[Lee Byung-jong] The perils of political leadership

Following President Yoon Suk Yeol’s recent declaration of martial law and subsequent impeachment, many South Koreans find themselves in a state of profound shock and sorrow. Their pride in being citizens of a young yet vibrant democracy has been shattered, replaced by a deep sense of shame. However, they may draw some consolation by looking beyond their borders, where democracies — whether old or seemingly robust — are being challenged and undermined one by one. Across the globe, a series of governmental failures have led to the downfall of political leaders, though not always as dramatically as President Yoon’s.

Germany recently experienced political turmoil when Chancellor Olaf Scholz suffered a crushing defeat in a confidence vote in parliament. This outcome caused the collapse of his fragile coalition government. Amid a weakening economy, mounting immigration concerns, and security issues exacerbated by the ongoing Ukraine war, German voters decided to reject Scholz’s Social Democratic Party. The conservative Christian Democratic Union is expected to emerge as the dominant political force following a snap election in February, forcing out Scholz. The political turbulence in Germany has been particularly shocking because the country has long been considered Europe’s most stable and enduring democracy.

Similarly, France, another strong European democracy, faced political instability earlier this month when President Emmanuel Macron’s government crumbled. His prime minister was ousted in a confidence vote, and despite appointing a new prime minister last Friday, Macron is under intense pressure to resign. His approval rating has plummeted to just 18 percent, with a staggering 75 percent disapproval rating, according to Morning Consult, a US-based multinational survey firm.

The same survey, conducted in late November and early December, reveals similarly low approval ratings for many global leaders. South Korea’s President Yoon, who had a mere 15 percent approval rating before declaring martial law, found himself at the bottom of the rankings. Germany’s Scholz had an approval rating of just 19 percent, and Japan’s Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, with 24 percent approval, faced significant setbacks in the October general election when his Liberal Democratic Party and its coalition partner lost their majority in the House of Representatives. US President Joe Biden fared somewhat better with a 37 percent approval rating, but his party lost control of the presidency in the November election.

In contrast to these unpopular leaders in established democracies, populist strongmen in less-developed nations continue to enjoy much higher approval ratings. In the same survey, India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi boasted the highest approval rating among global leaders at a staggering 76 percent, bolstered by his fiercely nationalistic Hindu populism. Argentine President Javier Milei, also a populist, had a 66 percent approval rating, thanks to his ultra-right, populist policies.

Leaders in authoritarian countries, unsurprisingly, tend to have even higher approval ratings. While polls in these nations are often unreliable, the popularity of their leaders far surpasses that of democratically elected leaders. For instance, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s approval rating has remained above 80 percent for years, according to the Levada Center, a Moscow-based nongovernmental organization. In China, President Xi Jinping’s approval rating exceeds 90 percent, though it drops to 60 percent when respondents are promised anonymity. These figures represent a level of popularity that leaders in the West can only dream of.

What accounts for the fall of political leaders in advanced democracies? What explains the broader trend of democratic regression in these countries? Are Western democracies fundamentally flawed and incapable of withstanding the test of time? And what happened to the post-Cold War euphoria surrounding the triumph of democracy and the supposed “end of history”?

While each country has its own unique reasons for political instability, a common factor emerges: anti-globalization and anti-immigration sentiment. After more than three decades of rapid globalization, many people in advanced Western economies are now voicing strong opposition to its negative consequences, particularly the growing inequality it has produced. This backlash against neoliberal capitalism has prompted many voters in the West to reject globalist leaders.

The first major sign of this backlash was the Brexit referendum in 2016, where British voters chose to leave the European Union — one of the foremost products of globalization. Their decision was largely driven by a sense of deprivation caused by open borders and the influx of immigrants. The election of Donald Trump as US President just months later further demonstrated the rise of anti-globalization sentiment. Although Trump lost the 2020 election, his 2024 reelection showed that anti-globalization has become a long-term trend, not a passing phase. Trump’s harsh rhetoric against globalist elites and immigrants marked the final nail in the coffin of globalization.

South Korea’s democratic decline, culminating in President Yoon’s martial law declaration, follows a different path. His impeachment resulted from his own poor judgment and betrayal of the will of the people, including his supporters. However, Korea’s deadlocked political landscape, with an emboldened opposition confronting Yoon, is not dissimilar to the paralysis facing other democracies. In the midst of sweeping societal changes driven by globalization and geopolitical forces, the perils faced by political leaders across the globe are likely to continue for the foreseeable future.

By Lee Byung-jong

Lee Byung-jong is a former Seoul correspondent for Newsweek, The Associated Press and Bloomberg News. He is a professor at the School of Global Service at Sookmyung Women’s University in Seoul. The views expressed here are the writer’s own. — Ed.