The foreign policy course of the Lee Jae-Myung’s government: сhallenges and prospects

On June 3, 2025, Lee Jae-myung, a representative of the Democratic Party, was elected as the new President of the Republic of Korea (ROK) in a snap presidential election. Unlike his pro-American predecessor, Yoon Suk-yeol, he pledged to pursue a balanced foreign policy aligned with the country’s national interests. However, the newly elected head of state, in many respects, actually continues his predecessor’s course. This inevitably raises the question of what accounts for such continuity and how it may affect the ROK’s foreign policy amid mounting international tensions. To address this question, the article first provides a detailed description of Lee Jae-myung’s political profile and identifies the persistent determinants currently shaping the substance and principal directions of the ROK’s foreign policy. According to the author, these determinants include global turbulence, intensifying Sino-American rivalry, the ‘Trump phenomenon’, the dynamics of relations between the DPRK, the PRC, and Russia, as well as the domestic political situation in South Korea. On this basis, the author examines Lee Jae-myung’s initial steps in relations with the United States, the PRC, Russia, Japan, and the DPRK and outlines possible scenarios for the development of the ROK’s interactions with these countries. The author concludes that, despite populist rhetoric, the new president will continue his predecessor’s foreign policy, which entails strengthening friendly relations with Washington and distancing from both U.S. rivals — China and Russia — and the DPRK within the frame-work of inter-Korean dialogue. This trajectory is determined not so much by the personal views of the populist Lee Jae-myung as by objective macro-regional trends that significantly constrain the ROK’s political leeway.

1. Asmolov, K.V. (2024a) ‘Izmeneniya politiki KNDR i RK v oblasti mezhkoreiskikh otnoshenii i perspektivy razvitiya situatsii na poluostrove’ [Changes in the inter-Korean policy of the DPRK and the ROK and prospects for the development of the situation on the peninsula], Far Eastern Studies, (4), pp. 32–44. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31857/s0131281224040038. (In Russian.)

2. Asmolov, K.V. (2023) ‘Kitai i gosudarstva Koreiskogo poluostrova v 2022 g. — do i posle Yun Sok Yolya’ [China and the states of the Korean peninsula in 2022 — before and after Yoon Suk Yeol], Vostok (Oriens), (3), pp. 162–172. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31857/S086919080025672-6. (In Russian.)

3. Asmolov, K.V. (2024b) ‘Konstitutsionnyi krizis v Respublike Koreya v 2024 g. Itogi parlamentskikh vyborov’ [The constitutional crisis in the Republic of Korea in 2024. The results of the parliamentary elections], Far Eastern Studies, (6), pp. 48–59. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31857/S0131281224060037. (In Russian.)

4. Asmolov, K.V. (2022a) ‘O prichinakh rosta antikitaiskikh nastroenii v Yuzhnoi Koree’ [On the reasons for the growth of anti-Chinese sentiment in South Korea], China in World and Regional Politics. History and Modernity, 27(27), pp. 254–267. Available at: https://doi.org/10.48647ZIFES.2022.74.22.015. (In Russian.)

5. Asmolov, K.V. (2022b) ‘Prezidentskie vybory 2022 goda v Respublike Koreya’ [Presidential elections-2022 in the Republic of Korea], Far Eastern Studies, (2), pp. 80–96. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31857/S013128120019649-4. (In Russian.)

6. Asmolov, K.V. (2022c) ‘Problema tret’ei sily v sovremennoi yuzhnokoreiskoi politike’ [The problem of a third force in South Korean politics], in A.Z. Zhebin (ed.) Sovremennye problemy Koreiskogo poluostrova 2022 [Korean peninsula: current issues, 2022]. Moscow: Institut Kitaya i sovremennoi Azii RAN Publ., pp. 124–132. (In Russian.)

7. Asmolov, K.V. and Zakharova, L.V. (2023) ‘Reshitel’nost’ i akkuratnost’’ [Determination and diligence], Russia in Global Affairs, 21(4), pp. 203–224. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31278/1810-6439-2023-21-4-203-224. (In Russian.)

8. Asmolov, K.V. and Pugacheva, O.S. (2024) ‘Politika Yun Sok Yolya v otnoshenii Yaponii: prichiny izmeneniya podkhoda i perspektivy’ [Yoon Suk Yeol’s policy towards Japan: reasons for changing approach and prospects], Japanese Studies in Russia, (3), pp. 113–132. Available at: https://doi.org/10.55105/2500-2872-2024-2-113-132. (In Russian.)

9. Asmolov, K.V. and Solov’ev, A.V. (2021) ‘Strategicheskaya avtonomiya Respubliki Koreya: intellektual’naya khimera ili politicheskaya real’nost’?’ [Strategic autonomy for ROK: intellectual pipe dream or political reality?], Journal of International Analytics, 12(2), pp. 49–73. Available at: https://doi.org/10.46272/2587-8476-2021-12-2-49-73. (In Russian.)

10. Ahremenko, A.S. (1999) Stsenarnyi metod prognozirovaniya politicheskikh protsessov [Scenario method of forecasting political processes]. PhD thesis. Moscow. (In Russian).

11. Babaev, K.V. (2024) ‘Vtoraya kholodnaya voina’ [Cold War II], USA & Canada: Economics, Politics, Culture, 54(8), pp. 5–15. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31857/S2686673024080013. (In Russian.)

12. Babaev, K.V. (2023) ‘Strategicheskii treugol’nik Rossiya — SSHA — KNR i budushchee Severo-Vostochnoi Azii’ [Strategic triangle Russia — USA — China and the future of Northeast Asia], Koreanology, (4), pp. 66–78. Available at: https://doi.org/10.48647/ICCA.2023.27.21.006. (In Russian.)

13. Primakov, E.M. and Khrustalev, M.A. (2006) Situatsionnye analizy. Metodika provedeniya. Ocherki tekushchei politiki. Vyp. 1 [Methodology of situation analyses: essays on current politics. Iss. 1]. Moscow: Nauchno-obrazovatel’nyi forum po mezhdunarodnym otnosheniyam, MGIMO MID Rossii Publ. (In Russian.)

14. Carothers, T. (2002) ‘The end of the transition paradigm’, Journal of Democracy, 13(1), pp. 5–21. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1353/JOD.2002.0003.

15. Cho, J.E. and Hur, A. (2025) ‘The perils of South Korean democracy’, Journal of Democracy, 36(2), pp. 38–46. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2025.a954560.

16. Ki, Y. and Chung, E. (2023) ‘Party reputation, moral expectations and voting behaviour in South Korea’, Millennial Asia, 16(2). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/09763996231179507.

17. Merton, R.K. (1948) ‘The self-fulfilling prophecy’, The Antioch Review, 8(2), pp. 193–210. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2307/4609267.

18. Nilsson-Wright, J. (2022) Contested politics in South Korea. Democratic evolution, national identity and political partisanship. Research paper. London: The Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House). Available at: https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/2022-07/2022-07-28-contested-politics-south-korea-nilsson-wright.pdf (Accessed: 30 January 2026).

19. Shin, G.-W. (2020) ‘South Korea’s democratic decay’, Journal of Democracy, 31(3), pp. 100–114. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2020.0048.

20. Shin, H., Yang, J.-w. and Hahm, S.D. (2024) ‘Affective polarization in the 2022 South Korean presidential election: causes and consequences’, Korea Observer, 55(2), pp. 273–296. Available at: https://doi.org/10.29152/KOIKS.2024.55.2.273.