China | MEMRI Daily Brief No. 772

South Korea stands at a critical political crossroads. The impeachment of President Yoon Suk-yeol has triggered a snap presidential election, now just weeks away. What is at stake is more than the outcome of a vote. This election could decide the future direction of South Korea’s democracy, its institutional integrity, and its strategic alignment with the United States.

The moment is grave. Interpretations vary widely along ideological lines. But for those alarmed by China’s expanding influence, the ideological drift of South Korea’s Democratic Party under the sway of postmodernism and Marxism, and the post-pandemic legacy of coercive public health mandates, the stakes are especially high. Many South Koreans who hold conservative views – rooted in a Judeo-Christian worldview – find themselves sidelined by domestic media and mischaracterized abroad. Their voices must now be heard – and understood.

Freedom Forged In Blood

South Korea owes its existence as a free nation to the United States. During the Korean War, 36,574 American lives were lost in defense of Korea’s freedom. They bled not as Republicans or Democrats, but as guardians of liberty. Their sacrifice laid the foundation for the Republic of Korea’s democracy and postwar transformation.

The values that shaped the United States – liberty, truth, and faith – also shaped the founding of modern Korea. Under President Syngman Rhee and the Christian leaders of his time, those principles were carried across the Pacific and embedded in our national identity. Korea’s remarkable rise from the ashes of war would not have been possible without the blood, commitment, and leadership of America.

That is why, during the most recent U.S. presidential election, the organization I lead – Truth Forum – supported for the election of Donald Trump. It was not about party politics. It was about restoring a nation founded on moral clarity and biblical truth. A strong and free America is not just in America’s interest – it is vital to ours.

Korea’s future is deeply tied to America’s direction. As we now approach a critical election of our own, following the impeachment of President Yoon Suk-yeol, our nation stands at a crossroads. The path ahead will determine whether we remain free – or fall to ideological subversion. In this decisive moment, we do not ask for sympathy. We ask for clear understanding – and for prayer.

A Mirror Of America – And A War Over Memory

South Korea was born in the image of America – built on the same biblical worldview that inspired the U.S. Constitution and the founding principles of liberty, law, and faith. But like the United States, South Korea is now locked in an ideological crisis.

Postmodernism, cultural Marxism, and atheistic progressivism have penetrated the nation’s core institutions: schools, universities, media, courts, and even churches. These ideas have found political shelter within the Democratic Party, mirroring trends on the American left. The results are strikingly similar – truth replaced by narrative, and identity distorted by ideology.

At the heart of this ideological subversion is a calculated revision of history. In the U.S., progressives have recast the founding as a project of oppression, built on slavery and colonialism. In South Korea, the left promotes a parallel fiction: that the Republic of Korea was not a sovereign act of national will, but a betrayal – engineered by pro-Japanese collaborators and propped up by American imperialism.

This narrative does not stop at national shame. It assigns moral legitimacy to North Korea, portraying the regime as the “true Korea,” supposedly forged in resistance against foreign domination. Never mind Pyongyang’s record of tyranny, famine, and forced labor – the myth of anti-imperialist purity prevails.

These distorted narratives function as political weapons. By undermining the Republic’s moral foundation, they sow anti-Americanism and pave the way for sympathy toward Communist China. In this upside-down worldview, China is no longer seen as a threat – but as a model of post-Western order. That illusion is not only false – it is dangerous.

This war over history is not a sidebar to politics. It is the front line. It shapes how nations understand themselves, choose their alliances, and decide their futures. For South Korea – and for the U.S.-ROK alliance – the outcome of this battle will determine whether truth or falsehood writes the next chapter.

Distorting The Past: How Historical Revisionism Fuels Political Power

South Korea’s Democratic Party, under the leadership of Lee Jae-myung, has embraced a dangerous revisionist interpretation of Korean history – one that casts doubt on the very legitimacy of the Republic itself.

In 2023, Lee appointed Lee Rae-kyung – an ideologue affiliated with the “Another Centennial” Foundation – as head of the party’s Innovation Committee. Lee’s theory claims that the last 100 years of Korean history, beginning with the 1919 March First Movement, represent an era of foreign domination, imposed particularly by the United States. In his view, Korea’s founding was not liberation – but subjugation. He calls for a new national narrative, unburdened by ties to the West.

This narrative has not remained on the fringes. Former progressive presidents echoed similar views. In 2003, Roh Moo-hyun stated that Korean history was defined by the “defeat of justice” and the “rise of opportunism.” In his autobiography, Moon Jae-in described his sense of elation upon witnessing America’s retreat from Vietnam, which he regarded as a realization of historical justice.

At the center of this narrative war is the reinterpretation of the 1948 Jeju April 3 Incident. What was originally a violent communist uprising intended to derail South Korea’s first democratic elections is now widely portrayed in global discourse as a state-sponsored massacre of civilians. UNESCO’s recent decision in April to inscribe related documents into its “Memory of the World” register lends international legitimacy to this rebranding – while omitting the historical context of communist-led violence.

Acknowledging civilian casualties is necessary. But to erase the nature of the uprising – to deny that it was launched to prevent the creation of the Republic of Korea – is not just revisionism. It is a political weapon.

This is no longer a matter of domestic academic debate. It is a coordinated strategy to delegitimize South Korea’s founding, absolve the violent legacy of communism, and sow anti-American resentment. The result is a warped historical lens through which younger generations are taught to question the morality of their own nation’s birth.

The roots of this revisionist impulse run deep. Many within the Democratic Party are not only ideological heirs of the South Korean Workers’ Party but are connected to it by lineage. Former President Roh Moo-hyun’s father-in-law, Kwon Oh-seok, was a lifelong unrepentant communist and political prisoner. These are not mere coincidences – they reveal a clear line of ideological continuity from Korea’s radical past to its contemporary political elite.

If the United States and its allies fail to recognize how historical narratives are being weaponized to undermine the moral foundation of free societies, they will forfeit critical ground – not only in Korea, but across the broader fight for truth in the Indo-Pacific.

Strategic Blind Spots: How the Democratic Party Enabled China’s Reach

The Democratic Party’s embrace of revisionist history is not merely ideological – it has translated into real-world deference to authoritarian regimes, most notably China. Under President Moon Jae-in, Seoul announced the “Three No’s” policy in 2017: no additional THAAD missile deployments, no integration into a U.S.-led missile defense system, and no trilateral military alliance with the United States and Japan. In effect, the policy conceded strategic leverage to Beijing.

The consequences have been more than symbolic. In late 2024, South Korea’s Board of Audit and Inspection uncovered evidence that sensitive details about the THAAD deployment may have been leaked to China during Moon’s presidency. This revelation followed Moon’s 2017 pledge at Peking University to support China’s so-called “national dream” – a message that sent a clear signal of alignment rather than neutrality.

On the ground, the situation is even more alarming. Chinese nationals have repeatedly been caught photographing sensitive South Korean and U.S. military installations – ranging from U.S. Navy assets in Busan to the headquarters of South Korea’s intelligence agency. Yet under current law, espionage is defined exclusively in relation to the “enemy state,” which is North Korea. Efforts to revise the law to include other hostile foreign actors were blocked – and notably, by the Democratic Party.

As a result, those caught gathering intelligence for China face, at most, a fine or deportation. There is no real deterrent. Critics call it what it truly is: passive collusion.

This troubling pattern continues. While the United States intensifies efforts to combat Chinese fentanyl trafficking, South Korea’s Democratic Party has slashed narcotics investigation budgets and curtailed prosecutorial authority. The results are catastrophic: in just five years, teenage drug crimes have surged fourteenfold.

Meanwhile, Democratic Party leader Lee Jae-myung has signaled his intention to strengthen ties with Beijing. In a 2022 interview with Time magazine, he pledged greater cooperation with China if elected. When China’s ambassador to Seoul warned in 2023 that South Korea would “regret” siding with the United States, Lee offered no rebuttal – a silence some critics interpreted as tacit approval. Even before that, Chinese state-run outlets such as Global Times and CCTV had portrayed him as a friendly and reliable figure in South Korean politics – coverage that, in China’s tightly controlled media environment, is rarely incidental.

Around the world, democratic nations are waking up to the reality of China’s “united front” operations – covert campaigns to shape public opinion and co-opt foreign elites. Confucius Institutes, long exposed as soft power arms of the Chinese Communist Party, have been shut down across much of the West. In South Korea, however, they remain active – and some are reportedly expanding.

At Seoul National University – South Korea’s most prestigious academic institution – a “Xi Jinping Library” continues to operate despite widespread public opposition. It no longer serves as a neutral academic resource, but rather stands as a stark symbol of how deeply China has embedded itself in the nation’s intellectual and political landscape.

China’s ambition matters – but more concerning is South Korea’s vulnerability. If the United States and its allies ignore this creeping influence, they risk losing not just a partner – but the geopolitical anchor of democracy in Northeast Asia.

When Impeachment Aligns With Authoritarian Ambition

Whether the declaration of martial law was the right course remains debated. But what followed is beyond dispute: tens of thousands of young South Koreans – many previously disengaged from politics – took to the streets. Their outrage transcended partisanship. It stemmed from deepening concerns over unchecked legislative power, weaponized budget obstruction, growing doubts about election integrity, and clear signs of Chinese interference.

For China, Yoon represented an obstacle – resolutely pro-U.S. and openly critical of Beijing’s influence operations. For the Democratic Party, removing him was existential. A failed impeachment could have spelled collapse, especially with Lee facing intensifying corruption probes, including the high-profile Daejang-dong scandal.

The convergence of interests between South Korea’s progressive establishment and the Chinese Communist Party is no longer a matter of speculation. Reports indicate Chinese nationals took part in pro-impeachment rallies – raising urgent questions about foreign orchestration at the heart of Korea’s constitutional process.

This is not coincidence. It is coordination. It is what happens when internal political warfare intersects with the global ambitions of authoritarian regimes. Beijing wants South Korea out of America’s orbit. The Democratic Party wants to survive – at any cost. Their common adversary: President Yoon.

For U.S. policymakers, the lesson is clear and urgent. South Korea’s internal crisis is not just confined to its borders. It is a case study in how foreign adversaries can leverage democratic institutions against themselves. Unless the United States recognizes this alignment for what it is – a coordinated effort to undermine Indo-Pacific stability – it risks repeating the mistakes of the past.

A Sudden Pivot – Or Calculated Camouflage?

In a striking shift, South Korea’s Democratic Party – long criticized for its dovish stance toward Beijing – has begun to sound an unfamiliar tune. On January 21, the party introduced a resolution reaffirming support for the U.S.-ROK alliance. The timing was no accident. It coincided with rising global anticipation of a possible Trump administration return, and with South Korea’s own snap election looming.

Party leader Lee Jae-myung has followed suit. Once a champion of progressive economic policies, Lee is now signaling a retreat. He has signaled a willingness to abandon key progressive platforms, including the Democratic Party’s hallmark policy of universal basic income – once championed as a pillar of its socialist agenda. In meetings with U.S. and Japanese officials, Lee has gone so far as to emphasize the importance of trilateral cooperation with Washington and Tokyo, a line rarely heard from the party’s upper ranks.

To casual observers, these gestures might suggest an ideological realignment. But within South Korea, few are convinced. Even some within the Democratic Party have expressed unease over the abruptness and optics of this sudden shift.

However, this calculated camouflage seems working abroad. Not long ago, former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich visited South Korea and addressed growing concerns in Washington about the Democratic Party’s pro-China leanings and far-left tendencies. In a post on his X account, he noted that despite these concerns, most South Koreans remain firmly supportive of the U.S.-ROK alliance – and that even if the Democratic Party wins the presidency, the alliance would likely endure.

His observation reflects a widely held reality in South Korea. The majority of South Koreans strongly value the alliance with the United States.

However, as the U.S.-China rivalry intensifies, it is critical to recognize the dangers posed by the Democratic Party’s distorted view of history and ideological foundations. If these are overlooked, the future of the U.S.-ROK alliance could face serious and lasting consequences. America’s allies must distinguish rhetoric from conviction – because the future of our shared security may depend on it.

Forecast And Response: South Korea’s Election At The Crossroads

South Korea stands on the edge of a consequential decision. The outcome of its upcoming presidential election will not only define the direction of its domestic politics but may also recalibrate the nation’s democratic framework and foreign policy orientation.

With the National Assembly firmly in the hands of the Democratic Party – widely criticized for its conciliatory stance toward Beijing – many Koreans fear that continued consolidation of power could tilt the country irreversibly toward strategic ambiguity. Some fear it could even lead to alignment with authoritarian regimes.

Amid this uncertainty, Kim Moon-soo has emerged as the conservative standard-bearer. Once a socialist labor activist, Kim renounced those beliefs following the collapse of the Soviet Union. He went on to serve three terms in the National Assembly, as Minister of Labor, and as Governor of Gyeonggi Province. During his tenure, Kim played a key role in advancing South Korea’s industrial growth through projects like Samsung’s Pyeongtaek complex, Pangyo Techno Valley, and Gwanggyo New Town.

Kim’s profile – defined by personal modesty and a reputation for integrity – stands in stark contrast to his rival, Lee Jae-myung, who remains entangled in multiple legal investigations and continues to face widespread public distrust. Several individuals connected to his criminal cases have died under suspicious circumstances – allegations that continue to raise unanswered questions.

Yet the political momentum has shifted since President Yoon Suk-yeol’s impeachment. Conservative unity has weakened, and concerns have emerged over the reliability of polling and voter engagement. Notably, Yoon’s approval ratings had rebounded to over 50 percent prior to his impeachment – suggesting that, with proper mobilization, the conservative base could still be reactivated.

At the core of this election lies the issue of electoral integrity. While fraud allegations in the United States have prompted unified calls for investigation within conservative circles, South Korea’s conservative leadership has remained largely silent – eschewing any meaningful inquiry. Even President Yoon’s invocation of martial law, tied to concerns over election manipulation, failed to prompt a serious audit of the system or restore public trust in the electoral process.

The result is a fragmented national discourse. Allegations of rigging are dismissed by some as fringe conspiracy theories, while others point to opaque procedures by the National Election Commission and the possibility of foreign interference – particularly from China. Public confidence continues to erode.

This erosion is unfolding against the backdrop of a broader geopolitical threat. Anti-China sentiment in South Korea ranks among the highest in the world – 81 percent, according to Pew Research. Yet paradoxically, the political party widely viewed as sympathetic to Beijing continues to command significant support.

This contradiction stems from deep historical and ideological divides. Some voters perceive the conservative bloc as tainted by alleged ties to Japan’s colonial legacy. Others downplay the threat from China, citing economic pragmatism. Still, some progressives argue that concerns about Chinese influence are overstated. Others believe that economic cooperation must take precedence in times of global uncertainty.

But this calculus may not hold. Recent reports of Chinese espionage involving South Korean military personnel have heightened public alarm. If further evidence emerges, the backlash could be swift – and politically decisive.

South Korea is approaching a moment of reckoning. Rebuilding democratic confidence will require more than campaign rhetoric. It will demand transparency, institutional courage, and an honest reckoning with the risks posed by foreign interference. The stakes in this election are not abstract – they are existential.

Syngman Rhee’s Warning And The Unfinished Mission

In 1954, President Syngman Rhee delivered a stark message to the United States Congress: “Unless we win back China, ultimate victory for the free world is unthinkable.” At the time, his words may have sounded extreme. Seventy years later, they read like prophecy.

The Republic of Korea today stands amid an unresolved struggle between truth and falsehood – a battle rooted not only in domestic division, but in the broader regional order shaped by North Korea’s authoritarian regime and China’s expanding influence. This ideological fault line runs deep, touching everything from historical interpretation to democratic governance.

The collapse of North Korea and the liberalization of China remain essential, not optional, conditions for the full realization of freedom and stability on the Korean Peninsula. So long as the North Korean regime endures, it serves as a source of internal subversion, disinformation, and national division. Likewise, China’s authoritarian reach continues to embolden illiberal forces in South Korea and beyond.

This is more than strategy – it is a question of values. The U.S.-ROK alliance was forged not just to deter war but to safeguard liberty. That mission – defending truth, securing sovereignty, and advancing human dignity – remains incomplete.

The question before us is whether we are prepared to finish the work begun decades ago. For both Koreans and Americans, the unfinished mission is clear: the liberation of North Korea and the arrival of genuine freedom in China. Without these, the free world’s victory remains partial – and its future uncertain.

AUTHOR

David Eunkoo Kim

David Eunkoo Kim is the founder and representative of Truth Forum, a conservative youth organization founded at Seoul National University. Rooted in a Judeo-Christian worldview, Truth Forum promotes universal values and defends freedom, national sovereignty, and historical integrity in response to the rise of leftist ideology in academia and media.

He holds a law degree from Seoul National University, where he also completed his doctoral coursework. Before launching his own game development company, he worked on the legal team at Nexon, one of South Korea’s leading tech firms.

He also co-produced and appeared in The Birth of Korea, a groundbreaking documentary that surpassed one million viewers. The film challenges progressive distortions of history and restores the legacy of South Korea’s founding president, Syngman Rhee – a U.S.-educated Christian who built the Republic on principles of liberty.

David founded Truth Forum in response to the impeachment of President Park Geun-hye, which he viewed as a turning point in South Korea’s ideological trajectory. Under his leadership, the organization successfully led the campaign to shut down the Xi Jinping Library at Seoul National University – a symbol of growing Chinese influence on Korean campuses. He also launched Students for Israel in Korea to combat rising antisemitism and pro-Hamas sentiment in academia.

Today, Truth Forum is at the forefront of a rising conservative movement, championing a strong U.S.–ROK alliance and advocating for Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Pro-Israel, Pro–South Korea, and North Korean human rights. David regularly writes and speaks on national identity, international security, and cultural resistance, focusing on countering authoritarian influence and defending democratic values.

EDITORS NOTE: This MEMRI column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.