S. Korean martial law debacle raises questions over president’s future

SEOUL, South Korea — President Yoon Suk Yeol’s stunning martial law declaration lasted just hours, but experts say it raised serious questions about his ability to govern for the remaining 21/2 years of his term and whether he will abide by democratic principles.

The opposition-controlled parliament overturned the edict, and his rivals on Wednesday took steps to impeach him. One analyst called his action “political suicide.”

Yoon’s political fate may depend on whether a large number of people in coming days take to the streets to push for his ouster.

Here’s a look at the political firestorm caused by the martial law declaration, the first of its kind in more than 40 years.

Why did Yoon impose martial law?

Yoon’s declaration of emergency martial law on Tuesday night was accompanied by a pledge to eliminate “shameless North Korea followers and anti-state forces at a single stroke.” He vowed to protect the country from “falling into the depths of national ruin.” Yoon, a conservative, cited repeated attempts by his liberal rivals in control of parliament to impeach his top officials and curtail key parts of his budget bill for next year.

South Korea’s constitution allows a president to impose military rule during “wartime, war-like situations or other comparable national emergency states.” But a president can’t maintain martial law if parliament opposes it with a majority vote.

That’s what happened Wednesday. And it’s why Yoon’s move has baffled many experts.

Yoon’s political fighting with the main opposition Democratic Party is not seen as an emergency requiring military intervention. Experts question why Yoon pushed ahead with the declaration even though the parliament would certainly vote it down.

“Conservatives and even moderates would agree with Yoon’s criticism and his assessment of progressive lawmakers, but his choice of methods in the 21st century is being seen as the wrong move, miscalculation, and even political suicide,” said Duyeon Kim, a senior analyst at the Center for a New American Security in Washington, D.C.

Yoon’s decree resulted in the military deploying troops with assault rifles and police officers to the National Assembly to block its entrance. Even so, 190 of the parliament’s 300 members managed to enter and later vote down Yoon’s martial law edict early Wednesday. Yoon then lifted martial law without any resistance.

The sequence of events suggests that his declaration wasn’t carefully or thoroughly planned.

“His advisers should have tried to dissuade him not to do it, and they likely did so. But I think that didn’t work, and Yoon just pressed ahead with his plan,” said Hong Sung Gul, a public administration professor at Seoul’s Kookmin University. “That shows he isn’t capable of governing this country.”

What political fate awaits Yoon?

The Democratic Party, which has a majority in parliament, demanded Wednesday that Yoon resign. Together with small opposition parties, it submitted a joint motion on Yoon’s impeachment and said they aim for a floor vote as early as Friday.

Yoon didn’t comment on the impeachment bid, but he put off his official schedule Wednesday morning. He hasn’t made public appearances since earlier Wednesday, when he announced he was lifting martial law.

The opposition parties together hold 192 seats, eight short of the two-thirds needed to impeach Yoon. But Yoon could face trouble from his own camp as 18 legislators from the ruling People Power Party voted to reject his martial law decree. PPP leader Han Dong-hun called his declaration “unconstitutional.”

“Both his own ruling party and the opposition party want to hold him accountable. For the first time, in a highly polarized country, both sides of the aisle agree that Yoon’s choice in declaring martial law was the wrong move,” Duyeon Kim, the analyst, said. “It sounds like his own party is opposed to impeachment but still deliberating whether to ask Yoon to leave the party.”