On December 3rd, Toronto’s The Globe and Mail headlined “South Korea’s President declares martial law, accuses opposition of anti-state activities”, and later that day headlined “South Korean parliament votes to defy president by lifting his declaration of martial law”; but, since then, the crisis has only gotten worse, and will certainly need South Korea’s U.S.-controlled Constitution to be changed. As Hanjoo Lee pointed out on page 262 in the “CONCLUSION” to his Spring 2007 Ph.D thesis, The Major Influences of the U.S. Constitutional Law Doctrines on the Interpretation and Application of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea: Critical Analysis on the Current Constitutional Court’s Decisions and Thoughts of the Necessity of Amendment of the Current Constitution of the Republic of Korea, “The Korean experience aptly shows that political changes precede legal changes. [This profound principle means that before there is even a Constitution, there is politics and political power — the decisions that were made by the individuals who held political power. A constitution doesn’t come from nowhere and no one, but from the possessors of political power, who actually shaped it.] … Cold war ideology based on a zero-sum mentality is outdated. These trends demand new ways of thinking.” Though veiled (for example, his “zero-sum” was a powerful condemnation of America’s demands for South Korea to be even more intensely anti-North-Korea and anti-China and anti-Russia than it is), his implication was clear, that South Korea must break out of the empire of which is a part (a colony), the U.S. empire, before it can TRULY become a democracy. Now, nearly 18 years later, Lee’s analysis is being proven to have been prophetic.
Tag: martial law
South Korean Court Issues Arrest Warrant Against Impeached President Yoon Suk Yeol Over Martial Law Attempt
In the midst of heightened tensions with their neighbors to the North of the peninsula, South Korea is going through a phase of instability, with a short-lived Martial law being imposed, and not one, but two Presidents impeached by Parliament.
Now, to cap it off, a Seoul court has issued an arrest warrant against South Korea’s suspended president Yoon Suk Yeol over his failed martial law stunt back on 3 December.
BBC reported:
“The warrant comes after Yoon, who is facing several investigations on insurrection and treason charges, ignored three summonses to appear for questioning over the past two weeks.
On Sunday night, investigators sought an arrest warrant for Yoon on charges of insurrection and abuse of power – a move that his lawyer described as ‘illegal’.”
South Korean Parliament Impeaches President Yoon Suk Yeol In Second Vote, After His Short-Lived Martial Law Decree – Constitutional Court to Decide His Fate
The year of 2024 continues to provide us with earth-shattering developments all over the world.
In South Korea, still reeling from the Martial law decree and the attempted – unsuccessful – closure of the Parliament, back in December, lawmakers voted to impeach President Yoon Suk Yeol.
Yoon vowed today to fight for his political future after he lost the second vote to impeach him.
Reuters reported:
“The Constitutional Court will decide whether to remove Yoon sometime in the next six months. If he is removed from office, a snap election will be called.
Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, who was appointed by Yoon, became acting president, while Yoon remains in office but with his presidential powers suspended halfway through his five-year term.”
Yoon is the second conservative president in a row to be impeached in South Korea, after Park Geun-hye in 2017.
Yoon even survived a first impeachment vote last Saturday, before some in his party turned on him.
“’Although I am stopping for now, the journey I have walked with the people over the past two and a half years toward the future must never come to a halt. I will never give up’, Yoon said.”
Kremlin Trolls South Korea & US: ‘Professed Democracy’ Can Morph Into ‘Absolute Chaos’ In Couple Of Hours
The Kremlin in a fresh Wednesday statement appeared to engage in a bit of trolling of South Korea and its Western backers like the US following the prior day’s wild and short-lived martial law events.
“North Korea’s concerns over its security are understandable given the political instability in the South,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said, which is somewhat ironic given the West constantly stresses the real threat and source of regional instability is actually Pyongyang.
Her comments sought to emphasize the unpredictability of democracies supported by Washington. “In my opinion, many have understood why the DPRK (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea)… is so concerned over its security,” she said.
“It’s because they see that in a couple of hours [South Korea] can morph from a professed democracy into absolute chaos, with tanks on the streets, a storming of parliament, popular confrontation and some brute-force tactics,” Zakharova continued.
This means the north’s vigilance and constant state of war readiness – which has included increased weapons testing of late – is entirely justified, she suggested in her explanation, given the “unpredictable” neighbor to the south.
Just before 5am local time on Wednesday South Korea’s president Yoon Suk Yeol lifted his martial-law declaration after parliament voted unanimously against the measure. Troops had at one point stormed the parliament building, and there were bizarre scenes of lawmakers scaling fences to get back in.
He had argued his drastic move was necessary as his political opponents made the nation vulnerable to North Korean “communist forces” as government couldn’t function. Parliament rejected the rationale.
South Korea’s 6-Hour Martial Law
South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol on Tuesday declared martial law, suspended the South Korean legislature and banned elected representatives from accessing the National Assembly building using massive police presence.
And then six hours later he rescinded the order.
President Yoon had declared in a public address to the Korean people that the move was to protect a “liberal South Korea from the threats posed by North Korea’s communist forces and to eliminate anti-state elements.” He said:
“I will restore the country to normalcy by getting rid of anti-state forces as soon as possible.”
But all the members of South Korea’s Parliament voted to reverse Yoon’s edict Tuesday and he then heeded the call.
The action and rhetoric had evoked the days of the country’s military dictatorships; the language and justification was exactly the same.
There had been repeated signals that Yoon could declare martial law because the public momentum to impeach him in South Korea was gaining ground.
Yoon is despised by South Koreans for his abuse of power, his wife’s corruption and his vitiation of South Korea’s sovereignty and economic wellbeing to serve U.S. geopolitical interests.
Particularly triggering and enraging for South Koreans has been his enmeshing of South Korea’s military with that of its former colonizer, Japan, through a formal military alliance designed to wage war against China. This has also entailed engaging in radical historical revisionism and erasure to facilitate this extraordinary coalition.
Last week 100,000 citizens protested in the streets demanding his immediate resignation — something that received absolutely zero coverage in Western media. There was still little mention of this in current mainstream Western coverage as a factor for the short-lived declaration of martial law.
Yoon does not want to lose power, but more importantly the U.S. cannot allow Yoon to lose power: He is essential to shore up alliances, agreements, and an Asian force posture to wage war against China.
South Korea Avoids a Return to the Bad Old Days
North Korea is a dictatorship, and South Korea is a democracy. That’s one of the most basic pieces of conventional wisdom about modern geopolitics. But it wasn’t always so. From its independence in 1945 to its final democratization in 1987, South Korea suffered from a series of coups d’état and military dictatorships.
On Tuesday night, the ghosts of the bad old days came back. President Yoon Suk Yeol, facing corruption investigations and gridlock in the National Assembly, declared martial law, banning all political activities and independent media. Soldiers stormed the Assembly building as protesters attacked them with fire extinguishers.
A few hours later, Yoon lifted martial law after his own party and the National Assembly unanimously voted to stop military rule. It was the latest in a series of cartoonish, ham-handed coup attempts that failed over the past few years in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Bolivia, Peru, Russia, Brazil, and elsewhere.
The attempt at a military takeover fell apart soon after it started. In defiance of military orders, 190 members of the National Assembly managed to get into the building. All of them voted to end martial law—under South Korean law, the president must respect such a vote—and soldiers retreated from the building.
Yoon justified military rule by smearing his opponents as North Korean stooges. “I am declaring a state of emergency in order to protect the constitutional order based on freedom and eradicate shameful pro-North Korea anti-state groups that are stealing freedom and happiness of our people,” Yoon said on the YTN television station.
The opposition called Yoon’s move an obviously unconstitutional coup attempt. “Tanks, armoured personnel carriers and soldiers with guns and knives will rule the country. The economy of the Republic of Korea will collapse irretrievably,” opposition leader Lee Jae-myung said in a livestream. “My fellow citizens, please come to the National Assembly.”
The Korean Confederation of Trade Unions, the second largest workers association in the country, declared “an indefinite general strike until the Yoon administration steps down.” In its statement, the confederation invoked past military coups in 1961 and 1979.
After decades of strongman rule violent transitions of power, South Korea finally became a democracy following the June Democratic Struggle, a mass uprising in June 1987 that forced military dictator Chun Doo-hwan to accept direct presidential elections and a new constitution.
Over the past few months, power in South Korea has been divided between Yoon, member of the right-wing People Power Party, and the left-wing Democratic Party, which controls the National Assembly. The day before the military takeover, Democratic Party lawmakers voted to reduce the government budget by 4 trillion won ($2.82 billion) against Yoon’s will.
The declaration of martial law seems to have been a long shot attempt by Yoon to break the gridlock. But it may have backfired badly. The attempted takeover “may very well serve against Yoon’s presumed intention to safeguard his rule, by potentially driving South Korean public opinion toward greater support of impeachment,” writes James Park in Responsible Statecraft, where I used to be a reporter.
South Korea’s President Yoon Suk Yeol Declares Emergency Martial Law
South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol has declared emergency martial law in the country after accusing the opposition party of “sympathizing with North Korea and of anti-state activities.”
“Through this martial law, I will rebuild and protect the free Republic of Korea, which is falling into the depths of national ruin,” he said during a late-night TV address on Tuesday
“I will eliminate anti-state forces as quickly as possible and normalize the country.”
He also asked people to believe him and tolerate “some inconveniences.”
Yoon did not say what specific measures would be taken. He cited a motion by the opposition Democratic Party, which has a majority in parliament, to impeach top prosecutors and reject a government budget proposal.
Yoon labeled the opposition’s actions as “clear anti-state behavior aimed at inciting rebellion.” He further claimed these acts have “paralyzed state affairs and turned the National Assembly into a den of criminals.”
He describing martial law as a necessary measure to eradicate these “shameless pro-North anti-state forces.” He justified the decision as essential to protect the freedoms and safety of the people, ensure the country’s sustainability, and pass on a stable nation to future generations.
The parliament speaker is traveling to parliament and plans to convene a session, according to local broadcaster YTN TV. Yonhap news agency reported though that the entrance to parliament is blocked and lawmakers are unable to enter.
South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol has declared emergency martial law, accusing the opposition of treason and collusion with North Korea.
Under the sweeping measures, violators can be arrested without warrants, and habeas corpus has been suspended.
Zelensky AGAIN Refuses to Hold Elections as Most Ukrainians Oppose War
Ukrainian ruler Vladimir Zelensky, whose term has ended in May of this year, presented his Internal Resilience Plan in the country’s parliament Tuesday where he again ruled out holding elections. This comes as the wartime leader guides his country toward global nuclear armageddon with a people who largely wish the war to end.
“We all know that the Constitution of Ukraine and the law do not permit elections during wartime, and no one in the world has demanded and does demand this from Ukraine. However, there are some people in Ukraine who may be so ‘hungry’ for [elections] that they want to fight within our state more than for our state. They seek political disputes in the trenches, like in film studios. This is detrimental to Ukraine,” Zelensky said, according to RT on Tuesday. “First, Ukraine needs a just peace, and then Ukrainians will hold fair elections. We must prioritize the common interest over any personal desires.”
Interestingly, a recent poll revealed that a slim majority of Ukrainians wish for the war to end soon.
“A majority of Ukrainians now favor a rapid end to the ongoing conflict with Russia through peace negotiations, according to a recent survey conducted by Gallup,” RT said Tuesday. “In its latest report, on Tuesday, the American pollster reported that 52% of respondents believe Kiev should pursue peace talks to end the war as soon as possible. This marks a substantial rise from 27% in 2023 and just 22% in 2022.”
While the majority that want peace is slim, it still constitutes a major increase since the war began.
“Support for continuing military action until a decisive victory is achieved has been on the decline. In February 2022, 73% of Ukrainians backed continued hostilities. By 2023, that number had fallen to 63%, and it has dropped further, to 38% in 2024. The poll indicates that Ukrainians are reconsidering their positions as the conflict drags on, and their military continues to retreat,” RT said Tuesday.
Ukraine is under martial law until at least February 2025. This has allowed Zelensky to refuse to leave office, outlaw opposition parties, jail politicians and ‘purge’ people deemed disloyal, according to RT.
The highest seat in Ukraine, held by Zelensky, is not operating under its own power however. The West, which has green-lit heavy bombardment of Russia on Sunday, controls the strings of the proverbial marionette, Zelensky.
“Zelensky’s chief of staff, Andrey Yermak, who has been described in Western media as “the real power broker” in Kiev, stated that presidential elections would be held immediately after the war ends. According to Verkhovna Rada Chairman Ruslan Stefanchuk, the next presidential elections would take place within 60 days after martial law is lifted,” RT said Tuesday.
DoD shreds all remaining constitutional protections from Posse Comitatus Act in anticipation of post-election Civil War 2.0
In anticipation of rioting or even a second civil war following the upcoming election, the Department of Defense (DoD) is preliminarily gutting the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 to allow for the U.S. military to execute law, i.e., martial law, on American soil.
As it was written, Posse Comitatus does not allow for any constitutional exceptions. The U.S. military is not supposed to be involved with law enforcement activities in any capacity whatsoever, and yet the Congress-passed bill has been so watered down over the past 50 years or so that armed soldiers could soon become commonplace on the streets of America.
“The law allows only for express exceptions, and no part of the Constitution expressly empowers the president to use the military to execute the law,” explains the Brennan Center about how Posse Comitatus is supposed to work.
“This conclusion is consistent with the law’s legislative history, which suggests that its drafters chose to include the language about constitutional exceptions as part of a face-saving compromise, not because they believed any existed.”
Despite all this, the DoD has decided that there are constitutional exceptions of Posse Comitatus. And because nobody with any power is willing to do anything to stop the DoD, the militarization of America’s police forces will continue to expand like a frog boiling in a pot.
“The Department has long claimed that the Constitution implicitly gives military commanders ’emergency authority’ to unilaterally use federal troops ‘to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances’ when doing so is ‘necessary’ and prior authorization by the president is impossible,” the Brennan Center further says.
“In the past, the department also claimed an inherent constitutional power to use the military to protect federal property and functions when local governments could not or would not do so. The validity of these claimed authorities has never been tested in court.”
Under the fog of war, Ukraine cancels its 2024 presidential elections
A very significant political event occurred in Ukraine earlier this month, and almost nobody noticed.
President Volodymyr Zelensky, the leader of the war-torn country, just received approval from his parliament to extend Martial Law another 90 days. There have been many parliamentary extensions of the wartime mandate, but this one carried special significance because the 2024 presidential elections in Ukraine were scheduled for March 31, 2024, coinciding with the end of Zelensky’s five year term. Now that Martial Law is in place to cover that time period, Ukraine’s presidential elections have been canceled indefinitely.
There is currently no set date for a next election, as lawmakers in the Verkhovna Rada (parliament) have failed to entertain the matter. They only agreed that elections should take place no sooner than six months after the end of the war with Russia.
While it’s not particularly unreasonable to want to postpone elections during a devastating war, the case of Ukraine deserves a closer examination, given the series of events leading up to the decision to extend Martial Law.
In November, a former Zelensky adviser named Oleksiy Arestovych announced that he would be challenging Zelensky for the presidency, promising to focus on a negotiated settlement to end the war with Russia. Arestovych was fiercely critical of Zelensky’s approach to the conflict, maintaining that a settlement was in the best interests of Ukrainians. Far from a pro-Moscow shill, the Russian government has an active arrest warrant out for him.
You must be logged in to post a comment.