From lions to lambs: Crisis of leadership in Korean armed forces

By Chun In-bum

The memory of President Yoon Suk Yeol declaring martial law on Dec. 3 will be etched into the minds of many Koreans. The subsequent impeachment of not only Yoon but also Prime Minister Han Duck-soo highlighted Yoon’s claims of a national emergency that he argued justified his actions. The political turmoil and the complicated process to resolve these matters will take time, but the ever-changing world will not wait for Korea to find stability.

Adding to public concern is the credibility of the Korean Armed Forces. The disappointing attitude displayed by certain Korean military leaders during the hearings and the series of disastrous accidents have intensified these concerns. The most severe incidents include the catastrophic drone crash that destroyed both the drone and a parked helicopter, and the accidental release of live bombs on a village by the ROK Air Force due to incorrect coordinates. (ROK stands for Republic of Korea, South Korea's official name.) As an institution, the Korean military remains intact but now faces significant challenges to its reputation and credibility. The incidents not only exposed operational flaws but also demonstrated a disturbing lack of accountability and professionalism within the ranks.

The public is increasingly questioning the professionalism of the Korean military, especially due to the irresponsible and reckless behavior of some officers directly involved in executing military duties on the night martial law was declared. The apparent absence of a coherent chain of command undermines the credibility of senior leadership. The subsequent accidents further raise concerns about the military’s discipline, training and overall readiness. This lack of readiness is not only a domestic concern but also a vulnerability that could be exploited by adversaries in the increasingly unstable regional security environment.

Any military given a flawed order will struggle to respond effectively. Even Yoon’s closest advisers did not fully understand the rationale behind the martial law declaration. As confusion spread down the chain of command, troops ultimately adhered to principles of democracy and common sense, which prevented the situation from escalating into a national tragedy. This remarkable restraint demonstrated by rank-and-file soldiers suggests a commendable dedication to the rule of law, even when their leaders failed to provide coherent guidance.

The core issue that Korean society must address is the indecisiveness of senior military leadership and their subsequent attitudes. Except for Yoon’s closest military advisers, none of the senior military officials were informed of the intent or urgency of the situation. When they learned of the martial law declaration, they were all in a position to recognize its inappropriateness. Faced with two options —either follow orders or disobey — most chose a third: observing passively to see how events would unfold. Such passivity reflects a broader institutional failure to foster decisive and principled leadership. What causes lions to turn into lambs?

A significant contributor to this indecisive attitude is the unrealistic demand for absolute safety within the armed forces. For the past two decades, Korean society has insisted that there must be no accidents, let alone fatalities, within the military. The only way to achieve such an impossible standard is to halt training or implement extreme safety measures that degrade the effectiveness of training itself. Intense public scrutiny and unwarranted accusations can destroy a commander’s career if their unit is involved in any training accident. This situation has resulted in senior officers who are increasingly risk-averse and, worse, incapable of making decisive decisions.

To be fair, the Korean military of the past was indeed reckless with the lives of its soldiers, resulting in avoidable deaths and injuries. However, the solution is not to eliminate training or to make training excessively difficult. The arbitrary dismissal of commanders following incidents creates an environment of fear and reluctance to make critical decisions. Such a culture is unsustainable for a military institution expected to defend the nation in times of crisis.

A clear and pragmatic social agreement must be established concerning the acceptable costs of training and the proper education of the military. Public opinion, often driven by vocal minorities or well-organized groups, must be balanced by rational policymaking that acknowledges the harsh realities of military preparedness. Insisting on a zero-tolerance policy for training accidents is unrealistic if Korea intends to maintain a fully trained, combat-ready military capable of effectively responding to crises, wars and other critical duties.

The rapidly changing global environment leaves Korea with no choice but to face difficult decisions. The days of relying on business-as-usual practices and expecting others to provide security are over. Korea must develop and sustain a capable military led by competent leaders. Achieving this goal requires not only increased defense spending but also the national will to sacrifice. The commitment to train and educate our military personnel must be unwavering. It is not just about financial resources; it is about readiness, resilience and the collective determination to secure the nation’s future.

If Korea is to remain secure and maintain its sovereignty, a recalibration of its expectations from the military is necessary. Leadership development, rigorous training and a culture that rewards responsible decision-making must be prioritized. Ultimately, the Korean people must decide whether they want an effective military or one shackled by unrealistic demands for perfection. The path forward will not be easy, but it is essential if Korea is to emerge stronger and more resilient in the face of evolving threats.

Chun In-bum ([email protected]) served as a lieutenant general in the ROK Army and was commander of Special Forces Korea.