This presentation is in some ways a retrospection on how left and progressive movements in South Korea should deal with the Lee Jae-myung Administration; it might hopefully also provide some insights into the internal dynamics that drive South Korean politics, rooted in Korea's unfinished national liberation — first from Japanese fascism, then from US occupation. I believe these are important elements for understanding peace and security in Northeast Asia.
In domestic media, South Korean President Lee Jae-myung's pragmatism has been praised as effective in dealing with Trump's tariff war, having managed to lower South Korea's reciprocal taxes from 25% to 15%. The Lee Administration's ability to charm Trump, with its MAGSA proposal (Make American Shipbuilding Great Again) and giving Trump the replica of a Silla Dynasty gold crown, has shown Lee Jae-myung to be a shrewd politician.
In today's presentation, I want to explore the origins, limits, and even dangers of Lee Jae-myung's pragmatism. At a time when we are made to choose between Trump's tariff war and the pre-Trump capitalist globalisation, I want to echo a call for an alternative global fight for justice, development, and sustainability, and against Trump's destructive and self-serving policies — a call that was recently made in the People's Summit Against APEC 2025 and Trump. While Lee Jae-myung might be a capable politician, his pragmatism does not address today's crises and in fact deepens them. Only movements and progressive parties guided by peace, justice, and sustainability are able to chart the way forward.
It is important to note that the Lee Administration came into power after months of protests that impeached President Yoon Suk-yeol. The world witnessed how Koreans valiantly came out to the streets to block martial law. Yet, what is often left out of the news is the disillusionment that followed the impeachment of President Park Geun-hye 8 years ago. In a system limited to voting between the conservative People Power Party and the liberal Democratic Party, without any runoff elections, the 1987 system makes it so that voting for a third party becomes, in effect, a throwaway vote.
8 years ago, after President Park, the Democratic Moon Jae-in Administration was elected with the mandate to implement broad social reforms. While being a seemingly progressive centrist, Moon's inept, tepid, failed attempts to carry out reforms resulted in a disillusionment with politics that is referred to as the 'Moon Jae-in trauma': The exuberance of the Candlelight Revolution to peacefully bring down a corrupt president only made way for 5 more years of failed attempts to create a more just and liveable Korea. This trauma paved the way for President Yoon and also shaped Lee's 'moderate conservativism' and pragmatism.
Coming into power directly after the Yoon Administration's obsession with making South Korea a 'pivotal state' within the US global security architecture, the Lee Administration promised its foreign policy would be more balanced and centred on Korea's national interests. Yet, as the recent agreements with Trump reveal, Lee's pragmatism still keeps South Korea locked in the orbit of the United States and its imperialist and destructive New Cold War.
In the recent agreement with the US, the South Korean government promises to invest $350 billion in the US, which is over 80% of Korea's dollar reserves. South Korea will be channeling $150 billion's worth of investments to a US shipyard, to allow the US to expand its naval power and strengthen its ability to project power around the world. The Lee Administration also touts its deal with the United States to acquire nuclear submarines, effectively escalating the regional arms race. The US will also monitor and determine the use of purchased weapons and equipment, further shackling South Korea's military to the United States, rather than making it more self-sufficient.
Furthermore, the remaining $200 billion will embed South Korean industrial capacity (mostly in semiconductors) in the US economy, making South Korea even more structurally dependent on the United States. While public money is invested in Korean companies to produce and profit in the United States, it does little to create jobs or provide benefits for the South Korean public.
Ultimately, Lee's pragmatism fails to make any progress in the problems that we face because what it gives with one hand, it takes back with the other. If the Lee Administration promises to expand renewable energy in South Korea, it is also planning on creating massive energy-guzzling data centres in its headlong rush towards the AI competition. If, on the one hand, the Lee Administration declares that peace is priceless, on the other hand, it is seeking to be the #4 arms exporter in the world.
At this moment, one might ask, what is preventing South Korea from breaking free from its democratic and political impasse of choosing between the conservative and the liberal parties, both of which are deeply pro-corporate and unwilling to ultimately break free from the US-ROK alliance? The answer is, firstly, South Korea was never able to complete its national liberation from Japan due to US intervention, which kept in power those that collaborated with the Japanese. The Cold War consolidated their rule in South Korea. This is represented by the fact that the conservative People Power Party presidential candidate, Kim Moon-soo, won 41% of the vote despite openly supporting President Yoon's martial law. The legacy of the Cold War has created a staunchly anti-Communist country structurally dependent on the United States, where only conservatives (the People's Power Party) and moderate conservatives (the Democratic Party) can exist. Breaking free from this impasse requires a deeper democratisation, as put forth by calls, amidst the recent protests against martial law, for constitutional reform to give people the right to propose laws to the National Assembly.
The struggle to break free from the legacy of the Cold War; to offer alternatives that improve the lives of the majority of people; to build a movement that can spark and inspire the majority of people. This is the task for South Korea's social movements as well as for movements in many countries around the world. It must be achieved, not depending on the Democratic Party, but by the efforts of independent progressive political parties and movements. The current moment of anti-Trump sentiments offers us an opportunity to supplant Lee's pragmatism with a real movement for reform and social transformation.
Recently, during the Gyeongju APEC 2025 Leader's Summit, left and progressive movements fired the first shots in South Korea against the Trump Administration's tariff war. We gathered groups to not only protest Trump's tariff war, but also an APEC that is closed off to the public and is simply centred on the interests of multinational corporations. As such, it was an implicit critique of Lee Jae-myung's pragmatism.
Building peace and security in Northeast Asia will not be achieved through pragmatism, rather, it requires broad global social movements guided by visions of a just and sustainable world. The struggle against Trump offers us a starting point. That's why South Korean social movements as part of the International People's Action Against APEC 2025 and Trump, together with the International Peoples' Assembly and other groups, call for people from around the world to hold protests against Trump's destructive actions and policies on January 20, 2026, on Trump's 1st year anniversary in office.
Watch the whole speech here: