In the morning of December 4, South Korean people woke up to a terrible news: their President Yoon Suk-yeol had imposed a martial law in previous night but it was swiftly thwarted by the National Assembly where opposition party – Democratic Party – holds a majority. As soon as the reports of imposition of martial law spread like a wild fire, political parties, civil society members, trade unions, and students took to the streets, braving the freezing cold at midnight. Protesters gathered in front of the Assembly building, with raucous call: ‘Impeach Yoon Seok Yeol.’
President Yoon was forced to withdraw the Martial Law decree in the face of massive public anger. Now Yoon has been suspended through a passage of impeachment motion backed by the lawmakers from both main opposition Democratic Party and ruling People Power Party (PPP). Yoon has been suspended from presidency for the disgraceful move and his political fate is in the Constitutional Court that will review the rebellion charges against the tainted president and decide whether or not to uphold the decision of removing Yoon from the post.
Deepening crisis
The political crisis has further deepened in the peninsular nation after the parliament Friday voted to impeach acting president Han Duck-soo after he delayed in appointing three judges in the constitutional court. The ongoing turmoil has rattled the financial market, with Korean won sharply falling against the dollar. For some time, Asia’s fourth-largest economy will tread the unchartered waters until it finds a clear constitutional course that will enable it to ride out the political storm.
The way Yoon’s bid to enforce the martial law shocked the Korean people, their quick, decisive and coordinated response to foil his anti-democratic move came as pleasant surprise for the world, signifying that South Korean democracy is strong and resilient that cannot be overturned by any leader that tries to don the camouflage a dictator. Korean people’s strong distaste for and resistance to authoritarian rulers of different hues is quite understandable. They endured a series of dictatorships under Syngman Rhee, Park Chung-hee and Chun Doo-hwan -, which deprived them of democracy and civil rights for several decades.
The recent dramatic unfolding of Korean politics reminds this writer of conviction of former South Korean president late Kim Dae-Jung. “No one can imagine that democracy will be again taken back in South Korea. It is firmly rooted,” said an icon of democracy. In August, 2006, he had granted an interview to this scribe and talked about his relentless fight for democracy and human rights, and Sunshine policy that sought reconciliation with North Korea. “In order to accomplish democracy, we need a leader who has ideas of democracy to enhance democratic culture and show courage to meet the ultimate goal,” added the Nobel laureate.
Shedding light on the strength and nature of South Korean democracy, Kim Dae-jung observed: “Democracy has been firmly established in South Korea. People from different walks of life such as students and intellectuals, the young and the old contributed to bring about democracy. So democracy in Korea was not accomplished only by the leaders but also by the people,” he said. His views look so far-sighted in the context of swift mobilisation of civic forces against the recent attempt to impose martial law in the country.
Photo courtesy : BBC
Virtually, no South Korean had believed that their democratically elected president would resort to martial law just to tame the opposition that has been at loggerheads with him over a number of issues. For the old generation that had a lived experience of repressive military rules and the young generation that grew up in peace time, the martial law appeared to be a surrealistic adventure aimed at gagging the freedom of speech, free press and other civil rights. There was no widespread violence. Neither a serious threat to public life, which might have demanded draconian security measures.
Yoon resorted to Cold War era’s tactic by invoking the menace of North Korea in order to justify his move. In his address to the nation, he argued that the country should be protected from “shameless, pro-North Korean, anti-state” forces, accusing the opposition of colluding with North Korea. This was a sort of discredited McCarthyism, which has no ground in the contemporary South Korean politics. In 1980, similar charges were levelled against the protesters in the southwestern city of Gwangju when they stood against the martial law imposed by the then president Chun Doo-hwan. A large number of people were massacred in the Gwangju uprising.
Decades of fighting against the military rules, deepening democratic culture, modern education, vast social networks and digital technology have been attributed to the quick response to the martial law. Of the total 51 million people, 49 million use social networking sites that connect together the old and new generation people. The school curriculum has well incorporated the democratic struggles, familiarising the young people with the nation’s tumultuous history.
Powerful alliances
Over the decades, South Korea has developed skills of building powerful alliances of workers’ unions, students, professional associations, rights activists, peasants and intellectuals against the military dictatorships. These coalitions are quickly mobilised when democratic rights are imperiled. Many noted progressive figures such as Kim Dae-jung, Roh Moo-hyun, and Moon Jae-in rose to the national scene through the civic mobilisation movements in the 1980s and became the president. In South Korea, civil society is strong and plays a crucial role not only in toppling dictatorships but also reforms electoral system and democratic institutions.
The ongoing political deadlock, triggered by the attempted martial law, has also laid bare the fragility of the South Korean democratic politics and institutional fault lines. This might require strengthening institutional guardrails and prudently implementing the principle of the separation of powers. Widening political polarisation between the ruling and opposition parties might threaten political and economic stability for some time. If the history is any guide, political parties will be able to find a democratic solution to the ongoing tension. And democracy will prevail over authoritarian inclination at the end of the day.
(The author is Deputy Executive Editor of this daily.)