On Tuesday, South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol shocked the international community by officially declaring a state of “emergency martial law.” He justified this unprecedented action—marking the first instance of martial law in South Korea since the end of military rule in the 1980s—by stating that “subversive, anti-state elements” among the opposition were obstructing his governance. At a press conference held at his office in Seoul, Yoon claimed the declaration was necessary to protect the Republic of Korea from perceived threats posed by North Korean communist forces and to eradicate what he described as “unscrupulous pro-Pyongyang anti-state forces” that supposedly undermine the freedoms and happiness of the South Korean people.
In his rationale, Yoon accused opposition leaders of using political maneuvering to disrupt judicial proceedings and undermine his administration’s operations. He highlighted a contentious proposal from the opposition to cut $2.8 billion from the proposed $483 billion national budget for 2025, which he interpreted as an attempt to incapacitate his government. Yoon specifically targeted Lee Jae-myung, the leader of the opposition Democratic Party, who recently faced legal troubles related to election law violations. The president’s declaration labeled the National Assembly, where the Democratic Party holds a majority with 170 of 300 seats, as a “hotbed of criminals.” This claim came amidst reports that parliamentary discussions regarding the budget were stalled until December 10.
Yoon announced that the martial law would remain effective until all “anti-state forces” were eradicated. He recognized that the implementation of martial law might disrupt the lives of citizens who upheld constitutional values, yet he asserted the necessity of such measures to guarantee the safety and sustainability of the nation. His assurances that inconveniences would be minimized were met with skepticism, both domestically and internationally. Yoon declared a focused commitment to restoring normalcy in the country and urged the public to place their trust in his leadership.
Opposition leaders responded vehemently against the declaration, highlighting a significant divide in South Korean politics. Han Dong-hoon, the leader of Yoon’s own People Power Party, publicly opposed the martial law, emphasizing that military rule should not return to South Korea. Opposition leader Lee Jae-myung went further, categorically stating that Yoon’s declaration was illegal and that he should no longer serve as the president. He implored the military to reject Yoon’s commands, asserting that authority lies with the people rather than the president. In the streets, tensions escalated as protesters attempted to breach the parliament building, which had been locked down.
Amidst this politically charged atmosphere, Yoon’s administration is also grappling with allegations of corruption involving his wife and high-ranking officials in his party. Recent polls revealed a decline in Yoon’s approval ratings, plummeting to 25%, while the opposition Democratic Party enjoyed greater public support at 45%. The martial law declaration itself had been foreshadowed by earlier accusations from the opposition, who foresaw a planned move to prevent any impeachment proceedings that could arise from allegations of abuse of power.
Following the martial law proclamation, commander Park An-su stated that all political activities, assemblies, and demonstrations were strictly prohibited. Moreover, the decree mandated that medical personnel on strike must return to work within 48 hours, reflecting the government’s urgency in restoring order amid widespread dissent. Protests intensified outside the parliament building, where riot police clashed with demonstrators, including around 70 opposition lawmakers who resisted efforts to disband. This chaotic atmosphere reflects a critical juncture in South Korean democracy, as the nation grapples with the implications of martial law and the ongoing confrontation between the government and opposition factions.