On December 3, 2024, South Korea experienced a dramatic political upheaval when President Yoon Suk Yeol declared emergency martial law. This unprecedented move, citing threats from “North Korean communist forces” and “antistate forces,” plunged the nation into a state of emergency for a brief period. The declaration, made in a nationally televised address at 10:30 p.m. (KST), marked the first time martial law had been imposed in South Korea since the turbulent era of 1980, raising serious concerns about the state of democracy in the country. But Why Is South Korea Under Martial Law, and what were the immediate consequences and reactions to this drastic decision?
To understand the gravity of President Yoon’s action, it’s crucial to delve into the political backdrop that preceded this declaration. The opposition Democratic Party, holding a majority in the National Assembly, had been increasingly at odds with President Yoon’s administration. Tensions escalated in the weeks leading up to the martial law announcement, with the opposition actively challenging the government’s agenda. The National Assembly, controlled by the Democratic Party, had recently moved to reduce the government’s budget for the upcoming year and initiated impeachment proceedings against key state officials, including the chief of the state audit agency and the chief prosecutor. President Yoon, in his martial law address, directly criticized this “legislative dictatorship” by the opposition, claiming it was obstructing his ability to govern effectively. He pointed to 22 impeachment attempts against him since assuming office in May 2022 as evidence of this political obstruction, framing the martial law declaration as a necessary measure to overcome this political deadlock and protect the nation.
The immediate aftermath of the martial law declaration was swift and impactful. Police and military forces were mobilized, with police vehicles quickly barricading the National Assembly building. Dozens of armed soldiers entered the National Assembly, even forcibly breaching the main building by breaking windows, demonstrating the seriousness of the situation. Martial Law Commander Park An-su, also the Army Chief of Staff, issued “Martial Law Command Proclamation (No. 1),” which effectively banned all political activities. This proclamation extended to the operations of the National Assembly itself, political parties, assemblies, gatherings, and protests. Furthermore, the decree prohibited any actions deemed subversive to the democratic system, including the dissemination of “fake news” and the manipulation of public opinion. Media and publications were placed under the control of the Martial Law Command, and social disruptions like strikes were outlawed. A stark measure within the proclamation was the order for striking medical personnel to return to duty within 48 hours, under threat of punishment according to the Martial Law Act.
Despite the imposition of martial law and the restrictions, the South Korean National Assembly demonstrated a rapid and decisive response. In an extraordinary session held in the early hours of December 4th, the National Assembly convened and passed a resolution demanding the immediate lifting of martial law. With all 190 members present voting in favor out of the 300-seat assembly, the resolution underscored the widespread opposition to President Yoon’s declaration. Crucially, Article 77 of the South Korean Constitution mandates that the President must comply when the National Assembly requests the lifting of martial law with a majority consent. Faced with this constitutional mandate and overwhelming political opposition, President Yoon was compelled to lift the emergency martial law declaration just hours after it was imposed. By 4:30 a.m. (KST), the martial law was officially lifted.
The reaction to President Yoon’s martial law declaration was immediate and widespread, spanning across the political spectrum and among the public. Opposition leader Lee Jae-myung of the Democratic Party urgently called for lawmakers and citizens to “safeguard the collapsing democracy,” vehemently denouncing President Yoon’s actions. In a live broadcast, Lee declared that Yoon had “betrayed the people” and effectively delegitimized his presidency. Notably, opposition to the martial law extended even to members of President Yoon’s own People Power Party. Party leader Han Dong-hoon publicly stated, “This is an unlawful and unconstitutional declaration of martial law,” affirming the commitment to protect democracy. Public outrage manifested in gatherings and protests in front of the National Assembly, where reports indicated clashes between civilians and martial law troops as they initially attempted to occupy the building. Internationally, the Biden administration adopted a cautious stance, acknowledging the developments and emphasizing the need for peaceful resolution of political conflicts, reflecting the delicate geopolitical implications of the situation.
While President Yoon swiftly lifted the martial law declaration, the repercussions of this event are far-reaching and cast a shadow over his political future. Intended as a display of decisive leadership to quell political instability, the declaration instead triggered a rapid and unified backlash from the legislature and the public. The swift mobilization of the National Assembly to overturn the martial law, coupled with the potential for sustained street protests against a president already grappling with low approval ratings, paints a picture of significant political vulnerability for Yoon. Furthermore, the incident provides a significant propaganda opportunity for North Korea, which is likely to exploit the turmoil to criticize the Yoon government and highlight perceived instability in the South. Despite the short duration of the emergency martial law, the episode underscores deep political divisions within South Korea and raises critical questions about the balance of power and the resilience of its democratic institutions in the face of internal conflict.
