When the United States signed bilateral security pacts with South Korea in 1953 and with the Nationalist government on Taiwan in 1954, it had two core goals.
Externally, the aim was to support staunchly anti-communist regimes as a bulwark against Soviet expansion.
But as political scientist Victor Cha explains in his book Powerplay: The Origins of the American Alliance System in Asia,
an equally important, if unstated, rationale for Washington’s creation of deep bilateral alliances was to constrain anti-communist leaders, embroiled in civil wars and with questionable domestic political legitimacy, from going “rogue” and recklessly pulling the United States into unwanted conflicts in Asia when the primary strategic concern was Europe.”
In other words, these alliances weren’t just about shielding allies from communist threats – they were about shielding the US from its own unpredictable partners.
The pacts helped restrain Syngman Rhee in South Korea and Chiang Kai-shek in Taiwan, both of whom might have dragged the US into regional wars to shore up their domestic power.
From a rogue ally to totalitarian ambition
Today, with Lee Jae-myung in office, South Korea risks becoming a rogue ally again – but this time, the threat is not from anti-communist zealotry, but from ambitions that lean openly totalitarian.
Unlike Rhee, Lee Jae-myung does not stand against communism. His political vision echoes that of Xi Jinping: a state centralized around one party, with no checks and balances, and power retained indefinitely. The pattern is unmistakable.
Control over the judiciary
On March 7, 2022, broadcaster JTBC released a phone recording from 2020, in which Lee Jae-myung’s then-aide in Seongnam City said:
We’ve got the Supreme Court line completely on our side. We’re working the Supreme Court. We’ve already done too much groundwork. Once the Supreme Court justices are announced, we need to start working on them. Let me know then. We’ll fully support it.
In the same news article, a property developer involved in the Daejang-dong real estate scandal is quoted as having told prosecutors that a named businessman had gone to the Supreme Court regarding Lee Jae-myung’s election law violation case and asked a former justice to help overturn the verdict. The article said that, since 2019, the businessman had been saying that the justice should be paid 5 billion won.
In a separate call on June 24, 2020, Lee’s former transition team member said:
“It looks like there’s been a tentative internal vote on the governor’s case at the Supreme Court. Seems like things are leaning in a favorable direction. Looks like the result will be out on July 16. It probably won’t be unanimous. Maybe eight to five, for example.”
The actual vote on July 16, 2020, confirmed this assessment: seven justices for acquittal, five for conviction and one abstention.
Judicial manipulation continues
On June 10 of this year, courts once again postponed multiple trials involving Lee Jae-myung, including cases tied to the Daejang-dong scandal and election law violations.
Though the court cited constitutional grounds, critics see it as further proof of a judiciary increasingly aligned with political power.
Lee hints at behind-the-scenes contact with Supreme Court
On June 2, during a YouTube appearance, Lee Jae-myung suggested there had been unofficial communication with the Supreme Court.
“This might be considered a kind of exclusive, but while I’m not directly contacted by the Supreme Court, there is communication. In a world where people live, it’s impossible for there to be no contact,” he explained.
“From what I heard, the position was to quickly and cleanly wrap up the election law violation case.”
He added, “But then, one day, it suddenly changed.”
An open attack on separation of powers
On May 2, Park Jin-young, former deputy of Lee’s think tank, said the judiciary should be elected – or perhaps abolished altogether.
His remarks came in response to a Supreme Court decision unfavorable to Lee, revealing a growing hostility within the ruling bloc toward judicial independence.
Laying groundwork for permanent rule
On May 25, Lee floated constitutional changes allowing presidential re-election – even for the sitting president – saying:
“The constitution states that it does not apply to the sitting president, but it can be theoretically debated whether past citizens can restrict the will of present citizens.”
Attempt to dissolve opposition party
Also on June 10, Lee’s ruling party pushed an “Insurrection Special Counsel Bill” that could criminalize the opposition PPP and justify its dissolution.
This time is different
South Korea has seen leftists holding both the presidency and a National Assembly majority. But there is a fundamental difference between Lee and his predecessors.
Previous leftist governments operated within South Korea’s liberal democratic framework, even as they pursued their own agendas.
Lee Jae-myung’s camp, however, is pursuing something else entirely: subverting the very foundations of the Korean liberal democratic political system.
This crisis is no longer theoretical – and public anxiety is growing. A well-established couple I know, highly respected in Korean society, are sending their children to Malaysia and planning to emigrate themselves. Just a few years ago, such a decision would have been unthinkable. Today, it feels like an act of survival.
External pressure and internal decay
At the same time, China’s influence over South Korea has grown steadily – often invisibly, but effectively. Behind the scenes, Beijing has quietly helped Lee’s rise by shaping narratives, manipulating institutions and expanding its soft power reach.
The US, meanwhile, is overstretched. With its attention divided among Ukraine, the Middle East, and the Indo-Pacific, it lacks the capacity – and perhaps the will – to check South Korea’s internal unraveling.
A personal reckoning
An American friend recently asked me if I could think of a solution. I said no.
Back in 2016, I saw the impeachment of President Park Geun-hye not merely as a political crisis but as the opening salvo in an assault on South Korea’s democratic identity – an attack orchestrated by forces aligned with Beijing and Pyongyang. To me, it marked the beginning of a second Korean War.
Even then, I knew South Korea’s conservative party was in free fall. I joined efforts to build a new party but it made no difference. The public continued to support the dominant conservative party, no matter how dysfunctional it had become.
Currently, I see no viable political path forward. What’s preventing South Korea from falling into Beijing’s orbit is no longer internal resilience – it’s the US and the international community.
As mentioned earlier, one key reason the US maintains a military presence abroad is to exert influence – and South Korea is no exception.
That’s why it’s a striking irony that, as a conservative who deeply values national sovereignty, I now find reassurance in that very presence.
But even this source of stability is beginning to erode.
Why international pressure matters
South Korea cannot stop this trend alone. The international community – especially the US – must act to restrain Lee Jae-myung’s ambitions. During the Moon Jae-in administration, the ROK-US Working Group helped restrict aid to North Korea.
Reinstating similar frameworks could help contain Lee’s growing alignment with the communist neighbors.
Strategic self-interest, not charity
Realpolitik is unforgiving. Every nation, understandably, acts in pursuit of its own interests.
That’s why I urge the US and fellow democracies to recognize the defense of South Korea for what it truly is – not an act of charity, but an act of self-preservation. South Korea stands on the front lines of the global struggle against Chinese totalitarianism.
Its survival is inseparable from the fate of the free world.
