South Korea is to hold its 20th presidential election on March 9.
Multiple opinion polls show former South Korean prosecutor general Yoon Suk-yeol, the candidate of the opposition People Power Party, to be slightly ahead of Lee Jae-myung, a former governor of Gyeonggi Province and the candidate of the ruling Democratic Party, although Yoon’s lead is within the margin of error.
As the campaigns enter the final furlong, two incidents at the Beijing Winter Olympics — one involving the appropriation of traditional Korean clothing, the other a perceived biased judging decision — have enraged young South Koreans and boiled over into nationwide anti-China sentiment.
South Korean social media is awash with angry accusations of “cultural plunder” and “cultural engineering” after a female performer wearing a traditional Korean hanbok was presented as a Chinese ethnic minority during a Chinese national flag-passing routine at the opening ceremony.
Beijing has a history of putting ethnic minorities on display at set-piece events to promote the concept of unity of one big “Chinese family,” and performers wearing hanbok have featured at China’s national celebrations for some time.
Given this, why did so many young South Koreans view hanbok being worn at the opening ceremony as a naked provocation that constituted a “plundering” of their cultural identity?
The problem runs much deeper than the clothing itself, which was just a touch paper for deep-seated anti-China sentiment among South Koreans that has been bubbling under the surface for a long time. This long-suppressed anger reached a tipping point.
An opinion poll conducted by a South Korean think tank last year found that 74 percent of the population held a negative sentiment toward China, up from 52 percent in 2019.
Anti-South Korean protests orchestrated by the Chinese government in 2017 over the US’ deployment of its Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system in South Korea and multiple bans of K-pop entertainers in the past few years are still fresh in the memories of many in the country.
Additionally, Beijing’s “wolf warrior” diplomacy, and the extreme nationalism that gave birth to it, coupled with the Democratic Party’s perceived pandering to China, has offended many South Koreans.
These factors are the fundamental cause behind the anti-China backlash during the Olympics.
However, how will this sentiment affect the presidential election?
Yoon has registered the shift in national mood and is playing the anti-China card. He has pledged to strengthen the US-South Korea alliance, mend fences with Japan, deploy additional THAAD units in the country and even said that he would push for membership in the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, also known as the “Quad.”
Yoon’s unequivocal anti-China, pro-US stance is rare for a South Korean presidential candidate, encapsulated by his blunt statement that “most South Koreans, especially young people, dislike China.”
During a television debate prior to the Olympics, Lee criticized Yoon’s pro-US stance and his THAAD deployment pledge, warning that it would severely damage trade relations with China.
However, after the firestorm created at the Olympics, Lee changed his tune and in an interview said that Chinese fishing vessels that illegally cross into South Korean territorial waters should be sunk.
Lee’s U-turn shows that he, too, has registered the shift in national mood and is worried it could scupper his campaign.
The Chinese embassy in Seoul issued a congratulatory message after South Korea won its first gold medal at the Games — a clear indication that Beijing is trying to dampen the fire, unleashing a charm offensive on the South Korean public in an attempt to prevent the installment of a pro-US, anti-China president in the Blue House.
Washington would be able to further consolidate its strategic advantage in Northeast Asia if Seoul moves away from Beijing.
The presidential election will have far-reaching geopolitical ramifications that directly affect Taiwan and the security of the region.
Yang I-pin is an assistant university professor
Translated by Edward Jones
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS