
‘Korean Donald Trump' emerges from the chaos in Seoul
The election followed an attempt on December 3, 2024 to impose martial law in the country, which led the Constitutional Court to unanimously vote for the impeachment of then-President Yoon Suk-yeol. There were several candidates, but the main contest took place between the ruling conservative People Power Party and the opposition Democratic Party.
Chairman Lee is a striking and controversial figure. During the presidency of the previous Democrat, Moon Jae-in, Lee led an independent faction within the party and was considered an even more leftist populist than Moon. Moon viewed him as a dangerous rival and tried to remove him via a series of criminal cases. Lee managed to fend off these attacks and eventually became the Democratic Party's presidential candidate in 2022 after all of Moon's protégés lost the primaries. Although he once called himself the 'Korean Bernie Sanders' due to his populist slogans and ideas such as universal basic income, his circle now prefers the term 'Korean Donald Trump', as both share a flamboyant style and peculiar reputations.
Even before entering the presidential race, Lee was implicated in several criminal cases involving corruption, abuse of power, perjury, election law violations, and even cash smuggling into North Korea. The accusations were serious – several of Lee's close associates were imprisoned. He was, however, saved by a series of miraculous coincidences: Five key witnesses in different cases who could testify against him either committed suicide or died from various causes. Though his enemies consider the deaths highly suspicious, police found no evidence of foul play.
The constitutional crisis that led to the snap election began when, on November 15, 2024, Lee received a suspended sentence. Although conditional, the verdict threatened his political career. If upheld by the Supreme Court, Lee would be barred from holding public office for five years. With nearly two-thirds of the seats in parliament, the Democrats intensified their opposition. Yoon attempted to 'cut the Gordian knot' by declaring martial law, but the public saw this as a return to military dictatorship, which unsurprisingly failed. After a long deliberation and despite contentious points, the Constitutional Court unanimously impeached the president, as reinstating him would plunge the country into chaos.
Lee easily won his party's primary with 89.77% of the vote. His opponents were the former independent left-centrist Kim Dong-yeon and ex-Governor Kim Kyung-soo, an ally of Moon Jae-in. Before the parliamentary elections, Lee either subdued or pushed out strong figures from other factions, earning accusations that he turned the Democratic Party into a personal fan club.
Still, Lee's path to the presidency was not easy. On March 26, 2025, the Seoul appellate court overturned Lee's conviction, formally reopening his political path. This surprised legal experts, especially conservatives. The reason became clear: The presiding judges were members of a progressive NGO associated with the Democratic Party.
However, on May 1, 2025, the Supreme Court reversed the acquittal and sent the case for retrial. Theoretically, this could disqualify Lee if the outcome was unfavorable, but the Democrats launched protests, calling the court's decision a coup comparable to martial law. Facing threats of impeachment (parliament can impeach any official, including judges), the judiciary made a 'compromise' decision: Lee's retrial and other investigations would resume only after the election.
Disqualifying Lee would decapitate the opposition, which lacked a viable substitute. But there's an unusual dilemma: The Constitution states that a sitting president can only be imprisoned for treason or rebellion. Yet, if someone under criminal investigation wins and is later convicted, there is no clear precedent. Democrats are preemptively addressing this: A parliamentary committee has reviewed a law that would terminate all criminal proceedings against an elected president and amend the penal code to decriminalize the charges Lee faced.
Such legal manipulation doesn't please everyone. Hence, Lee enjoys both the highest approval and disapproval ratings – meaning a sizable bloc could unite under the slogan 'anyone but Lee Jae-myung'.
While Lee achieved party unity, the conservatives have been plagued by infighting. The party has factions – center-rights, Yoon loyalists, and traditional conservatives. Initially, eight candidates entered the race, and a three-stage process narrowed the field.
The first round eliminated four weaker or controversial figures, such as ex-Speaker Na Kyung-won. In the second round, moderate An Heol-su ('the Korean Kaspersky') and classical conservative Won Joon-pyo – who ran against Moon Jae-in in 2017 and might have been the nominee again if not for Yoon – were dropped. Two finalists remained.
One was Han Dong-hoon, Yoon's longtime ally from the Prosecutor's Office, former justice minister and party leader. However, Han opposed martial law and voted against it. After Yoon's impeachment, Han resigned. Analysts saw in him a fresh conservative image, but he lost the final round.
Instead, the 2025 conservative candidate is ex-Labor Minister Kim Moon-soo. He has two notable qualities: A former union activist repressed under military rule, he later joined the conservatives. And he was the only cabinet member who refused to apologize after the failed martial law attempt. Instead, he argued that Yoon may have erred in methods, but the problem required resolution. Kim became a symbol of uncompromising conservatism. But party leaders worried whether he could attract undecided voters – those alienated by both Lee and Yoon. Fortunately, they had an alternative.
After some thought, Prime Minister Han Duck-soo (also acting president post-impeachment) entered the race. Once a leftist and prime minister in the 2000s, he too joined the conservatives. Some see him as a centrist technocrat; others, a political opportunist. On May 2, 2025 – after the conservative primaries ended – Han announced his independent candidacy. He vowed to act as a transitional 'technical president' to reform the government and step down, ushering in a 'Seventh Republic.'
In fact, all major candidates proposed constitutional reforms. Most advocated limiting presidential power and replacing the current five-year single term with two four-year terms, US-style. Given nearly 40 years since the last constitution, some anti-dictatorship clauses seem outdated.
Han's resignation triggered a mini-government crisis. Finance Minister Choi Sang-mok, next in line, resigned minutes before a parliamentary impeachment vote against him. The role of acting leader passed to Education Minister Lee Joo-ho.
Han effectively represented the conservative camp. Yoon's allies saw him as a unifying, rational figure. A split right would guarantee Lee's win. The party pressured Kim Moon-soo to withdraw for Han, even voiding the primary results. Kim denounced this as betrayal, demanded a new vote – and won again. The old leadership resigned. Han withdrew, urging support for Kim. Meanwhile, Kim softened his rhetoric and leaned toward the center. This showed in debates about whether Yoon should leave the party. While a symbol for conservatives, his presence burdened them with his failures – especially martial law. Ultimately, Yoon left People Power, but might form a new party post-election.
There were more candidates. Some from truly left-wing parties, as Lee has shifted right – dropping the idea of basic income and even proposing Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize. Independents include ex-conservative leader Hwang Kyo-ahn, now ultra-right. But only one got over 5%: Lee Jun-seok, leader of the Reform Party. A center-right former conservative leader ousted for opposing Yoon, Lee is youthful and energetic. Though his party failed to become a 'third force', he remains popular. Conservatives wanted him to quit and unify the right. Some party members disenchanted with him have even joined the Democrats.
Many promises were made by all candidates, and listing them all here is pointless – each of them essentially promises good things and opposes bad things. Beyond key issues such as North Korea-US relations, party platforms differ little. Where they do, differences stem more from factional struggles than ideology. If conservatives say a cat is black, Democrats will insist it's white – regardless of the truth.
As for where Lee's victory will take South Korea, that remains to be seen – stay tuned for the next article.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Russia Today
a day ago
- Russia Today
Musk claims ‘major' US Democrats in Epstein docs
Senior members of the US Democratic Party and their benefactors could appear in the Epstein documents, X owner Elon Musk has claimed. On Friday, Bloomberg reported that the FBI agents reviewing the files on the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein had identified numerous references to US President Donald Trump, as well as dozens of other high-profile figures. The agency stressed that the appearance of any name 'is not evidence of a crime or even a suggestion of wrongdoing.' Responding to the report, one X user suggested that 'when a Democrat becomes president, they'll un-redact these names.' Musk, however, did not agree, saying, 'They won't, because major Dems and their donors are on the list too.' He did not offer any evidence or elaborate. In 2019, a spokesman for former President Bill Clinton confirmed that he had flown on Epstein's private aircraft multiple times, while stressing that the ex-US leader had never visited Epstein's notorious private island. Alan Dershowitz, Epstein's former lawyer, has named two Democrats – former Senator George Mitchell and former UN Ambassador Bill Richardson – as appearing in the documents, stressing that that alone did not indicate any wrongdoing. In June, Musk – who had a falling-out with Trump over his legislative agenda – claimed that the president was in the Epstein files, suggesting, 'that is the real reason they have not been made public.' He later deleted his post, acknowledging he 'went too far.' Epstein was arrested in 2019 on federal sex trafficking charges involving minors, with some of the abuse occurring on his private island, Little St. James, located in the US Virgin Islands. The financier later died in jail in what was ruled a suicide. The case has fueled intense public scrutiny, driven by Epstein's ties to powerful figures across politics, finance, royalty, and media, as well as rumors of a potential cover-up. On the campaign trail, Trump pledged to release all documents related to Epstein if elected. However, in July 2025, the US authorities concluded that Epstein did not keep a so-called 'client list' that could implicate his high-profile associates, sparking widespread public uproar.


Russia Today
2 days ago
- Russia Today
India's oil trade with Russia a ‘point of irritation'
India's purchase of Russian oil is a 'point of irritation' which affects its ties with the US, Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said. In an interview with Fox Radio on Thursday, Rubio said India had numerous alternate suppliers, but still chose to buy oil from Russia. 'Like anything in foreign policy, you're not going to align a hundred percent of the time on everything,' Rubio said, while calling the South Asian nation an ally and a strategic partner. 'India has huge energy needs and that includes the ability to buy oil and coal and gas and things that it needs to power its economy like every country does, and it buys it from Russia, because Russian oil is sanctioned and cheap and – meaning they have to – in many cases, they're selling it under the global price because of the sanctions,' he added. 'And that – unfortunately that is helping to sustain the Russian war effort. So it is most certainly a point of irritation in our relationship with India – not the only point of irritation.' On Wednesday, US President Donald Trump announced 25% tariffs on imports from India, plus penalties for the country's economic and defense ties with Russia. He also attacked New Delhi for its ties to Moscow in a post on his Truth Social account. 'I don't care what India does with Russia,' Trump said. 'They can take their dead economies down together, for all I care. We have done very little business with India, their Tariffs are too high, among the highest in the world.' Additionally, the US State Department has imposed sanctions on eight Indian companies and five Indian citizens for trading in Iranian oil, petroleum products, and petrochemicals. The companies and individuals have been accused of violating US sanctions under Executive Order 13846, which punishes entities that are found to engage in significant transactions involving Iranian petroleum or petrochemical products. 'These coercive discriminatory actions violate the principles of international law and national sovereignty, representing a modern form of economic imperialism,' the Iranian Embassy in New Delhi said on Thursday. India has not officially commented on these sanctions.


Russia Today
2 days ago
- Russia Today
Trump is ‘weaponizing tariffs'
US President Donald Trump's tariffs could be a negotiation tool, which he is using in his country's ongoing trade talks with New Delhi, Indian economist Gurcharan Das, a former CEO of Procter & Gamble India, has said in an interview to RT. The US has hit India with a 25% tariff and additional penalties over trade with Russia. Commenting on the move, Das suggested that Trump is 'weaponizing' trade. 'It is very hard to read Donald Trump as he changes his mind every day,' Das said. 'Even now we do not know if it's a deal-making ploy. It could just be a negotiating tool for him,' he added. Das, however, also suggested that the US remains 'a very significant market,' and that it would be in India's own interest to lower tariffs to be more competitive when it comes to exporting goods and services. 'We are a protectionist country and for our own sake we need to bring down tariffs. It is in our own interests to lower tariffs to not only the US but to other countries as well,' he said. Das added that despite the Indian economy growing 6.5% annually on average for two decades, the country has made slow strides in manufacturing. 'Although India today is the fastest growing large economy in the world, we have not yet created an industrial revolution,' he said. He noted that 45% of India's workers are still employed in the agriculture sector. Manufactured goods currently account for a mere 2% of India's exports. On Thursday, New Delhi reiterated that it will take all necessary steps to safeguard India's interests while evaluating the implications of Trump's trade moves. Speaking in Parliament, Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal noted India's economic rise: 'We have gone from being listed as a 'fragile' economy to being on track to becoming the third-largest economy in the world. We have risen from the 11th-largest economy to one of the top five economies.' Trump recently suggested that India and Russia "can take their dead economies down together," doubling down on his claim that US does "littel business" with both countries.