Prof. Kelly’s Insights on South Korea’s Politics

South Korea’s politics has reached an extreme lately. The ideological conflict, intensified by the martial law issue on December 3rd, 2024, has deeply polarized the nation. Globally, South Korea is also facing a major diplomatic crisis with the inauguration of the second Trump administration. Declaring a global trade war, President Trump is now turning his attention to South Korea’s trade and security issues. At this critical juncture, seeking a better political direction for South Korea is essential.

Robert E. Kelly (Prof. of Political Science and Diplomacy, Pusan National University (PNU)), has been a prominent figure in international media reports on Korean politics. Having majored in Political Science in the US, he has served as a professor at PNU since 2008 and gained worldwide attention when his young children unexpectedly appeared during a live video interview with the BBC, during the impeachment of former President Park Geun-Hye in 2017. Since then, he has continued to appear in interviews with major media outlets such as the BBC and The New York Times. Recently, he was interviewed by CNN regarding President Yoon Suk-Yeol’s martial law issue, and in March 2024, he published a paper arguing that South Korea should be armed with nuclear weapons, sparking debate in academia. “Channel PNU” met with Prof. Kelly in his office on March 17th to discuss the future of South Korean politics and his teaching philosophy.

Q. What led you to become a professor at PNU?

A. My father, a scholar, always inspired me to be one as well. I’ve always loved traveling, so I wasn’t afraid of moving to another country. At the time, PNU had a vacancy, and I decided to come to South Korea. It wasn’t part of any grand plan, but South Korea turned out to be a new and exciting experience for me. As much as I anticipated, I was thrilled when I arrived here. Now, 15 years have passed since I married my wife, and my kids have grown quite a bit. All in all, life at PNU has been fulfilling and I’m happy living in this country.

Q. In 2017, you went viral for your BBC interview. What was that experience like?

A. My kids unexpectedly appeared in my video-call interview. Since they were young, many people found them adorable. Some even speculated that the scene was staged, but that wasn’t the case at all—it was completely spontaneous. After that happened, more students started recognizing me, and they still do now. So, whenever I start a new class, I make sure to mention the interview as part of my introduction. Sometimes, people ask me for autographs as if I were a celebrity, which makes me feel a bit awkward.

Q. It’s known that you give students small gifts on holidays like Christmas and Easter, and that you prefer to be called “Doctor” rather than “Professor.” Why?

A. I’ve always loved celebrating special occasions, so I enjoy preparing small events for my students, especially during exam periods. I know how stressful exams can be for students. I am happy to see them happy with small gifts that don’t cost much.

As for my title, when my father was a university professor, students always called him “Dr. Kelly.” I personally feel that the title “Professor” sounds too formal. I prefer a more relaxed relationship between professors and students, rather than one based on rigid hierarchy. That’s why I prefer “Doctor.”

Q. What values do you try to instill in your students?

A. Since I teach political science, I emphasize the importance of how to create a better political environment. I always tell my students that they must become more informed voters. Many people cast their votes without fully understanding the candidates—sometimes just because they are famous politician’s child or physically attractive. I aspire for students to understand how the democratic system works and what qualities make a good leader within that system. If they can comprehend the political system more profoundly, they can vote based on more substantial information rather than ideological divisions between the left and the right.

Q. The second Trump administration has had a significant impact on global politics. How do you view its effects on South Korea?

A. South Korea is expected to experience significant harm. If Trump targets South Korea, he’ll probably raise issues about trade deficits and US military support. Over the next four years of his presidency, the biggest challenge will be maintaining alliances that Trump is actively dismantling.

In fact, if South Korea wants to maintain the bilateral alliance, it should align itself with the Trump administration. If South Korea sets aside its pride a little and complies with the Trump administration’s demands, things could remain peaceful. However, given Trump’s aggressive and undiplomatic nature, South Korea might choose to pursue its own path instead. That would require increased defense spending and higher taxes, but ultimately, it depends on South Korea’s needs. Personally, I think Trump’s attention span is short—he’s likely to move on to another issue soon. Until then, South Korea may just have to be patient.

Q. In your recent paper, you argued that South Korea should develop nuclear weapons. Why do you believe that?

A. For the past five years, ever since Trump first took office, discussions about South Korea obtaining nuclear weapons have been ongoing because it’s clear that Trump will not defend South Korea in a crisis. He fundamentally does not believe in alliances. That’s why all of the US’s allies—not just South Korea, but also Poland, Germany, Japan, and Australia—are pushed to take drastic measures for their own security. If an inter-Korean war breaks out, North Korea will undoubtedly use nuclear weapons, but the US-South Korea alliance no longer guarantees US intervention. This means South Korea can no longer rely solely on the US nuclear umbrella. It must develop its own nuclear deterrent.

Q. You’ve said that South Korea needs a more socially liberal political party. Can you elaborate on your point?

A. I believe South Korea needs a political power to overcome rigid traditions and embraces more societal and personal freedoms. Regrettably, there is a lack of political parties advocating for civil liberties, freedom of expression, and human rights—especially women’s rights. There’s also no liberal party pushing for policies including strengthening the market economy or reducing government intervention. In my opinion, South Korea should have a party that is even more progressive and open than the current “Democratic Party of Korea.” A party like Germany’s Free Democratic Party would be ideal. For example, if South Korea were to accept more immigrants, it could greatly benefit the economy. However, this would require being more open-minded toward different ethnicities. That’s why I underscore that a new political party is critical to addressing these issues.

Q. How do you perceive the recent martial law and the president’s impeachment issues?

A. While I understand President Yoon Suk-Yeol’s frustrations with the opposite party, his response was excessive. In democratic countries, it’s common for the opposition party to hold a strong presence in the National Assembly. However, President Yoon treated this opposition-led situation as a national emergency requiring constitutional suspension, which was highly inappropriate.

The international community was also shocked. Most people are vaguely aware that South Korea once had a military dictatorship. So, the recurrence of such an event was alarming. Foreign observers may not fully understand the impeachment process, but they believe South Korea will successfully navigate the crisis and return to normal. They still respect South Korea as a functioning democracy. The sight of South Koreans protesting on the streets during the martial law crisis reassured the world that democracy was being defended.

Q. South Korea is experiencing severe political polarization. What do you think should be done to improve South Korean politics?

A. It is undeniable that political polarization in South Korea is severe. Not only polarization itself but also the issue of the presidency, which holds immense power, exacerbates the problem. Due to these complex problems, South Korean politics has become increasingly intense. Weakening presidential power or adopting a federal system could be practical solutions.  Additionally, North Korea is one of the essential aspects of South Korean politics that cannot be overlooked, which requires the most effort, as public perception of the regime has become starkly divided along ideological lines. I believe that fostering a national consensus on how to handle it could help alleviate South Korea’s overheated political climate.

Q. Finally, do you have any advice for students?

A. I hope students make the most of their university years. This is a time when they have the freedom to explore subjects they are passionate about. As life gets busier, those opportunities become rare. So, use your time wisely and read as much as you can.

Reporter Shin Ji-Yeong

Translated by Thadar-Soe