this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2024
374 points (99.5% liked)

World News

39199 readers
2376 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 64 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (2 children)

After Yoon's statement the military said activities by parliament and political parties would be banned, and that media and publishers would be under the control of the martial law command.

Yoon did not cite any specific threat from the nuclear-armed North, instead focusing on his domestic political opponents. It is the first time since 1980 that martial law has been declared in South Korea.

That's uh pretty explicit. Not quoted are two other key facts;

  • In South Korean law parliament can end Martial Law with a simple majority vote.
  • They did that vote immediately.
  • The Army "attempted" to take the parliament building but was rebuffed by staff members and fire extinguishers.

Y'all, those soldiers were not on board with this idea. And this is all vitally important because South Korea was a dictatorship for most of the cold war. This is absolutely an attempt to reinstate that.

[–] ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org 5 points 5 hours ago

*Kim Chonk Un calls Xi Jinping to secure a bulk deal on military-grade fire extinguishers*

[–] SulaymanF@lemmy.world 7 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

How would that vote be held if the original Martial Law declaration banned Parliament from meeting? It seems like a gigantic loophole they need to close immediately before the president or a successor tries this again.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 5 points 9 hours ago

Banning them, even under Martial Law is illegal.

[–] perestroika@lemm.ee 31 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

Update via Reuters: the president says he'll abide by the parliament's decision and revoke his declaration. Nobody started obeying it anyway - the military tried to do something because they had orders, but was not enthusiastic enough to achieve anything.

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/south-korea-president-yoon-declares-martial-law-2024-12-03/

Some analysis via the Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/dec/03/declaration-of-martial-law-awakens-ghosts-south-koreans-thought-were-laid-to-rest

Yoon’s declaration of martial law appears to have been a desperate gamble in the face of rock-bottom public popularity – with positive ratings barely over 10% – in the midst of a doctors’ strike and staunch political opposition, increasingly including his own People Power party, whose leader, Han Dong-hoon, said the declaration of martial law was a “wrong move”.

Yoon may have thought that his nostalgia for authoritarianism would resonate with at least some of the South Korean political spectrum, but the unanimous vote in the national assembly to overturn his declaration, including by his own party, suggests he miscalculated.

[–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 32 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

Who had south Korea becoming a fascist state?

Do I hear bingo from the back?

[–] RadioFreeArabia@lemmy.world 14 points 11 hours ago

Who had south Korea becoming a fascist state?

I don't read or speak Korean but maybe the president ran on making South Korea ~~Great~~ Fascist Again? South Korea only democratized in 1987.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 21 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

I'll be honest I had South Korean oligarch class does ridiculous cult shit and causes headlines. Does that count?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] veganpizza69@lemmy.world 7 points 12 hours ago

The ~~rat race~~ squid game eventually ends, as it's not sustainable.

[–] Hubi@feddit.org 158 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

Yoon cited a motion by the country's opposition Democratic Party, which has a majority in parliament, this week to impeach some of the country's top prosecutors and its rejection of a government budget proposal.

They declared martial law over a budget proposal??

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 128 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (20 children)
[–] Shardikprime@lemmy.world 70 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (4 children)

My god they are so efficient. Whole thing lasted like 3 hours

[–] Nighed@feddit.uk 61 points 14 hours ago (3 children)

Don't hold you breath...

From BBC:

The South Korean military says it will maintain martial law until it is lifted by President Yoon Suk Yeol, despite the nation's parliament voting to block its enforcement, according to the country's national broadcaster.

Yeah this is 100% a power grab. AFAIK there’s nothing going on right now in SK at a national level that could possibly justify the declaration of martial law countrywide.

[–] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 32 points 13 hours ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] perestroika@lemm.ee 18 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

As far as I understand, the president's decision might be void, since he was required to hold a session of the government before declaring martial law, but did not.

I predict that the military will consult their lawyers and stop enforcing it really soon.

I suspect the president either went insane or attempted some kind of a coup. His own party voting against his decision is a clear signal that it's a solo performance. He has no political backing.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 12 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

I mean… if the military is behind the president (and it sounds like they just might be), this is just the beginning phase of a coup, wherein their legislature is taken out behind the shed.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 8 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

This is hours old, I think there might be a couple generals for sure, but the rest of the military is playing catch up. We'll see how those chips fell tomorrow morning most likely.

[–] perestroika@lemm.ee 8 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

Judging by the unanimous decision of the parliament, the majority of soldiers will have no interest in going forward with a coup. A minority could have interest, but would soon notice they're a minority.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (19 replies)
[–] clutchtwopointzero@lemmy.world 42 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Yes. This possibility has been discussed for months now. Yoon framed the cuts to his proposed budget as an "act of sympathy to the North" in his speech.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] dance_ninja@lemmy.world 84 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (6 children)

Yoon said he had no choice but to resort to such a measure in order to safeguard free and constitutional order, saying opposition parties have taken hostage of the parliamentary process to throw the country into a crisis.

Not very familiar with the political situation in Seoul, but saying your political opponents are supporting North Korea sounds like a pretty serious accusation.

[–] clutchtwopointzero@lemmy.world 90 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Basically, anyone who does not agree with him now is being labelled a North Korea sympathizer

[–] Valthorn@feddit.nu 81 points 16 hours ago (3 children)

Taking inspiration from Netanyahu I see.

[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 35 points 15 hours ago

Standard authoritarian playbook, disgusting

[–] drolex@sopuli.xyz 16 points 14 hours ago

I must say, this is a welcome change from the old antisemitism accusation. Now I have two cards in my hand.

If you disagree, you're a North Semitic antikorean. No wait.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] logicbomb@lemmy.world 61 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Yoon cited a motion by the country's opposition Democratic Party, which has a majority in parliament, this week to impeach some of the country's top prosecutors and its rejection of a government budget proposal.

Imagine declaring martial law, and these were the only concrete reasons you could come up with.

[–] wildcardology@lemmy.world 26 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Donald Trump: hold my steak.

[–] curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 14 hours ago (2 children)
[–] harrys_balzac@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 12 hours ago

And covfefe

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Bumblefumble@lemm.ee 65 points 17 hours ago (8 children)

Is Martial law ever declared in a non-corrupt, power-grabbing way?

[–] cygnus@lemmy.ca 65 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (5 children)

Canada invoked the Emergencies Act in 2022 when the national capital was occupied by a convoy of antivaxers who shut down the city for days. There was some debate as to whether it was necessary and there was an inquiry afterward. The main reason for invoking it was to allow the federal government to use law enforcement since the Ottawa municipal police mostly sat on its hands during the whole debacle.

[–] n2burns@lemmy.ca 28 points 16 hours ago

Also in Canada, the War Measures Act was used during the FLQ Crisis in 1970. While some may disagree with using martial law, I don't think many would say it was used in a corrupt, power-grabbing way.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Hugin@lemmy.world 68 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

Occasionally in response to things like floods and other disasters. Though then it's usually local and short lived.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›