Recent events in Seoul and Tbilisi highlight the growing tension between internal political legitimacy and external influence.
While President Biden visited Africa, South Korea experienced a sudden crisis. President Yoon Suk Yeol declared martial law, claiming a need to suppress “pro-North Korean anti-state elements.”
This led to military deployment, widespread protests, and a swift parliamentary response overturning the order. Yoon subsequently retracted his declaration and apologized.
The West reacted with a mix of surprise and uncertainty, struggling to comprehend the situation in this strategically important ally. Diplomatic analysts often seek hidden motives in such events, hesitant to attribute them to simple mistakes. However, sometimes, that’s the explanation.
This incident illustrates a larger trend: global relations are based on evolving formal and informal rules designed to curb political actions. These rules, whether treaty-based or unwritten understandings, have historically provided stability. But with the shifting global order and waning American dominance, nations are increasingly pursuing self-interest without constraint. Reduced external oversight increases the likelihood of unpredictable events like the Seoul crisis. The system is attempting self-correction, but the results are uncertain.
Democracy’s dual nature in Georgia and beyond
Georgia’s recent elections exemplify this dynamic, showcasing a clash between the liberal model, which depends on international validation of election results, and the national model, which prioritizes domestic approval. The liberal framework relies on international certification of fair elections; challenges arise if the “wrong” side wins or the vote is deemed flawed. The national approach views elections as an internal matter, with domestic legal channels handling dissent.
Georgia has shifted from the liberal to the national model, disappointing Western supporters. This isn’t due to pro-Russia sentiment but rather pragmatic national interests, particularly economic survival. By avoiding full alignment against Moscow, Georgia has gained economic benefits appreciated by its citizens, reflected in public support for the government.
However, adherence to Western political norms now often surpasses economic considerations. Deviations from prescribed behavior are viewed as betrayal. In Georgia, and other post-communist nations, some citizens remain committed to Western integration despite conflicts with national priorities. This raises the question: does upholding popular will remain central to democracy, or is it secondary to geopolitical alignment?
South Korea: Democratic order under pressure
South Korea’s recent crisis highlights the dual nature of modern democracy. Its democratic institutions functioned as intended: parliament swiftly overturned an illegal action, and the military adhered to constitutional procedures. Yet, the crisis itself arose from democracy’s limitations. Democratic systems failed to prevent a reckless leader from gaining power or making perilous decisions.
This contradiction is central to contemporary democratic governance. Democratic processes can resolve crises after they occur but often fail to prevent them, especially with persistent internal divisions. The system’s self-correcting capacity might be its strength, but it doesn’t guarantee protection against destructive leadership or societal conflict.
A changing global order
The international system is evolving. Long-standing mechanisms guiding and constraining governments are weakening, replaced by a more fragmented, self-correcting global landscape. As external guidance diminishes, nations reveal their true priorities. Some respond pragmatically, while others experience instability.
The South Korean and Georgian cases illustrate how the balance between internal legitimacy and external approval defines modern democracy and how this balance is shifting. Democratic states may increasingly find that their issues require internal solutions, relying less on the old “rules-based” global order.
In this emerging world, there is no longer any embarrassment.
This article was first published by the newspaper and was translated and edited by the RT team