---

After months of paralysis in Seoul’s political life, the people of South Korea finally went to the polls in June 2025 to elect their new president. The election came after a period of extraordinary turbulence, triggered by the impeachment of former President Yoon Suk Yeol and the collapse of his conservative administration. For weeks the capital seemed stuck in uncertainty, with governance at a standstill and citizens growing weary of endless partisan confrontation. The June vote marked both a constitutional necessity and a public demand for stability, renewal, and direction.

The political context that led to this election was shaped by multiple failures of the preceding regime. The Yoon government faced allegations of corruption and struggled to maintain legitimacy after scandals eroded public trust. More importantly, its confrontational approach in both domestic politics and foreign relations left the country deeply polarized. Critics accused Yoon of prioritizing ideological alignments over practical governance. His sharp pivot toward Washington and Tokyo, while consistent with conservative security thinking, was seen by many as unnecessarily provocative toward Beijing, South Korea’s largest trading partner. Economically, households were strained by inflation, rising housing costs, and an increasingly insecure job market. By the beginning of 2025 public patience had thinned and impeachment sealed the administration’s fate.

It was within this fractured environment that the snap election was called. On June 3, citizens turned out in record numbers, with participation reaching nearly 80 percent, the highest since 1997. Two candidates carried the weight of expectation. Representing the Democratic Party, Lee Jae Myung was no newcomer to national politics. Having narrowly lost the 2022 race, he returned with greater experience, a populist edge, and a reputation for being a skilled communicator. His campaign centered on addressing economic hardships, expanding welfare protections, and rebalancing foreign policy. His opponent from the conservative People Power Party carried forward Yoon’s vision of deepening ties with the United States and Japan while taking a harder line toward North Korea and China. The ideological divide was stark. One side promised continuity in security alliances and conservative economic policies while the other called for pragmatism, social safety nets, and diplomatic balance.

Lee’s victory was decisive enough to end speculation about a contested outcome. Securing nearly half the national vote, he benefited from frustration with conservative governance and from the mobilization of younger voters who demanded both fairness in the economy and less ideological rigidity abroad. The win was also facilitated by the public’s desire for stability after impeachment chaos. For many, Lee’s pragmatic tone felt less polarizing than the rhetoric of his opponent.

The new president immediately faced questions about foreign policy. South Korea’s position is uniquely vulnerable, sandwiched between two global powers whose rivalry increasingly shapes the regional order. The United States remains the bedrock of South Korea’s security. The Yoon administration invested heavily in this alliance, building unprecedented trilateral cooperation with Japan and aligning closely with Washington on strategic issues from semiconductors to defense. This orientation, however, widened tensions with China. Beijing responded critically to Seoul’s participation in U.S.-led security frameworks, warning of consequences for bilateral trade. Under Yoon, relations with China were often tense and South Korean businesses dependent on Chinese markets voiced growing concern.

Lee Jae Myung’s approach marks both continuity and departure. He has been careful not to weaken the U.S. alliance, describing it as indispensable to South Korea’s deterrence against North Korea. He supports cooperative security exercises and values defense ties with Japan, recognizing the necessity of trilateral coordination in the face of regional threats. Yet his emphasis is on pragmatism rather than ideological alignment. Lee has already indicated that while military deterrence will continue, he will also explore channels of dialogue with Pyongyang, seeking incremental trust building that had been abandoned under Yoon.

In relation to China, Lee presents a significant shift. During the campaign he criticized his predecessor for “harassing China” in rhetoric that damaged the economy. He insists South Korea cannot afford to choose sides in the U.S.-China rivalry and must instead navigate a balanced course. This does not mean neutrality, but rather a foreign policy that prioritizes economic survival, given that China remains the country’s largest export market. Shortly after his victory, Lee engaged directly with Xi Jinping, signaling willingness to reset strained ties. Such moves underline his conviction that diplomacy must secure both security alliances and economic partnerships simultaneously.

This foreign policy pragmatism has broader implications for trade and geopolitics. The global trade environment in 2025 is increasingly uncertain, marked by supply chain fragmentation and rising protectionism. In his inaugural speech, Lee warned that global trade chaos threatens South Korea’s survival, a clear message that economic diplomacy will guide his administration. Already his government has pursued adjustments in trade relations with the United States, successfully negotiating relief on automotive tariffs. Similar attention is being directed toward safeguarding export channels to China while diversifying into Southeast Asian markets to hedge against dependency. His broader vision appears to blend strategic autonomy with global engagement, ensuring that South Korea is neither cornered by great power rivalry nor left vulnerable to economic shocks.

Geopolitically, this balancing act will not be easy. Washington expects Seoul to remain a reliable partner in Indo-Pacific strategies, particularly as tensions over Taiwan remain acute. Beijing, on the other hand, demands that South Korea respect its interests and avoid becoming a mere extension of U.S. containment. Lee’s foreign policy will therefore be tested by the art of maintaining credibility with both sides while avoiding the perception of compromise. Domestically, the electorate will watch whether his promises of welfare expansion and job creation can be funded without jeopardizing defense budgets or foreign investment.

The June 2025 election in South Korea was therefore more than a transfer of power. It reflected the public’s rejection of political paralysis, their demand for stability, and their insistence on leadership capable of navigating both economic insecurity and geopolitical rivalry. Lee Jae Myung enters office at a time when Seoul’s choices resonate far beyond its borders. His success or failure will not only shape domestic welfare but also determine how South Korea positions itself in a turbulent global order. The people’s mandate is clear. They voted not simply for a party or ideology, but for a pragmatic strategy of survival in an era where both politics and trade are inseparably linked to international power struggles.

Roman Uddin is a Research Associate at Centre for Governance Studies (CGS)

Disclaimer: Views in this article are author’s own and do not necessarily reflect CGS policy