deployed was too small to be considered martial law. Moreover, even the National Assembly members and aides were allowed to enter the National Assembly. The military gathered around the National Assembly and worked hard to protect citizens to prevent any bloodshed. As a result, there was no bloodshed.

"It would be better to say that this is not a martial law declaration, but a martial law declaration incident. Is there another martial law declaration like this in the world?

"Then why did President Yoon Suk-yeol declare such a pointless martial law?

"He declared martial law even though he knew it would fail. This is because he had no other outlets to speak to the people.

"He was unable to control the media and broadcasting in the early days of his presidency. Therefore, little was known about the things he did as president for the national interest. Instead, he was framed by his opponents as a president who drinks alcohol and an incompetent president who was manipulated by a shaman named Cheongung."

Yoon Supporter on Personal Attacks on the President

Beyond a discussion of the reasons for Yoon's declaration of martial law, the Yoon Supporter said:

"In addition, insults to his wife, Kim Gun-hee, calling her a barmaid Julie and falsely accusing her of manipulating the stock price of Deutsche Motors plagued him from the beginning of his presidency. No matter what he did, it all came down to 'Julie' Kim Gun-hee, the stock price manipulator. Eventually, his opponents went all-in on bringing down President Yoon by calling for a special prosecutor for Kim Gun-hee.

"The Democratic Party, the giant opposition party, drastically cut next year's budget, paralyzing state administration next year. In addition, his beloved junior and the leader of the ruling party [Han Dong-hoon] joined hands with the opposition party to attack him and corner him.

"He declared martial law, which was not even martial law, to inform the people directly. He declared martial law even though he knew it would fail in the face of the huge opposition party's tyranny. So he said,

"'As president, I appeal to you all with a heart that is bleeding.'"

Korea University Class of 2024 Opening Statement

Korea University students wrote an open letter on the issue and posted it on campus. They began by saying:

"It has been 37 years since the enactment of our current constitution, which was born out of the 1987 democratization movement. The constitutional system established in 1987 was a significant milestone in our modern history, as it overcame the painful legacy of military dictatorship and opened a new chapter in democracy. However, now is the time to confront the fundamental limitations of this system.

"While the 1987 Constitution successfully curbed the possibility of presidential dictatorship, it failed to establish mechanisms to prevent parliamentary overreach.

"This shortcoming reflects the historical context of the time, where the trauma of military dictatorship overly influenced the constitutional drafting process. The system only anticipated the risk of a president becoming a dictator, without considering the possibility of the legislature assuming an authoritarian role.

"This institutional flaw is becoming increasingly evident in our current political reality. For the first time in Korean history, the heads of the Board of Audit and Inspection and the Seoul Central District Prosecutor's Office have been impeached. Over 20 impeachment attempts by the opposition party have paralyzed governance. Most concerning is how even the national budget — critical to the country's future — has been reduced to a tool for political strife.

"For instance, reallocating ₩700 billion KRW ($487 million USD) to a regional currency project while prioritizing Chinese solar panel projects over investments in SMRs (small modular reactors), which are crucial for future energy security, demonstrates this troubling trend. Pushing through ineffective policies at the expense of national investment, impeaching prosecutors for party leader interests, and opposing espionage laws — can such actions confidently be labeled as non-anti-national?"

Class of 2024 on the Impeachment Debate:

These students continued their thoughtful analysis in a discussion of the impeachment debate:

"Some argue this stems from the overwhelming majority in parliament. But is the belief that a majority justifies anything truly aligned with the principles of the liberal democracy they often champion?

"Let us also consider the current debate over the impeachment of the president. Comparing this situation with past cases of impeachment reveals how abnormal the present is.

"For example, the 'state manipulation' scandal involving former President Park Geun-hye surfaced in October 2016. It led to impeachment proceedings in December and a bribery indictment in April 2017. The impeachment of former President Roh Moo-hyun was triggered by the establishment of the Uri Party in November 2003. Impeachment proceedings followed in March 2004.

"In contrast, the recent martial law controversy escalated to impeachment discussions within a week, as if driven by the looming verdict on the opposition party leader's trial. This behavior casts doubt on the true motives behind these actions, suggesting they are not purely aimed at safeguarding constitutional order.

"What is even more alarming is the haste to proceed with impeachment before fully uncovering the facts of the alleged insurrection. If a coup were genuinely in play, criminal charges alone would suffice to disqualify the president. Yet, there seems to be a rush to impeach within an impossibly short time frame to ascertain the situation."

Korea University Students on Media and Intellectual Responsibility

"Adding to the concern is the role of media outlets, some of which have a history of damaging innocent lives with false reporting. This helped lead to the impeachment narrative, despite their known political leanings. It underscores the need for careful scrutiny of the information we are receiving.

"In this context, acting hastily in the name of a prestigious institution like Korea University raises the question of whether this is the right approach for intellectuals. History teaches us a clear lesson: during turbulent times, what is demanded of intellectuals is not impulsive action but sober judgment and deliberate approaches. We are well aware of the historical tragedies that ensue when emotion overrides reason and action outpaces thought.

"True intellectuals should strive to discern the essence of a situation with patience and careful analysis, rather than being swept away by public sentiment or immediate emotions. While students are busy putting up posters criticizing the president and organizing protests, and student councils echo these sentiments with similar declarations, we must ask if this is shirking the responsibility that comes with intellectual privilege.

"Passion must be tempered with reason. Reflecting deeply on the meaning of the 118 candlelight vigils since the inauguration and uncovering the truths behind them is a responsibility that should first fall upon intellectuals."

Students on the Need for Institutional Reform

Next, the students tackled the issue of institutional reform. Their letter goes on:

"What we must truly focus on is institutional reform. We need mechanisms to check arbitrary budgetary authority by the National Assembly, effective means for the president to counter unreasonable legislative pressure, and stricter requirements and processes to prevent the abuse of impeachment as a political weapon.

"We now stand at a crossroads. Will we settle for the outdated framework of 37 years ago, or will we take a bold first step toward a new leap forward? What we need is not emotional responses or partisan judgments but institutional reform for a healthier and more sustainable democracy.

"The Constitution exists to ensure the permanent continuity of our community. Bad laws exist to be reformed."

Authors: Joseph Yi and Wondong Lee

Wondong Lee (Ph.D. in Political Science, UC Irvine) is a Research Fellow at the Center for International Studies, Inha University. Joseph Yi is an associate professor of political science at Hanyang University (Seoul).