Six hours under martial law in South Korea
47:09 Share

Aren't you that PBM? Middleman. At your service, doctor. Don't you get rebates that save money on medicines? Oh, PBMs like me get big rebates. So why do patients tell me they're worried about their costs? No one says we have to share the savings with patients. Ha ha ha.

Congress should make sure medicine savings go directly to patients, not middlemen. Visit prma.org slash middlemen to learn more. Paid for by Pharma. This is On Point. I'm Meghna Chakrabarty.

The fall of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and the elimination of his dictatorial regime continues to draw the world's focus. The complex situation there is in flux as Syrian rebels have taken the capital Damascus. Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, leader of the main rebel group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, claims that Assad's removal is, quote, a victory for the entire Islamic nation, end quote.

HTS is a Sunni Islamist insurgent group that formed from an al-Qaeda affiliate. In 2018, the United States designated HTS as a foreign terrorist organization. White House National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said today that, quote, We're going to work with all the groups in Syria, including the ones that have been designated as terrorist groups. They have actually said all the right things, end quote.

So the situation in Syria is, of course, changing from hour to hour, and no one knows when the dust will settle from the collapse of that brutal dictatorship. For that reason, today, we're going to step back and look instead to one of Asia's most important democracies and how last week, for six remarkable hours, that democracy looked as if it, too, could topple. Anand.

I declare martial law to protect the free Republic of Korea from the threat of North Korean communist forces, to eradicate the despicable pro-North Korean anti-state forces that are plundering the freedom and happiness of our people, and to protect the free constitutional order. On late Tuesday night, South Korean President Yun Suk-yool declared emergency martial law,

He claimed that it was to protect Koreans from supposed North Korean sympathizers. But many observers see a different story playing out. A deeply unpopular president whose own party suffered a major defeat in Korea's last election and is under several corruption investigations, Yoon's declaration of martial law included an attempt to ban political activities and bring the media under his control.

The news shocked the nation. I never expected something like this to take happen in my life. And when I first heard it, I thought I wasn't aware of the definition correctly. So I looked it up and I wasn't mistaken. So I was shocked.

Quite shocking. Chan-yong Ryu lives in Seoul, South Korea. The 28-year-old was just finishing a long workday at home when he heard the news. When I finished everything about 11.30, I thought about it. And the more I thought about it, I knew this wasn't right for the country. Although I'm not deeply involved in politics myself, I felt in my heart that I needed to go out. So...

I asked my parents, obviously, because they'd be concerned. They obviously didn't want me to, but they said that this was the right thing. And so I got a taxi and went straight away. Ryu arrived at the National Assembly compound around midnight. You know, there was such a traffic jam that I decided to get out and just run a couple of hundred meters. First of all, there was police everywhere guarding the National Assembly, not letting anyone in.

And on the opposing side, there were lots of people all around the National Assembly protesting against the decision. The police blockade included helicopters landing on the roof of the National Assembly to prevent Korean lawmakers from getting inside to overturn Yoon's declaration. Ryu was among the hundreds of Koreans who gathered to protest outside the National Assembly. David was also there.

David says, quote, End quote.

Now we're using a pseudonym for David because of concerns that his comments could have professional repercussions. At first, it was all surreal, he says. To his left, there was a platoon-sized group of troops trying to enter the compound by hopping the fences. The crowd David was in confronted the troops. We were worried, but...

David says he was worried. And although having the crowd next to him helped, he did feel a great deal of fear because this was not the first time he's witnessed martial law enacted in South Korea. The last time South Korea declared emergency martial law, David was in middle school just over 40 years ago. It's a dark part of modern Korean history, which we will talk about later in the show.

Around 1 in the morning, 190 members of South Korea's National Assembly were able to take a vote to reject the martial law declaration. A few hours later, President Yoon officially lifted the emergency. Although the reminder of South Korea's authoritarian past was a brief one, David says nevertheless, it's time for change.

South Korea has a hard-fought democracy in place, David says. Quote, even though this is the president that we voted for, I think it's time for change in our country, end quote.

Well, the next day, Wednesday, opposition lawmakers in Korea submitted an impeachment bill. The day after that, on Thursday, Kim Jong-un, the former defense minister who proposed to Yoon that he should declare martial law, well, he told South Korean media outlet SBS that another purpose behind the martial law declaration was to, quote, assess the necessity of an investigation into alleged election fraud, end quote.

Well, that's revealed something else. Nearly 300 troops stormed the National Assembly compound that day, on the day of the declaration of martial law. But later reporting has found troops were also headed elsewhere on Tuesday to the National Election Committee building. According to security camera footage retrieved by South Korean outlet NBC, there were troops taking images of election data servers.

The Korean National Election Committee confirmed that the troops did not remove any data from the building, but that has not allayed concerns. I was surprised that there were still people who are in the cabinet and probably the president who still believes in this conspiracy theory.

There will be a lot of people who will grow their support for the martial law decree because of this reemerging conspiracy theory. So what is that conspiracy theory? Well, John Cook is an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science at Michigan State University.

In 2020, the conservative party politicians made some accusations about early voting being not too safe and there is a possibility of fraud. To be clear, there has been no evidence subsequently found of systemic election fraud in the 2020 South Korean elections.

Professor Cook says the continued support for this election conspiracy theory in Korea, though, could further divide an already polarized nation. It's hard to address every accusation about elections. So if there are remaining doubts...

these doubts will still linger among voters. And if President Yoon decides to cling to these doubts, then he can prolong his presidency or maintain some support while he's going through this impeachment battle. Now, as for that impeachment battle, the impeachment vote failed to reach completion.

because all but three members of Yoon's conservative People Power Party boycotted the vote. They did not show up to the National Assembly and thereby prevented the necessary two-thirds quorum of the 300-member body. An estimated 150,000 protesters filled the streets outside the National Assembly this past Saturday, demanding Yoon's impeachment, according to the South Korean news outlet Yonhap News.

On Sunday, the Seoul prosecutor's office detained former Defense Minister Kim for his role in the martial law declaration. And today, the Ministry of Justice barred President Yoon from leaving South Korea, while officials continue to investigate whether last week's martial law declaration amounted to leading an insurrection.

Well, as the political unrest continues in South Korea, Ryu, the 28-year-old Seoul resident, says he nevertheless remains hopeful about what will come next. We are in a state of political unrest and instability and uncertainty.

I think everyone agrees that the government isn't doing a great job at the moment. A lot of people are hoping for a change in just the overall political leadership. I'm at the same page, but at the same time, I always have an optimism in my heart that the Korean people always made the right decision in the end, if you look at our history. And I think that we'll be able to do the same this time.

So what are we to make of the threats to and defense of South Korea's democracy? Well, joining us now is Ji-Yoon Hong. She's an associate professor of political science and Korea Foundation professor of Korean studies at the University of Michigan. Professor Hong, welcome to On Point. On Point.

Thanks for having me. So we've got about a minute and a half before our first break here. I was wondering if you could just briefly bring us up to speed on what else has happened in Korea regarding President Yoon in the past couple of days. So I think the summary has been really good in this show. But there are three bodies of evidence.

investigation working right now. You mentioned about prosecutor's office, which office is where the president Yoon used to work before he became the he was elected as the president. So there is a lot of suspicion about or

or, you know, distrust about prosecutor office, whether they will they can be truly impartial for this investigation. And there's National Office of Investigation, which is part of police department and also Corruption Investigation Office for high ranking officials. They are also working on this case as well.

Okay. So when we come back, Professor, what I'd love to do is get a much deeper understanding of the political backdrop that led to Tuesday night's really shocking martial law declaration. Because I think many American listeners, when they think of Korea, they don't necessarily think of what could be a divided democracy. We think of a lot of other things, very positive about Korea. So we're going to want you to walk us through all of that in just a moment. This is On Point.

Support for the On Point podcast comes from Indeed.

Are you hiring? With Indeed, your search is over. Indeed doesn't just help you hire faster. 93% of employers agree that Indeed delivers the highest quality matches compared to other job sites. And listeners get a $75 sponsored job credit to get your jobs more visibility at Indeed.com slash on point. That's Indeed.com slash on point. Terms and conditions apply. Need to hire? You need Indeed.

You're back with On Point. I'm Meghna Chakrabarty. And today we're getting a deeper understanding of the threats to and defense of democracy in South Korea. Jiyeon Hong joins us today. She's an associate professor of political science at the University of Michigan. And Professor Hong, you know, this idea of political polarization is very, very familiar to Americans.

But I also described Korea as being politically divided. Can you describe in detail sort of what the vectors of those divisions are in Korea right now? So Korean polarization in a way is similar to the United States, but there are different portions in it. It's rarely about policy itself. It's more about policy.

It began from its ideological battle that exists in the country since the establishment of South Korea, I'd say. And in recent period, it became even more confrontational. So if you read the declaration of Marshal Lowe by President Yoon at the time, it's

full of these ideological languages, mentioning of North Korea, North Korean sympathizers. And he called the entire country

legislature as National Assembly as the den of criminals that shows the level of confrontation and in a way demonization of the other side I think in the United States I see more of discussion about policy itself in South Korea it has been more about there's more agreement about policy actually what should be done so Professor Hong

Again, at the risk of sounding rather gauche about my own understanding of Korean politics, which is admittedly not deep. When you say the ideological differences dating back to the creation of South Korea, are you talking about the differences between those Koreans who are...

are staunchly opposed to any talk of reunification versus those who may be more sympathetic? What is the ideological battle? So it has sort of transformed in different ways. But initially, it was about whether South Korea should be, South and North Korea should be one Korea as one nation versus, and then how to make it. So whether it should be peaceful negotiation-based negotiations

reunification versus the value of free liberal democracy sort of winning this battle between North and South Korea. So the Conservative Party, which is also authoritarian successor party, they have been always more confrontational about and then sort of against the North Korean regime.

And the Democratic Party, which is more progressive side, has been more leaning toward peaceful negotiation between North and South. OK, so I don't want to minimize how important this ideological divide is, right? Because it harkens back to the very well, first of all, the extraordinary situation.

pain and suffering that the entire Korean Peninsula experienced during the Korean War. And then second of all, it gets to the heart of South Korean self-identification, I guess. So, I mean, when you said that the conservative party or the people power party is the successor party to the authoritarian one or authoritarian regime, tell me more about that.

So the democratization of South Korea, which happened in 1987, it was initiated by massive protests by the public.

But process of the democratization was more of sort of negotiation between the authoritarian regime at the time and also the opposition side at the time. And then the way it was democratized through the election was through the democratic election.

And the authoritarian regimes, the ruling party at the time was one of the parties competed there. And then they won the first presidential election.

And afterwards, they merged with other pro-democracy parties and then sort of transformed themselves as sort of one of the most successful authoritarian successor party or the party that has origins in authoritarian regimes ruling party. But if I'm understanding you correctly, even though that's the genesis of Korea's conservative party now, they are the ones who say that they are standing in defense of

liberal democracy in South Korea. Right. So that has ideological meaning in it. So that liberal democracy is democracy against North Korea, democracy against possible socialist or communist change in the country. Okay. Which is an old idea. Wait, say more about that.

Which is, I think, in most of the countries, this is very Cold War-oriented languages, which will not be used in real politics anymore. But in South Korea, that's very much alive, especially, you know, even in 2024. I mean, again, I'm saying this at a great distance, sitting here in the United States, but

That makes sense to me because, I mean, what, Seoul is 12 miles, is that right, from the DMZ? So the reality of the difference in ideological beliefs between South and North Korea is ever-present. Right. That's true, too. That's the reality that South Koreans face every day. So given this backdrop, then, what is the current balance of power in South Korean government? Right.

So the presidential election was 2022, and that was the most closed election in history. The margin was less than 1%, 0.7%. So from the beginning, President Yoon's support was not the strongest one in history. And what...

After the election, though, instead of expanding the support base, he chose to speak to or seek collaboration from very narrow right wing or even far right group of supporters. And his speech compared to what he spoke during the election campaign became even more ideologically driven afterwards.

And then the personnel politics he played, he appointed a lot of very far right or right wing leaders in the country as the main cabinet members or in key positions in the government. So that led the support rate or the approval rate for him dropped drastically after his term began.

In South Korea, is the president elected directly by the people or is it through some sort of – Okay. So people were actually casting their ballots either for or against him as president. Yes. So there were another prominent candidate from the Democratic Party who won just 0.7 percent less votes than the president. Interesting. Interesting.

I hate it when U.S. journalists pull everything back to try to make it relevant via the lens of U.S. politics, Professor Hong, but I can't help it hearing you describe how President Yoon won by this tiny margin. But it sounds like he considered it something of a mandate and then became even more ideologically extreme is what you're saying?

Right, right. I think that sort of small margin make him and some of his supporters becoming became more confrontational because their support is so narrow. And then you should do something about it, which makes them to sort of behave in an extreme way, I believe. Yeah. Well, I'm saying that this sounds a little familiar given given the current state of U.S. politics and where we are. Unfortunately, yes. So you don't disagree? No.

I don't disagree. Okay. So then, but then what led, I mean, there seems like there's many factors. We played that tape from President Yoon earlier saying, as you said, he's decrying this den of thieves that he saw of support for North Korea. But there are other aspects that have been emerging about why he took this like extraordinary step of declaring martial law in Korea for the first time in 40 years. What are some of those other factors? Yeah.

So the decisive moment, I think, is the legislative election, which happened in April this year.

So because of his dropping popularity and some of the political missteps that he took before the election, the opposition party, Democratic Party, won about 60% of the seats in the National Assembly.

which gave them a lot of power to make the bill the Democratic Party wants and also block the policies that the president wants to execute.

And whatever bill made by the opposition party, basically the president played veto power against the bill. That happened more than 20 times so far. So none of the political action could be taken for about seven months now. And then that was...

apex of political confrontation you can imagine in the country. It's interesting because I can't imagine it because the kind of gridlock that you're describing seems completely normal here in the United States, right? Like divided government and given how U.S. politics has worked for the past couple of decades, divided government leading to a de facto paralysis when it comes to actually advancing policy. I think we're just

too inured to that in the United States, which is what's so interesting to me about what has happened in South Korea. So this gridlock is one of the reasons that President Yoon said, well, instead of...

continuing to allow South Korea's democratic processes to work. I'm going to jump to declaring martial law. Now, how much of that had to do with some of the other things that we touched on earlier, that he's under investigation for under various corruption allegations? Can you just quickly tell us what those allegations are?

Sure. So there is definitely him being coming from outside of politics. So he never practiced politics before and constantly

Coming from prosecutor's office, a lot of people describe him having very black and white view about the word. So it should be legal or illegal. It should be right or wrong. So that makes him make a... And then sort of his ideological leaning so far also made it hard to make any negotiation with the opposition party and then made an awful unconstitutional decision.

But at the same time, he personally, he, him and his family was under a lot of accusation and investigation. And then the police,

Opposition party argued they could not, the public could not trust the prosecutor's office because that's where he used to, the president used to work. And then prosecutor's office also dropped a lot of charges against his wife, who's also the center of the political scandal for corruption and bribery. There are so many accusations against her, right?

probably more than the president himself. And the prosecutor's office has been very inactive or not responsive so far. I see. So that led to even greater distrust about his politics. Okay. I'm Meghna Chakrabarty. This is On Point. Professor Hong, you're going to have to forgive me because, I don't know, maybe I'm just not...

a sophisticated enough political thinker to understand why he would have taken this massive jump to declaring martial law. Because, again, it just seemed like the next elections aren't that far away. Why not turn to making a somewhat persuasive argument to the Korean people to break the gridlock between the president's office and the National Assembly? I think that's

part of the reason why all South Koreans are having a hard time and frustration. Why? Like, what kind of psychology could lead him to this? So we are puzzled as much as you are.

I think part of the reason is next election is actually quite far away because the latest election was this year in April. And legislative election is every four years. So next one will be in 2028, which is after 2020.

the end of his term. So Korea has two major national elections, which is presidential election every five years. The last election was two and a half years ago. And legislative election is every four years.

And then there is no re-election. So this is, he's only in last term. And the National Assembly, the competition will be the same for the rest of his term. So if you try really hard to understand his psychology or desperation as he described his status at the time, that might be the reason. But still, it cannot be the legitimate reason to understand. Okay.

I want to highlight one important thing, though, is that ultimately the rule of law prevailed last week in South Korea. Right. I mean, the impeachment, the impeachment vote may not have been completed because of his party not showing up to prevent that quorum. But nevertheless, his his martial law declaration was completed.

which had to involve members of his own party as well. And I'm just very taken by the images that we saw coming out of South Korea, you know, even legislators trying to get into the National Assembly and confronting troops and saying, aren't you ashamed for being out here, for stopping the government from doing its work? And of the Korean people themselves who came to the National Assembly to protest. Can you tell me a little bit more about, you know, what you saw in that spontaneous protest

organization and support for Korean democracy? Yes, absolutely. We, I mean, it's really, we all became tearful to see those citizens and public

democracy with their body, despite their facing martial law military who are heavily armed. But at the same time, the lawmakers, despite their partisan conflict they have had, feels like forever so far, they sort of acted quickly together to pass

to revoke the martial law very quickly. Within two and a half hours, it was revoked. And then it could be even two hours, but they wanted to make it procedurally correct. So the president cannot do anything about that.

And then thirdly, the martial law itself was not well prepared, partly because the information couldn't be shared widely. So a lot of – and then the military system has been very professionalized during the 40 years when South Korea did not have –

emergency martial law. So at every step, I think there was lack of communication or miscommunication within the military, how what they should do, how they behave.

And the military members who were dispatched to the scene were also reluctant to act aggressively. Well, in the crowd of South Koreans who came to defend their democracy, it included both the young and the old. So when we come back, Professor Hong, let's move back in time in Korean history to talk about why this martial law declaration really, really hit home for so many Koreans. This is On Point. On Point.

You're back with On Point. I'm Meghna Chakrabarty. And today we're joined by Ji-Yoon Hong. She's an associate professor of political science and the Korea Foundation professor of Korean studies at the University of Michigan. And she's helping us make sense of what happened in South Korea last week when President Yun Suk-yool unexpectedly declared martial law there before being forced to lift that declaration just six hours later.

And within that six hour period, though, there are some very powerful lessons on the threats to and defense of democracy in the Korean context. Yes, but lessons for Korea.

The entire world, I'd say. Now, what happened last week marked the first time that South Korea declared martial law in more than 40 years. The last time was 1980, to be exact. And Professor Hong, if you could listen along with me for a few moments, because we really wanted to speak with people in detail about that history. Okay.

So we reached out to two political sociologists who were also students in South Korea in the 1980s, Seung-suk Moon at Vassar College and Gi-uk Shin at Stanford University.

And in the 1970s, South Korea's democracy was experiencing quite a bit of turmoil. You had mentioned that earlier, Professor. In 1972, then President Park Chung-hee established the Yushin Constitution, which turned the country into an autocratic dictatorship.

Professor Moon says that for a while, many South Koreans, particularly the older generation, supported Park's dictatorial government. So during the 70s, military tension with North Korea was really heightened. And then globally, oil prices really gone up and it created real negative repercussions for Korean economy. After 1975, internal political situation also became so contentious.

So a lot of people were very much fearful of what's going on. Everyday Koreans who supported him

So all very positive things about him that, yeah, he is not democratic. He's brutal when it comes to political opposition. But, well, Korea is not quite ready for Western-style liberal democracy. So we need this kind of a strong man. However, there was also growing protest, especially among young college students, albeit quietly.

But then in 1979, after nearly two decades of Park Chung-hee's presidency, the unexpected happened. It was on October 26th of 1979. I heard from news that he was killed. Growing up in the 70s, we always thought that Park Chung-hee was the only person who can be the president.

When the Yushin Constitution was issued, Korea became a formal dictatorship, meaning there was no election during the 1970s.

We didn't know what happened at the time, but later we learned that there are certain divisions within the inner circle of power regarding how to deal with growing protests. The chief of the Korean CIA believed that the only way to solve the situation was to kill the president himself.

Korean people were not used to this kind of power vacuum. And what they called the new military, led by Jeon Do-hwan, the two-star general in charge of military intelligence, they actually moved very quickly to seize power through another coup. By spring of 1980, social and political atmosphere was very intense. And I remember that campuses were full of protests.

riot police were dispatched to deal with protests and the tailgates all the time. It's a really massive mobilization.

During that time, people called Seoul Spring, that all this political dictatorship was in a way melting away. And maybe now Korea has a chance to restore procedural democracy and then revive our election. Even as a high school student, I was aware of how all these things were really up in the air.

It was during about 10 days from May 18th through 27th of May. Citizens of Gwangju City

rose up against the military rule, especially in response to, in other words, martial law and all this hardening of political situation again. And Jeon Doo-hwan had to crack down all this movement that is spreading around the country. And he sent a special force to Gwangju City, the tanks and all. It was like a wartime operation, really.

to crack down civilian uprising. The new military, they wanted to send a strong message to Korean people. And I think Gwangju became a scapegoat. They got very severe repression. And then we know in the end, civilians fought against Korean troops.

It was brutally crushed. And that was one of the most violent political history in South Korea. In the end, several hundred innocent people got killed, many wounded. You know, this might be the first time or only time in Korean history that people got killed by their own military.

The people who were living there, they say, was thousands. Government always put much less number. So it's somewhere between. So that was the last time when Koreans experienced martial law. On Tuesday morning, I woke up around 6 a.m. And then I saw some breaking news saying martial law in South Korea.

I thought you're going to fake this. You're going to be kidding me. I mean, martial arts, sunscreen, 2024? There's no way. I was totally shocked. I thought that there would be possibly two scenarios. One is that something really terribly threatening to the national security happened and I don't know about it. Or he's just doing this without much thinking and consultation.

maybe in the context of all this political contention that has been going on and steadily growing. But I am actually very encouraged to see a lot of people taking streets. Koreans remember that they had to fight for democracy. If any undemocratic measures try to threaten their society, they'll fight back.

That's why I remain optimistic despite all the problems with politics and politicians. That's my very strong conviction. That's Gi-wook Shin, professor of sociology and contemporary Korea at Stanford University. You also heard from Sung-suk Moon. She's a professor of sociology at Vassar College.

Professor Hong, listening to them really makes it that much more powerful that the scenes from South Korea, from Seoul in particular, last week included people confronting the military. I quoted a protester earlier saying, aren't you ashamed? Because it sounds like that's a direct reference to the tragedy of 1980. But I

But just to be clear, even after 1980, though, Korea wasn't free of a military dictatorship, right? Right. So the new military regime by Chun Doo-hwan lasted seven more years. And then toward the end of his regime, there was simply too big outcry from the public to reinstall the presidential election, direct presidential election.

as he promised at the beginning of his regime. And that movement became really massive, the largest in scale in Korean history for democratization. And he had to make a concession. Okay.

So how much, though, does that period from 1980 through the 90s still inform? I mean, you heard the other two professors say this, but still inform South Koreans' belief in the stability of their own democracy. I think it's amazing. So at that time, I was told I was I was like just too young to remember anything myself. But I was told people didn't know about Gwangju that well.

because the information was very, there was no internet and information was really kept within the insider. And it only, that's why the students who somehow got the information had to go out to street and demand more transparency and democracy to the government, even though it was extremely brutal government at the time.

And then what's interesting about what just happened in 2024, it's not just old generation who remember that period, but also a lot of younger generation just sprung out to the streets and try to protect the democracy because this is already Gwangju and also the previous period,

under dictatorship is already in collective memory of South Korean citizens. And then that has been through textbook news on truce and reconciliation process and documentaries and also movies. People talk about K-culture and part of K-culture

Kate Kirchherr is also a very realistic depiction of what happened during Korean dictatorship. You see, the reason why I'm so compelled by understanding what happened in Korea last week is that, again, externally, many Americans look upon Korea as this, you know, glittering example of

of the potential of Asian democracy, right? I mean, it's a technological powerhouse. It's a cultural powerhouse, as you talked about. Politically, the United States looks at South Korea as an absolute linchpin in the stability of the entire Asia, excuse me, Asia Pacific region, right? Korea, Japan, China, that sort of triumvirate being central to that whole hemisphere. Right.

So I wonder if this reminder that even in a nation like Korea, democracies can be fragile and must be protected. I wonder what you think that might make of if last week's momentary blip might if that might have any impact on U.S.-Korea relations, if at all, given that we have a Trump administration coming in here in the United States in January. Mm hmm.

So I think what happened in South Korea hasn't ended. So there is continuing political turmoil going on. And there will be the impeachment failed last week. And then the Democratic Party, the opposition party already announced that they will try it again next week on Saturday. And then there will be even greater protests outside the National Assembly building.

I think what Korean case shows is the hope and also limitation we see in political, democratic political system and institutions. So National Assembly quickly

prevent the country becoming another military dictatorship that was successful. But afterwards, how we can sustain democracy in South Korea has been a big question because the ruling party doesn't want to let go of the

current power they have doesn't think about long-term politics. They should think right now and blocking the impeachment process, which is the only constitutional process given by the Constitution since the democratization of the country. They're talking about other process like orderly resignation, which are not inside the Constitution. So it's not sustainable. It's not constitutional.

So I think it's really important for politicians, especially the ruling party politician, think about democracy before partisan interests and think about the stability of institution. The legislators, their mission is to check and balance the executive power. That's what founding fathers built the system of United States. And then democracy.

that will be really the last power they would have when this extreme situation happened. Correct. That a democracy is only as strong as the people who believe in its institutions. Correct. Absolutely. You know, Professor Hong, I wonder if we've got about a minute and a half left, if I could ask you to remove your professor hat for a moment, because it's

I'm thinking to myself of how I felt on January 6th, 2021, right? Watching the storming of the Congress of the United States. And American democracy did feel very, very, very endangered in that moment to me. Ultimately was protected. I'll never forget that feeling, though. And I'm just wondering as a Korean, like how did what happened last week in Korea, when you were witnessing it, what were you feeling and what were you thinking?

So I called my mom that morning without knowing the news. And she said something really bad happened to our country. I immediately thought North Korea attacked the country. That's this natural, even unconscious reaction any Koreans would have.

None of us imagined this Marshall O mayhem was the reason. And I think January 6th to a lot of American citizens was a similar thing. I think what...

I feel very frustrated, angry, and despite studying politics for decades, I honestly don't know what to do as an individual. But I think we have a lot of people in solidarity. So there are a lot of citizens who are taking action because they have to do something right now. And then I'm part of it. And I will continue to make those actions to protect democracy.

Well, if I may say, something important that you've done is coming on this show and helping educate us all further and helping us make sense of what is happening today in South Korea. So Professor Ji-Yoon Hong, Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Michigan, my sincere thanks to you. Thank you so much for coming on the show. Thank you very much for having me. I'm Meghna Chakrabarty. This is On Point.