In January 2026, former South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol was sentenced to five years in prison. This marked a critical turning point in the country’s democratic history. The decision was directly linked to Yoon’s brief attempt at imposing martial law in December 2024 and included charges of constitutional violations, obstruction of justice, and falsification of official documents. Under Yoon’s administration, domestic political polarization increased, and he was known for having low approval ratings. Furthermore, his foreign policy was characterized by rapprochement with the United States and a tough stance against China and North Korea.[i]
Yoon’s political journey began with a career as a prosecutor and culminated in his candidacy for the conservative People’s Power Party (PPP). Winning by a narrow margin in the 2022 elections, Yoon was elected on promises of economic deregulation and anti-feminist policies. However, his administration quickly faced criticism, and events like the Seoul Halloween tragedy lowered his approval ratings. In this context, the declaration of martial law can be seen as a reaction to the opposition’s budget veto and impeachment attempts. At this point, it would be beneficial to first examine the ideological differences between genders from a demographic perspective.[ii]
In South Korea, Yoon Suk Yeol’s victory in the 2022 presidential election deepened gender-based political divisions by reinforcing anti-feminist sentiment among young, single, and incel (involuntarily celibate) men. Yoon’s campaign, with elements such as his promise to abolish the gender equality ministry and his blaming feminism for low birth rates, weaponized young men’s sense of victimhood. This group, arguing that compulsory military service, competition in the job market, and gender norms disadvantage them, gravitated towards the conservative PPP.
According to polls, only 18% of men in their 20s approve of the liberal Moon Jae-in government, while this figure reaches 42% for women; this difference reflects the more conservative attitudes of younger men compared to older generations. Yoon’s election, in what has been called the “incel election,” mobilized young men into politics, but it also widened the ideological divide between men and women, contributing to a decline in marriage and birth rates. For example, young women gravitated towards left-wing parties advocating feminism, while men embraced extreme masculinity and misogynistic rhetoric. This dynamic is straining the social fabric of South Korea and laying the groundwork for a more polarized gender politics in the future.
Yoon Suk Yeol’s entry into the political arena parallels his success in his career as a prosecutor. His role in the corruption cases of former presidents Park Geun-hye and Lee Myung-bak made him a well-known figure on both the left and the right. Serving as Attorney General from 2019 to 2021, Yoon gained the support of conservatives by initiating investigations against the Moon Jae-in government. This period reflected South Korea’s polarized political environment. Criticizing Moon’s soft approach to North Korea, Yoon achieved victory in the 2022 elections with a conservative platform.[iii]
During the early years of his administration, Yoon’s domestic policies were controversial. An attempt to increase the quota for medical students led to doctor strikes and hampered the government’s health reform efforts. Economically speaking, the deregulation promises have not been fulfilled, with approval rates falling from 52% in 2022 to 36% by December 2024. This decline can be attributed to budget and policy obstructions caused by the opposition majority in parliament. Yoon’s anti-feminist stance, such as his proposal to abolish the Ministry of Gender, deepened social divisions.[iv]
From a foreign policy perspective, Yoon’s approach has been US-centric. He strengthened the comprehensive strategic alliance with the US and took steps to overcome historical disagreements with Japan. His tough stance against North Korea manifested as increased nuclear deterrence and a request for the US nuclear umbrella. Regarding China, he took a position against any change to the status quo in the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea, thus unsettling Beijing. This policy placed South Korea in the middle of the US-China rivalry.[v]
Yoon’s foreign policy strategy has been defined by the concept of a “global pivot state.” This involves positioning South Korea as an actor defending liberal democracy and a rules-based order. It has expanded its alliance with the US to include technology and supply chains, and has seen efforts to reduce economic dependence on China. However, this approach has been criticized by the opposition in domestic politics as “Japan-centric” and “China-hostile.” In its North Korea policy, Yoon abandoned Moon’s dialogue-focused approach, prioritizing deterrence. He characterized North Korea as “anti-state elements” and increased joint military exercises with the US in response to missile tests. This heightened tensions on the Korean Peninsula but also strengthened South Korea’s defense capabilities.
In 2024, Yoon’s declaration of martial law shocked South Korea. The declaration was supported by orders to besiege the National Assembly and arrest opposition leaders, accusing the opposition of being “pro-North Korean” and “anti-state.” This was done unconstitutionally, without consulting the cabinet, and threatened democracy.[vi] Members of parliament broke through the siege, lifting martial law, and protests erupted. In 2025, Yoon was arrested, and the Constitutional Court approved a parliamentary inquiry. This process demonstrated the resilience of South Korean democracy but also increased political polarization.
The conviction includes charges related to martial law: violating the rights of cabinet members, obstructing arrests, and falsifying documents. The court emphasized that martial law is for extraordinary circumstances and characterized Yoon’s actions as a constitutional violation. Yoon’s defense argued that his actions were aimed at protecting democracy. However, the court rejected this, and separate cases were opened against him on charges of rebellion and espionage.[vii]
This crisis was reminiscent of the 1979 Chun Doo-hwan coup, South Korea’s last experience with martial law. Yoon’s actions were seen as the first major threat after the transition to democracy. Political instability continued in South Korea after martial law. Following Yoon’s removal from office, a provisional government was formed and early elections were held. The victory of the Democratic Party (DP) signaled a shift in foreign policy. Dialogue with North Korea increased, and relations with China and Russia softened. Economically, the crisis led to a devaluation of the won and a decrease in foreign investment. The country’s international image was damaged, and its democracy index rankings declined. The alliance with the United States suffered damage in foreign relations. Yoon’s actions, particularly his use of the military without informing US military commanders, undermined trust. The Trump administration intensified debates over cost-sharing and troop deployment. Tensions with China and North Korea are a legacy of Yoon’s policies. While the new government seeks a balance, North Korea’s nuclear threats persist. Currently, Yoon’s appeals process continues, with a verdict expected in February 2026 in his rebellion case. This tests the independence of South Korea’s judiciary.
Yoon’s crisis has left deep marks on South Korea’s domestic politics. In the future, constitutional reforms may be needed to reduce polarization; limiting presidential power and increasing parliamentary oversight are being discussed. The DP government may aim for economic stability by prioritizing social welfare, but will face resistance from the conservative opposition. This signals a period focused on dialogue in domestic politics, but carries the risk of early elections. In foreign policy, the pursuit of balance in the context of US-China rivalry is paramount. The new government may strengthen economic ties with China while maintaining the US alliance. Dialogue with North Korea could reduce nuclear threats, but a rapprochement between Russia and North Korea will create complications. Relations with Japan could maintain trilateral cooperation, preserving Yoon’s legacy.
In future scenarios, Trump’s policies could challenge South Korea. This would require South Korea to redefine its role as a “global pivot.” Ultimately, while the crisis may have strengthened democracy, foreign policy flexibility is linked to domestic stability; instability could increase regional tensions.
[i] “The Global Consequences of Yoon’s Martial Law Gambit”, Carnegie Endowment, https://carnegieendowment.org/emissary/2024/12/south-korea-martial-law-foreign-policy-us-alliance, (Access Date: 29 Jan 2026).
[ii] “Martial Law in South Korea”, Council on Foreign Relations, https://www.cfr.org/articles/martial-law-south-korea, (Access Date: 29 Jan 2026).
[iii] “Yoon Declares Martial Law in South Korea”, CSIS, https://www.csis.org/analysis/yoon-declares-martial-law-south-korea, (Access date: 29 Jan 2026).
[iv] Doucette, J. (2025). Converging histories: South Korea’s martial law crisis in a global conjunctural frame. Critical Asian Studies, 57(3), 357-374.
[v] “Yoon administration releases its National Security Strategy”, Embassy of the Republic of Korea in the USA, https://www.mofa.go.kr/us-en/brd/m_4511/view.do?seq=761767, (Access date: 29 Jan 2026).
[vi] Ibid.
[vii] Engel, B. A. (2024). Making Sense of South Korea’s Senseless Martial Law Declaration. Asia-Pacific Journal, 22(12), e2.
