South Koreans went to the polls to choose a new president on Tuesday, and they handed Lee Jae-myung of the Democratic Party a clear victory with 49.4 per cent of the vote. But even before Mr Lee was sworn in at the country’s Parliament the following morning, he appeared to be surrounded by a whirlwind of questions, accusations and warnings.
“The first task facing South Korea’s next leader: Handling Trump” was one headline, referring not just to the 25 per cent tariffs Seoul may have to deal with from Washington, but also Mr Lee’s willingness to improve relations with China and North Korea, a shift from the very pro-US and Japan outlook of former president Yoon Suk-yeol, who had plunged the country into chaos by briefly declaring martial law last December.
It may indeed be quite the challenge if Mr Trump listens to one self-appointed adviser, the hardcore Maga activist Laura Loomer, who posted on X: “RIP South Korea. The communists have taken over and won the presidential election today. This is terrible.”
Mr Lee faces a country with deep political divides, and the two other candidates, both on the right, won a combined total of just over 50 per cent. The election was widely seen as being driven by anger at Mr Yoon’s self-implosion – for which he was impeached, arrested and driven from office – which hindered the candidacy of Kim Moon-soo, who is from the same People Power Party as Mr Yoon. However, “the conservative tally outweighed Lee’s support even after the debacle of Yoon’s martial law decree”, as one analyst put it.
Not enough young people support Mr Lee, say some. He faces legal charges – which he says are politically motivated – although they may be suspended until after his five-year term as President ends. Others accuse him of being a showy populist who has used fiery and – they would say – irresponsible rhetoric about US troops stationed in the country. How will he cope with an economy that is “sputtering”? Oh, and to top it all, he apparently doesn’t even have a proper place to work, since Mr Yoon moved the presidential office out of the Blue House, the official residence, to a military compound that none of the candidates said they liked.
There are other ways to look at Mr Lee’s victory, of course. The 6 per cent margin of his win over Mr Kim was more than emphatic enough in a three-way race, and with his Democratic Alliance partners holding 173 out of the 300 parliamentary seats, there should be none of the logjam between the executive and the legislature that led Mr Yoon to make such a rash (and career-ending) move.
Mr Lee has called for “national unity” and said on election night that he wanted South Korea to be a country “where we live together with mutual recognition and co-operation rather than hatred and loathing”. All of this should reassure investors, while the new President has a $25 billion stimulus package up his sleeve, plans for labour and corporate governance reforms, and wants to go all-out on stimulating domestic demand.
As for Mr Trump, despite Ms Loomer’s wild characterisation of Mr Lee as a “communist” – the adjectives “liberal” and “centrist” are more commonly preferred – the two leaders may be more likely to hit it off than some have suggested. They are both populists: Mr Lee made a point of being filmed when he climbed over barriers to enter the National Assembly to vote against Mr Yoon’s imposition of martial law last December, and he has been referred to as “Korea’s Bernie Sanders”, but also as “Korea’s Trump”, for his candid speech and ability to connect with the grassroots.
On North Korea, if Mr Trump enters negotiations with Pyongyang again, as he did during his first term, the two could be very in tune. In fact, this February Mr Lee’s party sent a letter to the Nobel Committee urging them to nominate Mr Trump for this year’s peace prize in the hope that he “continue his peace-building efforts during his second term”, as a party official put it. That was a canny move that will surely have been brought to Mr Trump’s attention.
Both men have survived assassination attempts. Mr Lee was stabbed in the neck in January 2024 and was airlifted to hospital. Just like Mr Trump, Mr Lee drew inspiration from his survival, saying: “Since my life was saved by our people, I will dedicate the rest of it solely to serving them.” And when it comes to trade discussions with the US, not only has Mr Lee said it is “the most important issue” for him, after “overcoming people’s hardships and recovering from the current turmoil”, but he seems prepared both to stand his ground and to show the US President whatever deference is required.
“Diplomacy between independent countries can be mutually beneficial,” Mr Lee said on Korean radio last Monday. “We have plenty of cards to play. There’s room to give and take, and that’s what we must do well.”
Asked how he would react to tough words from Mr Trump, Mr Lee was ready. “That’s just the way powerful countries operate,” he said. “Any humiliation or pressure is not about me personally – it’s about the entire nation. If it’s necessary, I’ll crawl under his legs. What’s the big deal?”
So for sure, Mr Lee faces challenges. But with a clear mandate, allies dominating Parliament, and being seen as the person bringing back stability after the tumult of the past six months, he has a lot going for him too. Navigating better relations with China while maintaining the treaty alliance with the US won’t perhaps be easy, but he won’t be the only leader having to thread that needle.
Above all, his pragmatism may end up being his greatest strength. Take his concluding words about his possible approach to Mr Trump: “An hour of the president’s time is worth 52 million hours of the Korean people’s time,” he said. “If the president has to bend briefly so that 52 million people can stand tall, then that’s what must be done.”
