On December 3, 2024, then-current president Yoon Suk-yeol declared a state of emergency and imposed martial law in a televised address, citing it as necessary protection for the country from his political opponents, whom he referred to as undemocratic, pro-North forces. Because martial law transfers authority to the military and severely reduces civilians’ liberties, it became clear that South Korea’s democracy was under attack.
Soon after, armed troops barricaded and broke into the National Assembly, the Korean legislature, under orders to prohibit all political activities, partially motivated by Yoon’s attempts to block members of the National Assembly from meeting from lifting the martial law. Simultaneously, in a display of civic resistance, 2000 South Koreans gathered at the gate of the National Assembly, protesting the authoritative decision .
In light of these escalating tensions, the National Assembly called an emergency session, with many climbing over the fences to access the building, and ruled the declaration unconstitutional: the country was not in a state of war, and the former President sought to illegally restrict the National Assembly from gathering. On December 14, 2024, with 204 votes out of 300 supporting the impeachment, the National Assembly removed Yoon from office and pressed criminal charges of insurrection.
With a snap election to follow, South Korea has faced a period of political uncertainty and polarization, highlighting the deep divides within the electorate and the government. Over the following weeks, supporters and opponents of the impeachment expressed their views in radical demonstrations.
Given the context of South Korea’s recent build-up of political tension, some might argue that this deepened political polarization remains to impede the nation’s trajectory towards democratic reforms. However, the impeachment and the snap presidential election demonstrate the opposite, highlighting the resilience and the will of the South Korean people to protect their democracy.
Historical Significance
– Advertisement –
This was not the first time martial law had been declared in South Korea. Since its founding in 1948, South Korea has experienced 16 declarations of martial law -– stemming from periods of political unrest and military coups -– with the last declaration occurring in 1980 under authoritarian General Chun Doo-hwan. The fragile state of South Korea coming out of Japanese colonialism and the Korean War against North Korea made the nation vulnerable to instability and the erosion of democratic norms by autocrats who rose to power. The history of frequent martial law declarations reflect the challenging path that South Korea undertook to establish and maintain its democracy since its last martial law declaration.
In particular, the imposition of the 1980 martial law remains a source of national grievance to the South Korean civilians, a period in which armed military forces brutally suppressed thousands of students protesting against the authoritarian rule. According to estimates, at least 165 people have been killed, all of them college students and Gwangju residents. The May 18 Democratization Movement of 1980 not only laid the foundation for a democratic movement in South Korea but also served as a reminder of the violence and repression made possible under the imposition of martial law. As such, the Korean people’s effort to oppose the 2024 martial law declaration was not a spontaneous reaction stemming from alarm but rather a deliberate stand grounded in a history of opposing authoritative rule to protect their democratic rights.
Current Day Polarization
Polarization in South Korea’s political system is primarily rooted in its two-party system: the People Power Party and the Democratic Party, the dominant conservative and progressive parties. The rivalry between the People Power Party and the Democratic Party has long been fierce, but it sharpened after the impeachment of conservative President Park Geun-Hye in 2017 and the subsequent election of progressive President Moon Jae-In. That transition, while a victory for democracy, also hardened partisan identities. Mass rallies for and against Park’s removal marked the beginning of a politics defined less by policy debate than by mutual distrust and retribution -– a cycle of “politics of revenge” that we see today.
This cycle was evident in former President Yoon’s decision to declare martial law. After winning the presidency in 2022, his conservative People Power Party lost control of the legislature in the 2024 general election, when the progressive Democratic Party captured nearly 60% of National Assembly seats. This split between the executive and the legislative branches further plunged the nation into a political stalemate. This particular split manifested regarding budget disputes and controversies surrounding the former first lady Kim Geon-Hee, during which cooperation gave way to confrontation, and the president turned to extraordinary measures to weaken his rivals.
Amid a politically polarized atmosphere, the South Koreans awaited the Constitutional Court’s decision regarding former President Yoon Suk-Yeol’s impeachment in 2025. Supporters and opponents operated within separate media ecosystems, portrayed the other side as an existential threat, and mobilized through confrontational street politics. Their hostility has at times crossed into violence, as seen on January 19, 2025, when a group of young conservative men stormed the Seoul Western District Court to protest Yoon’s detention — an incident underscoring how political violence has become a legitimate form of expression for some.
– Advertisement –
Such polarization poses a serious obstacle to the consolidation of South Korean democracy. In this divided government, where each side prioritizes partisan victory over compromise, even basic legislative functions become more disputatious. Polarization erodes both the effectiveness and the perceived legitimacy of democratic governance as the parties place their partisan interests over democratic interests, leaving the political system vulnerable to further crises.
Potential for Progress
Despite deep partisan divisions, South Korea’s path to democracy is not without hope. While the current polarization presents itself as a serious obstacle to be solved, recent events show that South Korea’s democratic foundations remain resilient.
The response to the martial law declaration of 2024 revealed great public defiance against authoritarian overreach, as thousands of Koreans gathered in the streets to protest. The citizens were able to overwhelm the troops and allowed members from both the ruling and opposition parties to enter the National Assembly to cast a repeal vote. In some cases, protesters even physically blocked armored vehicles, buying legislators the time needed to lift martial law. Such public support for impeachment demonstrates the nation’s desire to maintain and uphold democratic governance, as opposed to remaining complacent and detached in times of great political turbulence.
Notably, according to a Gallup poll, around 57% of the population -– including both progressives and conservatives -– supported his removal, signaling a rare moment of bipartisan consensus for the defense of democratic norms. The subsequent snap election achieved a 79.4% turnout rate, the highest in nearly three decades, highlighting exceptional civic engagement even amid political turmoil. The statistics illustrate a broad rejection of authoritarianism and commitment to democratic participation, considering the heavy divide separating the two parties.
These events show that, even in the middle of deep political divides, South Koreans are still ready and able to hold their leaders to account. The strong rejection of authoritarian rule -– matched by one of the highest voter turnouts in decades -– suggests a public determined to defend their democracy. It is a reminder that, despite the challenges, there is a solid base of civic will to build on for the country’s democratic future.
What Does This Mean?
South Korea continues to struggle with polarization and an increasingly divided society, but the impeachment and the snap election revealed something important: a strong undercurrent of civic responsibility and democratic engagement. The public’s swift and united response to the threat to democracy showed that the country’s commitment to democracy is rooted in the history of struggle against authoritative rule.
At the same time, these events are a warning -– not just for South Korea, but for the world -– that no democracy, no matter how established, is immune to backsliding. It highlights the important role advocacy on the part of civilians plays in protecting established institutions, encouraging accountability, and engaging in democratic practices. For South Korea, the fight for democracy is not over, and most certainly did not end with the impeachment of the former president and the restoration of democratic practices. Rather, the recent events prompted many to recognize that democracy is not something to be taken for granted but one that requires constant advocacy from those willing to preserve it. As far as South Korea is concerned, the preservation of its democratic future ultimately rests with the people -– whether or not they choose to defend it.
– Advertisement –