South Korea’s Constitutional Court continues to consider the impeachment motion against President Yoon Suk-yeol over his declaration of martial law in December. If the impeachment is upheld, a new presidential election will be held within 60 days – likely in May or June.
Unless an unexpected event occurs, Lee Jae-Myung from the opposition Democratic Party is likely to become the next president of South Korea. This prospect has raised concerns in Washington, as Lee is a left-leaning politician – and South Korea’s liberals are typically viewed as less reliable partners in the United States.
For example, the Congressional Research Service noted last December that Lee had repeatedly questioned the us-against-them diplomacy of the Yoon administration. Lee has accused Yoon of being overly friendly toward the United States while displaying blatant hostility toward China and North Korea.
In early January, Republican Representative Young Kim expressed her discontent with South Korea’s opposition parties, which have “accused [Yoon] of antagonizing North Korea, China, and Russia, isolating South Korea within Northeast Asia, and being too pro-Japan.” Kim’s remarks were indirectly aimed at Lee, a central figure in the opposition.
These criticisms should be understood in context, however. A Lee presidency will present both opportunities and challenges for U.S. President Donald Trump.
The first opportunity for Trump is the possibility to use Lee as a middleman between Washington and Pyongyang. During his first term, Trump held three summits with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, facilitated largely by then-South Korean President Moon Jae-in.
Trump recognized Moon’s left-leaning political stance but respected his diplomatic abilities. Meanwhile, Kim viewed Moon as a reliable mediator. Moon worked diligently to persuade Kim to engage in talks with Trump, understanding that these two leaders needed to reconcile their political differences to foster peace on the Korean Peninsula.
Lee, due to his left-leaning orientation, is unlikely to antagonize Kim. He is expected to treat the North Korean as a political partner, working toward mutual coexistence. Such an approach starkly contrasts with that of Yoon, who considers Kim a sworn enemy and has refused to engage in open dialogue while instead focusing almost exclusively on increasing military deterrence.
Since Kim is aware of Lee’s political views, he is likely to accept Lee as a middleman between Washington and Pyongyang, similar to the role former President Moon played. This suggests that Lee could be an asset to Trump in managing security risks posed by the nuclear-armed state, rather than a liability.
The second benefit of a liberal president is that the Trump administration would be less worried about South Korea going nuclear.
Trump’s comment on his inauguration day, referring to North Korea as a nuclear power, has deepened concerns among South Koreans about Pyongyang’s nuclear capabilities. As a result, many Koreans are urging their leaders not to rely on the United States’ nuclear umbrella but to develop their own nuclear arsenal as a counterbalance to the North. As of January 28, 74 percent of South Koreans supported the idea of their country developing nuclear weapons if Trump were to recognize North Korea as a nuclear power, either implicitly or explicitly.
The nuclearization of the South would significantly reduce the United States’ political influence over this strategically important country.
However, Lee opposes nuclearization, since he believes that the Korean Peninsula should remain free of nuclear weapons. In the past, he and his progressive party have even opposed the renovation and construction of nuclear power plants in the name of avoiding any potential man-made catastrophes.
Despite the growing demand from ordinary South Koreans to pursue nuclear capabilities, Lee will probably use his statesmanship and experience to navigate popular sentiments while adhering to his anti-nuclear policy. That would be good news for the Trump administration.
However, a Lee presidency would also bring challenges for the United States. The first is Lee’s neutral stance in the face of Washington’s efforts to form a coalition against China. When asked to choose between the U.S. and China four years ago, Lee stated, “There is no reason to narrow our diplomatic options by choosing one side or the other.” This perspective arises from Lee’s view of China as a strategic partner essential for protecting his country’s economic interests.
While praising the United States as his nation’s vital security ally, Lee is expected to continue considering China an important economic partner, as it has become South Korea’s largest market. China is the primary destination for many of South Korea’s key exports, including semiconductors, cyclic hydrocarbons, and broadcasting equipment.
Lee’s balancing act may disrupt Trump’s “Make America Great Again” policy, which aims to revitalize the U.S. economy by weakening China’s close trade ties with South Korea and other nations.
The second challenge for Trump would be the potential difficulty in maintaining the trilateral alliance among the U.S., Japan, and South Korea in East Asia. During his presidential campaign in 2021, Lee emphasized, “I am against forming a triad military alliance since we already have the U.S. as our key ally, and therefore, including Japan is unnecessary.”
Lee was defeated, and Yoon was elected president in May 2022. Yoon became the first South Korean president to set aside the anti-Japanese sentiments prevalent among the opposition and the public and pursue cooperation with Japan. His decisive actions enabled South Korea to strengthen its security partnership with both Japan and the United States to counterbalance the influence of China and North Korea.
As an opposition leader, Lee has opposed Japanese military operations in Korean territory, particularly in the East Sea (Sea of Japan). He has accused Yoon and the Korean conservatives of harboring pro-Japanese sentiments. Lee’s protests are not surprising; he has been a prominent figure in resisting Japanese influence in South Korea, a country that suffered under oppressive Japanese colonial rule for 36 years.
If Trump can take advantage of Lee’s left-leaning stance, he could create substantial opportunities to improve his diplomatic relationship with Kim Jong Un and decrease the security threats posed by North Korea’s nuclear missiles. However, in the face of Lee’s programmatic foreign policy, Trump may encounter difficulties, as it would be challenging to position South Korea as a key player in a triad security alliance against China.
In summary, Lee’s presidency is likely to complicate the political landscape in East Asia, forcing Trump to prioritize which security threat to address first: North Korea or China.
