It didn’t take long. Just minutes after it became clear that Lee Jae-myung won South Korea’s presidential election, American conservative social media lit up with a verdict: “RIP South Korea.” According to Laura Loomer: “the communists have taken over.”
Attention has turned to the re-emergence of a Cold War-like division in East Asia, with China, North Korea, and Russia on one side and the United States, South Korea, and Japan on the other.
Significance. South Korea’s presidential election domestic debate focused on candidate personalities, recent political events, and party politics, amid a strategic landscape reshaped by Donald Trump’s presidency and growing demands regarding tariffs, United States Forces Korea (USFK), and U.S.-China rivalry.
Single sentence summary
Every discussion about South Korea’s foreign policy options begins with the same unspoken constraint: what will Washington tolerate? Proposals for strategic realignment, closer ties with China, or regional multilateralism are not dismissed because they’re impossible—they’re dismissed because they’re implausible within the context of U.S. political expectations.
Cybersecurity for the North Korea watcher is about adopting a disciplined, practice-based mindset. The threats faced by researchers in the field are persistent and highly tailored.
The next South Korean President, or let’s just call it now—Lee Jae-myung, will inherit more than a fractured domestic landscape. They’ll inherit Donald Trump. Lee will be dealing with a man who runs U.S. diplomacy on podcast and social media vibes, Fox News soundbites, and showmanship.
Despite being on the frontlines of global strategic fault lines—wedged between a rising China, a declining Japan, a volatile North Korea, and an unpredictable U.S.—South Korean business schools have not moved to embrace geopolitics as a serious academic specialization within their institutions.
Not every state can, or should, try to understand every other state on its own. For small and medium-sized states like Australia or Canada, when it comes to deeply opaque regimes such as North Korea, pursuing direct analytical insight is an exercise in futility.
In South Korea, there’s an old leftist argument that the foreign policy of the country was long ago captured. It draws a straight line from the chinilpa - Koreans who collaborated with Japanese colonial rule - to the postwar conservative elites who aligned the country’s strategy with U.S. interests.
