Assuming It wasn't Due to His Cognitive Disorder, What Logic Could Justify President Yoon's Declaration of Martial Law, Which Puts His Career at Risk?

[The Crisis of South Korea’s Conservative Party 1/2]

Under the light of economic growth lies the shadow of dictatorship—a defining strength and threat in the history of conservative governance in South Korea. The ruling party, People Power Party (PPP), inheriting the legacy of conservative politics, has spent decades striving to erase this authoritarian shadow by upholding constitutional principles and liberal democratic values. However, President Yoon's declaration of martial law on December 3 exposed a critical Achilles’ heel of the conservative party for the first time in 45 years, unraveling decades of hard work in just six hours.

When declaring martial law, President Yoon cited the need to "eradicate pro-North and anti-state forces to safeguard the liberal constitutional order." To him, these forces are the members of the opposition that make up more than half of the National Assembly. The idea that these? Democratic Party (DP) members of the National Assembly are North Korean operatives is a conspiracy theory rooted in the belief that the elections earlier this year were manipulated by North Korea and China.?

Who are the alleged pro-North Korean forces? The election was rigged, so China and North Korea got people they supported into the General Assembly.?

South Korea’s political landscape has been deeply polarized through decades of conflict, with the rise of social personal media platforms like YouTube further reinforcing confirmation bias among supporters. Far-right YouTubers who support the president have persistently claimed that the 22nd National Assembly elections were rigged, branding opposition lawmakers as pro-North Korean forces and vehemently criticizing them. These figures have also alleged that the president’s low approval ratings were fabricated, inciting public sentiment. An example is the channel HoverLab Inc., which has over 800,000 subscribers and serves as a major platform for spreading far-right narratives. Another prominent figure is Pastor Jeon Kwang-hoon, one of the most well-known far-right activists in South Korea. He even warned that he would withdraw his support for the president if the allegations of election rigging were not clarified.?

President Yoon’s martial law declaration included strong language such as "a haven for drugs, agents of democratic subversion, the root of national ruin, and anti-state forces," vowing to protect South Korea from these threats. These expressions strikingly mirror the rhetoric of far-right YouTubers. Such claims are rarely found in traditional media or any credible sources, raising concerns that the president may have misjudged these extreme views as representative of public opinion. This misjudgment signals a potential lack of objectivity and rationality in diagnosing and responding to the national crisis.

One of the main reasons behind declaring martial law He's declaring martial law as a way to investigate election rigging claims.

Where do these claims actually come from? They don't actually represent views of the general public or traditional media, but the views of a few Far-right YouTubers. The president has long been at odds with most legacy media outlets, further isolating his sources of information. Because of the lack of communication between the president and his own party, it creates this echo-chamber effect where he seeks information that confirms his biases.?

For the greater good to “Save South Korea?” Or is it also personally motivated? Him arresting his potential political opposition, or burying the potential investigation into the First Lady

Yet, by deploying martial law forces to enter the National Assembly and obstruct its functions, he violated the principle of separation of powers. Moreover, his attempt to seize control of the National Election Commission, a constitutional institution, contradicted the rationale of protecting the constitutional order, and instead, undermined constitutional principles and democratic values. This self-contradictory act rendered the justification for declaring martial law untenable.

The martial law declaration, which defies rational explanation, was so shocking to politicians across party lines and the general public that it provoked claims of impulsive behavior. Some claimed Yoon declared martial law because? "he was drunk" or "due to his temper." However, evidence is emerging that the action was premeditated. Prosecutors have uncovered substantial evidence of premeditation, leading to the arrest of the Minister of National Defense and the emergency detention of the National Police Chief. According to police reports, prior to the declaration of martial law, the president had instructed the police chief to detail specific targets, including 10 locations such as national media outlet Munhwa Broadcasting Corporation (MBC), to be seized by martial law forces.

An opposition party, DP, suggested that the declaration of martial law last week might have been motivated by the impending impeachment of the auditor general and three prosecutors scheduled for December 4. If these impeachments proceed, investigations into stock manipulation allegations involving the First Lady could resume, leading to speculation that the use of martial law was a desperate attempt to block such developments.

Given his background as a former prosecutor general, the rationale for President Yoon’s martial law declaration appears particularly weak in its legal justification. Martial law is a measure justified only under extreme circumstances such as military threats or national chaos. If this declaration was motivated more by political aims—such as shielding the First Lady or consolidating his support base—rather than a genuine national crisis, it starkly contradicts his credentials as a legal professional and further weakens his justification.

The PPP spokesperson defended the martial law declaration, stating that "attempts to impeach the auditor general and public officials led by the Democratic Party, coupled with budget cuts, prompted the president to judge the situation as akin to a wartime emergency, if not an actual war. The martial law was meant as a warning to inform the public of the gravity of the situation."

If, as the spokesperson claims, the president judged the current situation to be a state of emergency akin to wartime and sought to justify it, what exactly were the reasons behind such a conclusion?

Could a lack of communication have reinforced this binary way of thinking? It is no secret in Yeouido, Korea's political hub, that communication between the president and the ruling party leadership is strained. This breakdown in dialogue has led to an environment where diverse perspectives are sidelined, and the president reaches unilateral conclusions. Such a structure inevitably fosters an "us versus them" mentality, increasing the likelihood of extreme decisions.

Before the martial law declaration, the prime minister, the National Intelligence Service director, and other cabinet members reportedly expressed opposition. Even after the declaration, military generals allegedly pretended to comply with the president’s orders to suppress the National Assembly while effectively disobeying them. Furthermore, the president reportedly ordered the arrests of not only the opposition leader, a potential presidential candidate, but also the ruling party leader with whom he had been at odds. He also directed the arrest of journalists influential in the progressive camp.

The president may have defined his action as "justice" and perceived anyone opposing him—including the ruling party leader—as threats to national integrity. Believing that public opinion was manipulated, he might have been convinced that martial law would garner public support. His belief in revealing the truth about election rigging and “enlightening the ignorant masses” may have led him to justify the extreme act of suppressing the National Assembly, exceeding his presidential authority.

According to the detained Minister of National Defense, the president ordered martial law forces to investigate claims of election fraud in the 21st and 22nd general elections, as alleged by far-right YouTubers. This indicates that the president may have aligned himself with extreme political views, leading to the martial law declaration.

Ultimately, these circumstances suggest that the martial law declaration stemmed not from an objective assessment of the state of the nation but from personal convictions and political motives. Driven by a distorted interpretation of public opinion and a lack of communication, the president may have sought to use martial law to uncover the 'truth' about election rigging and position himself as the true protector of South Korea.

President Yoon’s strong ambition to "Save South Korea" through martial law instead plunged the nation into unprecedented chaos During his college years as a law-major student, Yoon participated in a mock trial sentencing former President Chun Doo-hwan to death for insurrection. Ironically, he is now the first South Korean president to be barred from leaving the country and faces investigations for insurrection. The public’s hopes for a novice politician who could transcend divisive politics have crumbled under his extreme choices, leaving him alienated even from the "good citizens" he claimed to represent.