The first task facing South Korea's next leader: Handling Trump
Lee Jae-myung, leader of the liberal opposition Democratic Party, had a clear lead in polls going into the election, which is being held six months to the day after then-President Yoon Suk Yeol plunged the East Asian democracy of more than 50 million people into turmoil by abruptly declaring martial law.
Since lawmakers impeached Yoon in December over the short-lived martial law order, South Korea has been stuck in a leadership vacuum, churning through a series of acting presidents. The uncertainty has also constrained the U.S. ally in Washington even as President Donald Trump slapped it with a 25% 'reciprocal' tariff, among other levies.
The presidential by-election, which was triggered in April when South Korea's Constitutional Court upheld Yoon's impeachment, promises a return to stability, and South Koreans have turned out in record numbers for early voting.
'A lot of people just want to move on, because it's been a long six months,' said Jennifer Lee, a principal at the Asia Group corporate consultancy in Washington, who recently returned from a trip to South Korea.
Lee Jae-myung, 61, who narrowly lost to Yoon in 2022, has been seen as the most likely next president since Yoon was impeached.
But public support for Lee has been driven more by anger at Yoon's conservative People Power Party, which has declined to condemn his actions, than by agreement with Lee's policy positions, said Rob York, director for regional affairs at Pacific Forum, a foreign policy research institute in Honolulu.
'I don't think enthusiasm for him is especially strong,' York said. 'He's not an especially inspiring figure for a number of reasons, but the conservative party is simply so tainted right now.'
Further boosting Lee's chances is the fact that conservative votes are being split between Kim Moon Soo, the People Power Party candidate, and Lee Jun-seok, a young lawmaker from the upstart Reform Party who has been generating controversy with his antifeminist remarks.
Though Lee has moved toward the center during the campaign, he is generally seen as more open to China and North Korea than his predecessor and less friendly toward Japan, which is part of a trilateral security partnership with the United States and South Korea.
Because Yoon was 'so pro-U.S. and hardcore U.S.,' it seems unlikely that the U.S.-South Korea relationship will remain as strong, the Asia Group's Jennifer Lee said.
'I think that there will be some more balancing act between the United States and China,' she said, and if the Trump administration 'comes out hard' on issues such as tariffs or cost-sharing for the 28,500 U.S. troops stationed in South Korea, 'I think there may be a lot more frictions ahead.'
Still, Lee the candidate has expressed support for the U.S.-South Korea alliance and already begun reaching out to the Trump administration. In an interview last week with Time magazine, Lee said Trump 'has outstanding skills in terms of negotiation' and that both he and Trump are simply looking out for the interests of their people.
Though he doesn't align with Trump's conservative views, Lee has in the past been nicknamed 'Korea's Trump' by supporters enamored with his populist, outspoken style.
Like Trump, Lee also survived an attempt on his life last year, having been stabbed in the neck during a visit to the city of Busan.
'Personality-wise I think the two of them, if they're in a room together, would probably get along,' York said. 'Both of them are people who view themselves as dealmakers, and I think they're more concerned with crafting a deal that makes both of them look good.'
One of Lee's top priorities will be reaching a deal on tariffs, which have hit South Korea hard. In addition to the 25% tariff, South Korea — the world's 10th-largest economy — is vulnerable to steep duties on some of its biggest exports, such as steel and automobiles.
Lee is also facing a more assertive North Korea, whose leader, Kim Jong Un, has been advancing his ballistic missile and nuclear weapons programs. Like Trump, Lee favors greater engagement with the North, pledging last week to restore a military hotline between the two rivals, who technically remain at war.
Though Trump has said he'd like to revive his in-person diplomacy with Kim, North Korea appears far less interested in negotiating than it was when the two leaders met in 2018 and 2019. Kim is now receiving crucial economic and military support through a security partnership with Russia, and he said last year that North Korea is no longer pursuing reconciliation with the South.
The heightened tensions on the Korean Peninsula come amid reports that Trump is considering withdrawing thousands of U.S. troops from the South, an idea he also floated during his first term. Though Seoul says there have been no such discussions, Pentagon officials say a troop reduction has not been ruled out.
Neither South Korea nor U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) were barely mentioned in Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's speech in Singapore last weekend laying out the U.S. approach to the Indo-Pacific, adding to concerns about where the country stands with Washington.
'The U.S. can unilaterally decide and act on reducing USFK troops. It's their military, after all,' said Bong Young Sik, a North Korea specialist at the Yonsei Institute for North Korean Studies at Yonsei University in Seoul, referring to U.S. Forces Korea.
But 'they need to consider and accommodate the situations their security partners are under and facing,' he said.
'If they go with 'What is good for the U.S. is good for the world,' I am not sure how long that approach could work,' Bong said.
Jennifer Jett reported from Hong Kong and Stella Kim from Los Angeles.
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


San Francisco Chronicle
2 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Trump administration cuts $300M in UCLA research funding over antisemitism claims
The Trump administration has suspended more than $300 million in federal research grants to UCLA, citing the university's alleged failure to address antisemitism and discriminatory practices on campus. The move, part of a broader crackdown on elite universities, marks the most severe funding cut in UCLA's history. According to government letters obtained by multiple news outlets, agencies including the National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health and Department of Energy are halting hundreds of active grants. Officials allege the university engaged in 'race discrimination' and 'illegal affirmative action,' and failed to prevent a hostile climate for Jewish and Israeli students, following campus protests over the Gaza war. Attorney General Pam Bondi said Tuesday that UCLA would 'pay a heavy price' for its 'deliberate indifference' to civil rights complaints. A 10-page letter Tuesday from the Department of Justice to UC President Michael Drake said the DOJ had looked into complaints of discrimination since Oct. 7, 2023, the day Hamas attacked Israel, leading to the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza, which sparked protests at college campuses across the U.S. The letter cited 11 complaints from Jewish or Israeli students regarding discrimination between April 25 and May 1, 2024, while pro-Palestianian protesters occupied an encampment on the UCLA campus. 'Several complainants reported that members of the encampment prevented them from accessing parts of the campus,' the letter said, and some reported encountering intimidation or violence. The Department of Justice set a Sept. 2 deadline for the university to begin negotiations or face legal action. 'Federal research grants are not handouts,' he wrote Thursday. 'Grants lead to medical breakthroughs, economic advancement, improved national security and global competitiveness — these are national priorities.' The freeze affects more than 300 grants, with nearly $180 million already distributed, and follows similar enforcement actions against Harvard, Columbia and Brown universities. UCLA recently agreed to a $6.5 million settlement with Jewish students and a professor over claims of discrimination during 2024 campus protests. Frenk, who is of Jewish heritage, emphasized the university's efforts to combat antisemitism, including the creation of a campus safety office and an initiative to fight antisemitism and anti-Israel bias. 'Antisemitism has no place on our campus, nor does any form of discrimination,' he wrote, while insisting the funding cut 'does nothing to address any alleged discrimination.'


Boston Globe
32 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump administration freezes $339M in UCLA grants and accuses the school of rights violations
The Trump administration paused the research funding as part of an investigation by the government's antisemitism task force, two administration officials said. The freeze included about $240 million in research grants from the Department of Health and Human Services and the NIH, $81 million from the NSF, and $18.2 million from the Energy Department, a White House spokesperson said. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The move makes UCLA the latest university to be targeted by Trump administration officials. It comes amid a broader pushback by the administration against what it sees as 'woke' ideologies. Advertisement The NSF said in a statement that it was 'suspending awards to UCLA because they are not in alignment with current NSF priorities and/or programmatic goals.' The NIH did not immediately respond to a request for comment. In recent weeks, Columbia University, the University of Pennsylvania, Harvard, Brown, and others have had federal funding reduced or threatened based on broad accusations from the Trump administration that range from antisemitism to improper support for diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. In some cases, the government has used the threat of funding cuts to extract concessions and hundreds of millions of dollars from universities. Advertisement Last year, UCLA was the site of one of the nation's biggest protests against the Israeli military offensive in the Gaza Strip. The demonstrations prompted claims from across the political spectrum that the university didn't do enough to protect Jewish students or pro-Palestinian demonstrators. On Tuesday, the university agreed to pay more than $6 million to settle a lawsuit from Jewish students and a professor who said that the university had allowed a hostile protest on campus. After the settlement was announced, the Department of Justice separately said that it had found the university violated civil rights laws by failing to respond to students' complaints of antisemitism. Although the Trump administration intensified its attacks on UCLA this week, the school had been a target of the government's scrutiny for more than a year. In May 2024, Frenk's predecessor, Gene D. Block, testified before a congressional committee examining campus antisemitism. And in February, a Trump administration task force on antisemitism identified UCLA as one of 10 schools it intended to visit as it investigated whether 'remedial action is warranted.' In recent weeks, UCLA would not say whether any of the task force's investigators had been to the campus. Frenk said in his statement Thursday that UCLA had taken 'concrete action' to address antisemitism and discrimination, including creating a new office of campus safety. 'This far-reaching penalty of defunding lifesaving research does nothing to address any alleged discrimination,' he wrote. He called the cuts a 'loss for Americans across the nation' whose work and health rely on the university's research. Advertisement The funding cut is an early test for Frenk, who became chancellor in January, as well as James B. Milliken, who took over as the University of California system's leader Friday. State and education leaders have been deeply concerned about the possibility that the Trump administration would target the university system as a whole, but especially the campuses in Los Angeles and Berkeley. Both schools were on the antisemitism task force's list for potential visits. But the Department of Education has also said it was investigating accusations of antisemitism at several other UC campuses.


San Francisco Chronicle
32 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Veteran federal judge T.S. Ellis III, who presided over trial of Trump aide Paul Manafort, has died
ALEXANDRIA, Va. (AP) — Federal judge T.S. Ellis III, whose legal scholarship and commanding courtroom presence was evident in numerous high-profile trials, has died after a long illness. He was 85. Ellis oversaw the trials of former Donald Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort and former U.S. Rep. William 'Dollar Bill' Jefferson as well as the plea deal of 'American Taliban' John Walker Lindh across a judicial career that lasted more than 35 years. His acerbic wit sometimes drew muted complaints at the courthouse in Alexandria, Virginia, where Ellis was based, but his legal reasoning was unquestioned. Ellis died Wednesday at his home in Keswick, according to the Cremation Society of Virginia. Thomas Selby Ellis III was born in Colombia in 1940 and frequently found ways in court to utilize his Spanish-language skills. He often told Spanish-speaking defendants who relied on interpreters to speak up as they pleaded for leniency, saying he wanted to hear their words for himself. He joined the Navy after receiving an undergraduate degree from Princeton, and completed graduate studies at Oxford. He received his law degree from Harvard, graduating magna cum laude. He was appointed to the federal bench by President Ronald Reagan in 1987. In a courthouse known as the 'Rocket Docket' for its speedy disposition of cases, Ellis' courtroom reflected his iconoclastic nature. Rarely did his hearings start on time, though when he presided over jury trials his punctuality improved as he zealously guarded jurors' time commitments. He frequently chastised lawyers to cut short long-winded arguments, in what he called 'a concession to the shortness of life.' But he was easily coaxed or diverted into telling stories from the bench recalling episodes from his long legal career. He snapped at lawyers who annoyed him, but would often adopt a more conciliatory tone later in the same hearing, and apologize for his short temper. His penchant for speaking freely drew raised eyebrows at what was arguably the highest-profile trial over which he presided: the prosecution of Manafort, on charges of tax and bank fraud related to his work advising pro-Russia Ukrainian politicians before managing Trump's campaign. Ellis ultimately delivered a 47-month sentence, and said as an aside that Manafort appeared to have lived 'an otherwise blameless life,' a phrase he often used at criminal sentencings. Critics who found much to blame in Manafort's long career working for clients including the tobacco industry and international despots were outraged by the comment. In 2009, Ellis sentenced Jefferson, a former Louisiana congressman, to 13 years in prison for taking bribes, including $90,000 found hidden in his freezer. The case threw multiple curveballs at Ellis, including a sexual relationship between a key witness and an investigating FBI agent. In 2017, Ellis reduced Jefferson's sentence to time served after a Supreme Court case changed the rules for what constitutes bribery of public officials. He made clear, though, that he believed Jefferson's actions were criminal, and called his conduct 'venal.' 'Public corruption is a cancer,' he said at the time of Jefferson's resentencing. 'It needs to be prosecuted and punished.' Ellis' sentencing hearings often followed a familiar script in which he invited defendants to explain themselves 'by way of extenuation, mitigation, or indeed anything at all' that they wanted to say on their behalf. He invariably told defendants before passing judgment that 'you write the pages to your own life story.'