President Yoon Suk Yeol’s television broadcast made no sense whatever because there was no need to “to protect the country from North Korea's Communist forces and to eliminate anti-state elements.” It “felt like the coup d’état in Myanmar”, as one Seoul resident put it.

South Korea is a very long way from Myanmar both geographically and politically. Myanmar is an impoverished Southeast Asian country which has spent almost all its post-independence history under the mafia-like rule of a predatory army. South Korea is a rich East Asian country that has been civilian-ruled and fully democratic for four decades.

There was no threat from “North Korea’s Communist forces” beyond the standing menace of its swollen armed forces, which has endured since an armistice ended the Korean War 70 years ago. As for the need to “eliminate anti-state elements”, Yoon may have been referring to the opposition parties, which were consistently thwarting his policy initiatives.

Yoon had other political problems, including a looming investigation into his wife’s alleged influence-peddling and stock manipulation, but nothing huge enough to warrant what would have amounted to a coup d’état. “It was very impulsive. Maybe he's not in his right mind,” speculated Joon Hyung Kim, an opposition member of the National Assembly.

Even more bizarrely, Yoon cancelled martial law within a few hours of his late-night declaration, as if he was shocked by the almost unanimous public rejection of military rule. Could he have been so ignorant of the country he was living in? It would seem that the answer is yes.

South Korean politicians and ordinary citizens both mobilised with admirable speed. Hundreds of thousands of civilians were in the streets in hours, while politicians of all parties headed immediately to the National Assembly. Even Yoon’s own party condemned his actions.

By Wednesday morning enough politicians had struggled through the police lines to constitute a quorum. (The police had tried to force their way into the building but had been repelled by parliamentary officials.) First the members of the National Assembly cancelled martial law by a unanimous vote, and then they voted to impeach the president.

It was an exemplary defence of democracy, and South Koreans of all political colours should be congratulated for their actions. With the partial exception of the many senior members of the military and police forces who largely obeyed Yoon’s orders until he panicked and cancelled them.

You can sympathise with their dilemma. The president is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces and he might have information unavailable to the soldiers that justifies his orders. Even if he does not, disobeying the orders of a lawful superior officer is a fateful and irrevocable step. If you are wrong, you may be charged with treason and rebellio

What the South Korean military and police seem to have done in practice was to obey all of the president’s orders up to but not including the use of lethal violence against the civilian population (which Yoon may not have ordered in any case)

Happily, the rapid reaction of the civilian defenders of democracy made further debate within the South Korean armed forces unnecessary, but what might happen if such a dilemma arose in a democracy with a deeply divided and fiercely partisan population? A democracy like the United States, for example

Speculation on this topic was building even before Donald Trump’s return to the White House became certain, but seeing just such an event play out in a stable country like South Korea sharpens the focus considerably. Which way would the US armed forces jump if Trump gave a similar order

Like the Korean constitution, the US Constitution strictly subordinates the military to elected civilian authorities, but Trump will be just such an authority. He regularly generates fantasies just as far-fetched as Joon Suk Yeol’s justifications for declaring martial law nationwide, and the American military authorities would face the same dilemma in deciding whether or not to obey him.

One suspects that the US armed forces would initially respond rather like the South Korean army did, obeying the president’s orders in general but stopping short of using lethal force. However, it would be much harder to maintain that stance for more than a few days in the United States, where the population is heavily armed.

Trump’s rhetoric is often extreme but his actions are usually much less so. In a weird way, the fact that he now effectively controls both Houses of Congress and the Supreme Court means that a resort to radical measures like martial law becomes less likely, so lying awake worrying about it would be excessive. But the Koreans weren’t lying awake either.

Author

Gwynne Dyer is an independent journalist whose articles are published in 45 countries.

Gwynne Dyer