Contested politics in South Korea

Academic and policy analysts are sharply divided over the strength and durability of representative democracy in South Korea. Institutionally, the Republic of Korea (ROK) possesses structural features that should, in principle, provide for a reliable and representative democratic process. These structures include: a written constitution; the separation of powers between the presidential executive, a unicameral National Assembly and a functioning judiciary; a diverse media; and a system of local and national elections governed by a distinct and transparent regulatory process. However, there is a persistent tendency by voters and activists on both the right and left of politics to rely on mass-based protest to challenge leaders’ perceived (and actual) deficiencies, which include corruption, poor decision-making, excessive partisanship and a willingness to abuse the power of the presidency. This has encouraged some observers to argue that the country is in the grip of ‘democratic decay’. International surveys suggest that South Korea still lags behind other comparable liberal democratic polities in terms of press freedom, political rights and individual autonomy. The shortcomings of the country’s contemporary democracy are ‘path-dependent’ – a function of a highly contested post-1945 political history in which elites, both on the left and the right, have relied on cultural norms of deference, divisive identity politics and the institutions of politics to exclude opponents and narrow the political spectrum to limit voter choice. The wider context of the Cold War division of the Korean peninsula and the security threat from North Korea had limited the ability of the US, South Korea’s alliance partner, to effect lasting democratic change in South Korea. The rhetoric of identity politics remains powerful, but it appears to be less salient than in the past in influencing political outcomes. The results of the March 2022 presidential election, one of the closest in the country’s history, suggest that economic considerations (particularly concern over rising wealth and income inequality) are increasingly important in shaping the choices of voters, who may be becoming more independent and less partisan than in the past. Notwithstanding the smooth transition from the progressive administration of President Moon Jae-in to the conservative administration of President Yoon Yuk-seol following the 2022 election, the bitterness of recent political rhetoric and the tendency of politicians to frame political choices in divisive, moralistic terms of ‘good versus evil’ suggest that South Korea is not immune from the dangers of populism. Guarding against these dangers requires continued efforts to strengthen the transparency and accountability of political institutions. It requires a willingness by political leaders, public commentators and voters to recognize and accept the legitimacy of opposing political views, and to engage constructively even where they disagree over policies.