let’s think over some kimchi

a bit more on yesterday’s whirlwind in Korea

Following many electrons ricocheting around the world over roughly eighteen hours, things seem to be calmer in Seoul today. But people are still scratching their heads about what on earth the Korean president was thinking. I offer a couple of amplifications on what history probably will call a truly bizarre day in South Korea’s history.

First, as promised, I offer thoughts from a man who knows the country and the personalities about as well as anyone could, following decades of personal and professional involvement. COL David Maxwell, USA retired, served in the Army Special Forces community for decades. He is a legend, particularly in both Korea and the Philippines. David graduated from the National War College in 2004, returned as his final active duty assignment from 2010-2011 where I had the privilege of working with him, and then went on to Georgetown University and the Foundation for the Protection of Democracy. David serves as the Vice President of the Center for Asia Pacific Strategy as well as Editor of Small Wars Journal.

You might recall he invited my husband and I to address a gathering of Midshipmen and Cadets merely two and a half weeks ago. David departed that conference the next morning for a trip to Seoul where he heard first hand of the on-going frustration with President Yoon Suk Yeol only a few days ago. I enclose David’s analysis of what we saw yesterday, though recognizing he may delve more deeply into Korean affairs that many of us ever go. He permitted to quote him so I will give you the details in full because he points out implications most of the analyses are skipping over (If you use his remarks in any manner, please credit him as he intends to publish them).

“The bottom line for me is four things:

1) Despite the tragic event South Korean democratic institutions held. Everyone should take solace in that.

2) This will have international political and economic implications because South Korea has turned itself into a global pivotal state with global reach, politically, militarily, culturally, and economically as well as a partner in the arsenal of democracy which has global security implications.

3) I fear all the good work of the Yoon administration will be upended both internationally such as with trilateral ROK-Japan-US cooperation. However my worst worry is that the human rights upfront agenda, the necessary information campaigns, and the pursuit of a free and unified Korea will be significantly and negatively affected especially if and when the opposition comes to power after President Yoon either steps down or is impeached.

4) Kim Jong Un will work very hard to have his United Front Department and former 225th Bureau accelerate their efforts to subvert South Korean society and the government through its political warfare strategy.

Not a surprise that there are calls for impeachment. I think the question now is whether Yoon will step down before impeachment.

Also, the South Korean military was put in an impossible position. I am sure Kwangju was on their mind which is why they did not use excessive force to prevent the General Assembly from meeting and voting.

Not a surprise that there are calls for impeachment. I think the question now is whether Yoon will step down before impeachment.

Also, the South Korean military was put in an impossible position. I am sure Kwangju was on their mind which is why they did not use excessive force to prevent the General Assembly from meeting and voting.

Here is my revised assessment. Fundamentally this is a domestic political issue but it has significant international implications politically and economically because South Korea has become a global pivotal state and a partner in the arsenal of democracy. Although this will not be a popular view, the Korean people in the South and all democracies should take solace that the democratic institutions of the Republic of Korea held and prevented a single leader from taking all power which fundamentally is what a republican government is designed to do. But there will continue to be huge political problems because of the domestic political divisions.

This martial law incident was really President Yoon's fight with the opposition Minjoo party and especially the opposition leader Lee Jae-myung.

This was surprising action and a huge miscalculation on Yoon's part that caught us all by surprise including apparently President Yoon’s own party leadership. It was obvious that this martial law order could not last long at all which Yoon must have known as well. A question is who was advising Yoon and what made him think martial law was the correct action?

Timing - lowest approval rating counterintuitively gives him the opportunity to act. (e.g., nothing to lose but with the hope that it will eradicate the racial left for the next conservative administration).

Timing - likely to receive little or no condemnation from the incoming Trump administration as much as there may be from Biden or would be if Harris had won.

Timing: large scale labor union protest to begin.

Trying to right a perceived wrong going back to Lee Myung Bak and Park Geun Hye, neither of whom purged the leftists from the government (e.g., what some consider a ROK "deep state") and the perceived leftist controlled media. Yoon must have thought this had to be done and done now.

Danger one - miscalculation and misunderstanding by ROK security forces who could interpret protests incorrectly and inappropriately use force that could cause escalation. Think Kwangju in May 1980 (for those who remember). Again this is likely why the ROK military did not use excessive force but they were put in an impossible situation.

Danger two - this will destroy the ROK conservative movement by delegitimizing it and ensure a win by the opposition in the next election (which was likely anyway).

Danger three - How will Kim Jong Un exploit this? If Yoon is correct and there are north Korean sympathizers (and agents/agitators from the United Front Department and the old Bureau 225) in South Korea (as I believe without a doubt that there are) we can expect them to incite violence in potential to cause Danger One above.

There is still a lot more to unpack - my concern is with the future of a human rights upfront approach (there must be no "whataboutism" because regardless of what happens with martial law in the South the 25 million people in the north are still victims of the worst crimes against humanity in the north since WWII). My concern is with how to affect and adjust an information campaign against the north. And ultimately my concern is with the impact on the pursuit of a free and unified Korea. This will certainly undermine the 8.15 unification doctrine.

The General Assembly voted to overturn and the military allowed the National Assembly to vote. Since Yoon accepted the vote the rule of law can be said to have prevailed and perhaps like Nietzsche, that which does not kill me (or kill democracy) makes me (or democracy) stronger.

But I expect the that General Assembly will soon begin impeachment proceedings especially if Yoon does not heed the calls to step down.

The actions in South Korea will have in the human rights community and there are those who will want to use this to undermine South Korea’s ability to call out nK human rights by saying the Yoon government is hypocritical in calling for freedom and democracy in nK. While this is domestic politics it has regional global implications - economic markets will react and if there is any supply chain disruption due to labor unrest it will have global effects. We cannot say this is solely a domestic issue especially after South Korea has postured itself to be a global pivotal state.

Its internal politics have external effects. But I truly worry about how this will discredit the good work that Yoon has done with the 8.15 unification doctrine. Will any successor continue to follow the pursuit of a free and unified Korea or will they revert to the failed policies of the past in the naive hope that Kim Jong un will negotiate and denuclearize so there can be co-exist between north and South while 25 million continue their unimaginable suffering in the north. The real losers in this tragic event are going to be those 25 million Koreans in the north.”—David Maxwell

I want to stress his second danger because it raises consequences of incredibly long duration. No, we can’t forget that politicians are merely individuals, folks who tend to seek copious approbation by running for office as well as offering ideas to help run a country. None of them ever want to lose power. Come on, let’s not be daft here: no one likes rejection or loss of influence. It’s just not human nature.

But, a participatory system, whether a republic such as Korea’s or anyone else’s, relies on a functioning opposition to create a political dynamic healthy in the society. The Democratic Party in the United States won House of Representative majorities in all but a single election (1948) between 1930 and 1994. It was not healthy for Democrats or Republicans or Hagadoobies; this is not a partisan matter but one of human tendencies to get lazy intellectually. The period had many good things but it also had some pretty bad ones. This is true at any and all level of government—period.

It’s too tempting for a members of any party facing no intellectual or philosophical opposition to become absurdly overcomfortable, to stop serious intellectual honing for the purpose of improving governance proposals, to become “entitled” as elected officials. The members of said entitled party lose a connection with those it represents and those over whom it governs. Arguably that is precisely why happened with the “Contract for America” in 1993. (Republicans, in turn, fell prey to the beginnings of the same mentality later in the decade as scandals roiled the Party—Newt Gingrich, Robert Livingston, and Dan Burton-in 1998.)

Intellectual engagement and governing rest on the exchange and defense of ideas. Institutionally, it’s hard to find something more important for a society since I know of no system in the world where everyone agrees on things all of the time.

President Yoon holds a substantially different view of the DPRK or the trilateral relationship with the United States and Japan, as I noted yesterday. He won election with the slimmest of margins in 2022 while leading a smallish conservative party determined to raise these policy questions against a substantial headwind in Korean society. While there is no guarantee the conservative political forces rather than Yoon himself will suffer the wrath of voters but there is a good chance of that. If so, the lack of a nationalist, forcefully anti-North Korean moderation position could threaten the ROK’s safety as a sovereign state. It would also disillusion a substantial number of Koreans who feel left out of options than those of more centrist or leftist elements. Sound familiar?

David Maxwell’s concerns are real for this country, like Israel or Taiwan, facing an existential threat every day. The DPRK has proven anything but interested in ending the conflict from decades past, instead developing its own nuclear capability and strengthening ties with Russia in the midst of the Ukraine conflict.

President Yoon’s proclamation of martial law, suspending political activities he did not support, and limiting both freedom of assembly and the press were unacceptable to the people of Korea. His actions appeared self-serving, petty, and unsustainable. But the consequences affected many beyond himself and his wife who he may have been protecting against investigations. The heart of the question for the future, however, will be how any of this leads Koreans to approach democracy differently? It will do but we can’t know for certain yet precisely how. Actions create consequences but they are never completely apparent as soon as the initial event closes.

I welcome your questions, thoughts, and comments. If there is interest, I can resurrect online discussion forum with David Maxwell for subscribers to question him directly. He is a gem whose knowledge is so welcome for this oft-misunderstood place. I welcome your suggestions on what would be useful to YOU as readers and subscribers.

Thank you for your time today and any day. Please feel free to circulate this column if you find it of value. Thank you to the subscribers whose support means so much. Do send me any reactions!

It was another crisp but lovely dawn. If you’ve never been to Annapolis or Eastport, you owe it to yourself to visit the Sailing Capital of the World.

Be well and be safe. FIN

Charles Apple, “In Control”, The Spokesman-Review, 2024 retrieved at https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2020/jun/25/control-house-and-senate-1900/

Associated Press, “Indiana lawmaker “, Deseret News, 5 September 1988, retrieved at https://www.deseret.com/1998/9/5/19400093/indiana-lawmaker-admits-an-affair-illegitimate-son/