Asia
South Korean president Yoon impeached: What happens next?
The Constitutional Court unanimously upheld President Yoon Suk Yeol’s impeachment on Friday, following his declaration of limited martial law in December.
The decision, read by Chief Justice Moon Hyung-bae and broadcast live on television, took immediate effect. The country must hold an early presidential election within 60 days to choose Yoon’s successor, with the election expected to take place on June 3.
Yoon was impeached by the National Assembly in mid-December for violating the Constitution and laws by declaring martial law on December 3, deploying troops to the opposition-controlled National Assembly to prevent lawmakers from voting on the decree, and ordering the arrest of politicians.
Chief Justice Moon stated, “The negative impacts on the constitutional order and the implications of the respondent’s violation of the laws are very grave. The benefits of protecting the Constitution by removing the respondent from office outweigh the national losses incurred by the impeachment.”
The decision concluded a contentious four-month period that began with Yoon’s surprise declaration of martial law, which significantly damaged the country’s political, economic, and social fabric.
In a statement released by his legal team, Yoon apologized to the public for failing to meet their expectations and thanked them for their support.
“My dear citizens, it has been a great honor for me to work for the Republic of Korea,” he said. “I will always pray for the beloved Republic of Korea and for you.”
What offenses did the case involve?
The case centered on whether Yoon violated the law by committing five key actions: declaring martial law, preparing a martial law decree, deploying troops to the National Assembly, raiding the National Election Commission, and attempting to arrest politicians.
The court agreed with all charges, including that he did not meet the legal requirements for declaring martial law. According to the Constitution, a president can declare martial law during wartime or an equivalent national emergency.
Yoon justified his actions by accusing the main opposition party of paralyzing state affairs by repeatedly accusing officials in his administration and attempting to cut the state budget.
The court rejected this claim.
Chief Justice Moon stated, “He neglected his duty to protect the Constitution by undermining the authority of a constitutional institution and infringing upon the fundamental human rights of the people through the mobilization of soldiers and police.”
He added, “The respondent’s actions that violated the Constitution and the laws are a betrayal of the public’s trust and, from the perspective of protecting the Constitution, constitute a grave violation of the law that cannot be tolerated.”
With eight justices currently on the bench, at least six justices had to agree to approve the impeachment motion.
The key issue was not only whether Yoon violated the laws but also whether this violation was serious enough to warrant impeachment.
Yoon did not attend the court for the decision.
How did the ruling and opposition parties react to the decision?
Acting President and Prime Minister Han Duck-soo addressed the nation, pledging to do his best to manage the upcoming elections to ensure a smooth transition to the next administration.
The ruling People Power Party stated that it “humbly accepts” the court’s decision, while the main opposition Democratic Party (DP) hailed it as a “victory for the people.”
DP leader Lee Jae-myung, seen as a leading candidate in the next presidential election, read a separate statement from the National Assembly.
“The great people have reclaimed the great democratic republic, the Republic of Korea,” he said. “Together with the people, we will restore the destroyed livelihoods of the people, peace, the economy, and democracy with a great spirit of unity.”
According to a Gallup Korea poll conducted from Tuesday to Thursday on 1,001 adults, 52% wanted an opposition candidate to win the next election, while 37% supported a candidate from the ruling party.
Lee received the most support as the next head of state, with 34%, followed by Labor Minister Kim Moon-soo from the ruling bloc with 9%. The poll had a margin of error of ±3.1% at a 95% confidence level.
According to Yonhap news agency, the decision led to sharp divisions among Yoon’s supporters and opponents.
Outside the official presidential residence in central Seoul, anti-Yoon protesters gathered, holding signs that read, “Impeach Yoon Suk Yeol.”
A few meters away, a group of Yoon’s supporters expressed their shock. Some angrily hurled abuse, while others fell to the ground and wept loudly.
Second president to be impeached
Thirty-eight days was the longest time the court has taken to issue a decision on a president’s impeachment after the final hearing.
In the past cases of former Presidents Roh Moo-hyun and Park Geun-hye, the court had taken 14 days and 11 days, respectively.
It took 111 days from the day the impeachment motion against Yoon was submitted to the court on December 14.
In addition to the impeachment case, Yoon is also being tried on charges of inciting insurrection through the martial law proposal, a crime punishable by a maximum sentence of life imprisonment or death.
Yoon, who was arrested in January and held in a detention center until early March due to these charges, was released following a court decision that his detention was invalid.
Yoon, who rose from a senior prosecutor to president in three years, became the country’s second president to be impeached.
Yoon, 64, followed in the footsteps of former President Park Geun-hye, who was impeached in 2017 when the Constitutional Court upheld her impeachment over a corruption scandal.
Yoon’s journey
Before reaching the country’s highest office, Yoon began his career as a prosecutor in 1994. He rose to prominence by leading an investigation team into Park’s corruption scandal, ultimately leading to Park’s impeachment and subsequent imprisonment.
In 2019, he was appointed as the country’s top prosecutor by then-President Moon Jae-in but clashed with the administration as he pursued investigations into the family members of former Justice Minister Cho Kuk.
Faced with increasing pressure from the Moon administration, Yoon resigned from his position in 2021. Shortly thereafter, Yoon entered politics and won the 2022 presidential election as the candidate of the conservative People Power Party.
Yoon’s term was marked by conflicts with the National Assembly, which was dominated by the main opposition Democratic Party. Yoon exercised his presidential veto power against 25 bills passed by the National Assembly.
Tensions with the DP peaked in early December when the main opposition introduced motions to impeach the country’s top auditor and a senior prosecutor, leading to Yoon’s declaration of martial law on December 3, which ultimately led to Yoon’s downfall.
Asia
Analysts warn new surge in Chinese exports threatens global markets
Financial Times writer Ryan Avent has written that a fresh, rapid surge in China’s trade surplus could signal a new wave of the “China shock”.
Economists define the “China shock” as a spike in Chinese exports to global markets that intensifies competition for manufacturers in advanced economies and curtails employment in certain sectors.
The term gained widespread currency after China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001, accelerating the inflow of inexpensive Chinese goods into the US and other nations.
The US was the country hit hardest by the initial shockwave. Between 1999 and 2011, more than 2 million jobs were lost because domestic producers were unable to withstand the competition.
Avent argued that the effects of the initial wave are still felt across the American economy because China failed to carry out the rebalancing that the world expected.
The share of net exports in China’s gross domestic product contracted during the 2007-2019 period, allowing Western nations to focus on national security and other matters.
Avent reported that the trade surplus is now escalating rapidly once again, posing a threat to the economies of wealthy nations.
The writer pointed to the stagnation of domestic demand following the collapse of the real estate market six years ago as one cause of this surplus. Another prominent factor is the Beijing government’s channelling of massive resources into manufacturing in pursuit of self-sufficiency.
Attention was also drawn to the role of the depreciating yuan. An appreciation of the currency could require China to alter its foreign exchange interventions, reduce purchases of foreign currency and assets, and sell those assets off. That scenario could trigger currency depreciation and rising interest rates in other countries.
The Wall Street Journal also reported in the spring of 2024 on economists’ concerns regarding a potential second wave.
Experts predicted that global markets would once again be flooded with inexpensive goods, stating that China was manufacturing far beyond domestic demand to overcome its economic troubles.
Moreover, it was stressed that China is now competing in high-technology fields such as automobiles, computer chips, and complex machinery manufacturing.
Meanwhile, Vasiliy Kashin, Director of the Centre for Comprehensive European and International Studies at the Higher School of Economics (HSE) University in Moscow, told the Russian media outlet RBC that the US has imposed sanctions on the Chinese economy since the first shock period, adding that these measures would very likely tighten in the event of a fresh export wave.
According to assessments reported by the Financial Times, this new process could also shake China’s own economy. Alongside rising output, entry-level manufacturing plants across the country are turning toward automation and reducing personnel.
This trend could trigger a painful departure from labour-intensive production, leaving millions unemployed. Manufacturing activities in China that previously capitalised on cheap labour are shifting to other Southeast Asian countries.
The Beijing administration rejected allegations that its industrialisation steps pose risks to other countries. As reported by the Xinhua news agency, China’s Ministry of Commerce stressed that claims of a “China shock 2.0” are groundless. The ministry stated:
“The US and other Western countries have circulated the so-called ‘China shock 2.0’ narrative, asserting that China’s industrial development has shaken Western monopolies and narrowed growth space for Global South countries. This claim is unsupported by concrete data and is entirely unfounded.”
Asia
Iran and China run secret barter network to bypass oil sanctions
Iran is operating a covert, barter-like trade mechanism to bypass sanctions on its oil sales and procure billions of dollars in goods from China, including military hardware.
Speaking to the Reuters news agency, two senior Iranian officials and three sources closely monitoring the matter said the Tehran administration receives credits for goods imported from China instead of cash in exchange for the oil it sells to the country.
The sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, emphasised that this method of swapping oil revenues for Chinese goods provides an immediate financial lifeline to the Tehran government at a time when the US has intensified economic and military pressure over its nuclear programme.
China, the world’s largest crude importer, continues to access discounted Iranian oil through this arrangement while shielding its banks and exporting companies from the risk of international penalties.
Although the Washington administration has imposed sanctions on several small-scale Chinese entities facilitating the transport of Iranian oil, it avoids sweeping measures that could shake the global economy.
The US has stepped up its pressure as it seeks to reopen the Strait of Hormuz amid the ongoing war between the two countries.
US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said last month that countries failing to cut commercial ties with Tehran would risk exclusion from the dollar system.
It remains unclear how the barter mechanism has been affected by the US naval blockade imposed on Iran as part of the six-month-old war.
However, since the reimposition of the blockade on 14 July, no shipments of Iranian oil passing through the Strait of Hormuz to China have been recorded.
Beijing and Tehran, which describe Western unilateral sanctions as illegal, refrain from disclosing publicly how they sustain their trade.
Sources state that Tehran introduced this system to obtain pharmaceuticals, vehicles, and communications equipment. Chinese manufacturers are said to have no direct contact with Iran, and there is no indication that they are violating sanctions.
On the other hand, the mechanism was utilised at least once last year under contracts supplying Iran with millions of dollars’ worth of air defence equipment. The sources provided no details regarding the shipments in question, and the transactions were not independently verified.
The United Nations conventional arms embargo returned alongside other sanctions in September 2025 following the collapse of the 2015 nuclear agreement between Iran and world powers.
Tehran had withdrawn from the terms of the agreement, while Beijing and Tehran described the European nations’ automatic reimposition of sanctions as legally flawed.
Responding to questions from Reuters, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that it had no knowledge of the trade structure in question.
Beijing stated that it opposes unilateral sanctions lacking United Nations Security Council authorisation and having no basis in international law.
Iran’s diplomatic missions in New York and Geneva remained silent on the inquiries. A US official speaking on behalf of the White House stated only that they are working with international partners, including the EU, to prevent Tehran from achieving its nuclear goals.
According to data analytics company Kpler, China purchased more than 80% of the crude oil exported by Iran in 2025. This share equates to an average of 1.4 million barrels per day.
Although the two countries signed a 25-year strategic partnership agreement in 2021 covering energy and infrastructure, the operational details of their cooperation remain largely confidential.
The model in question constitutes only one of the networks through which Iran procures goods and services from China without passing through international banking channels.
A Western official and two other individuals tracking the matter said that a buyer acting on behalf of state-owned Chinese oil company Zhuhai Zhenrong deposited hundreds of millions of dollars each month until this year into ChuXin, a shadow financial entity based in China.
These deposits reportedly represent payment for oil purchased from a Hong Kong-based company linked to the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC).
Approximately 70% of the oil revenues routed through ChuXin is allocated to infrastructure projects in Iran. The remainder is transferred to the accounts of a special purpose vehicle (SPV) established to disburse payments to companies supplying goods to Iran.
Sources close to Iran’s decision-making apparatus confirm the existence of this financial mechanism.
Fund management is shared between a firm acting on behalf of the Chinese Ministry of Commerce and another entity linked to the Central Bank of Iran. When the Central Bank of Iran authorises importers, money transfers are directed to supplier firms. While the name ChuXin does not appear in official records, one source noted that the structure exists solely on balance sheets.
Andrea Ghiselli, an international politics specialist at the University of Exeter, stated that Beijing uses these indirect networks to demonstrate that it will not bow to US secondary sanction threats.
Highlighting that Chinese leaders aim to protect their own banks and firms from being pushed out of the global financial system, Ghiselli said: “They want to create deniability.”
Asia
China leads $54bn capital injection into state banks and insurers
China’s Ministry of Finance will lead a total capital injection of $54 billion into state-owned insurance companies and banks as part of a coordinated push to reinforce the capital structure across the country’s financial system, according to details disclosed by the institutions in statements on Sunday.
China Life Insurance (Group) Co, the country’s largest life insurer, will receive 35 billion yuan ($5.2 billion) in capital support, whilst China Taiping Insurance Group will receive 7 billion yuan.
In a separate announcement, People’s Insurance Company (Group) of China (PICC) said it plans to raise up to 15 billion yuan via a private placement of A-shares to the Ministry of Finance. The company stated that the proceeds will be used to replenish its capital.
The initiative could fortify the financial position of state insurers, which have been called upon to support the equity market with medium- and long-term funds. At the same time, it could position these institutions to help regulatory authorities manage smaller and higher-risk insurance companies.
Financial sector stability
China’s insurance industry has been contending with shrinking profitability caused by prolonged low interest rates. Solvency ratios across numerous small and medium-sized insurers have also deteriorated.
China Export and Credit Insurance Corp stated that the Ministry of Finance will inject 10 billion yuan to boost the company’s core capital. China Reinsurance (Group) announced that it will execute a capital increase of 3 billion yuan.
“The capital injection represents an important step for enhancing the financial sector’s capacity to serve the real economy and promoting high-quality development across the financial and insurance industries,” China Life said in a statement. The insurer added that the capital support will improve the group’s resilience to risks.
Taiping also noted that the funds provided will strengthen the company’s solvency and other core metrics.
Banks benefit from recapitalisation plan
Separately, three state banks announced on Sunday that they will receive capital support totalling 290 billion yuan.
The recapitalisation framework was first announced during the annual parliamentary meetings in March this year. The move broadens a funding mechanism deployed last year to strengthen the capital structures of several other major state-owned lenders.
Agricultural Bank of China and Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC), two of the country’s largest state-owned lenders, announced plans to raise up to 160 billion yuan and 100 billion yuan, respectively, through private placements of A-shares to the Ministry of Finance, China National Tobacco Corp, and affiliated entities.
Both lenders confirmed that all net proceeds will be deployed to replenish their Core Tier 1 capital. The measure is expected to help sustain credit expansion at a juncture when Beijing is increasingly relying on state lenders to support economic growth.
Weak credit demand remains a persistent headwind for the world’s second-largest economy, while continuing to erode profitability across the banking sector.
Export-Import Bank of China, one of the country’s three policy banks, stated that the Ministry of Finance will inject 30 billion yuan of capital into the institution, thereby bolstering its capital base.
-
Europe5 days agoGermany’s CDU drafts tougher citizenship rules to counter AfD
-
Russia2 weeks agoWhat to know about Russia’s upcoming State Duma elections?
-
Europe2 weeks agoMarine Le Pen leads all 2027 French presidential scenarios, poll shows
-
Diplomacy1 week agoGeoffrey Roberts sees Ukraine war concluding within coming months
-
Middle East2 weeks agoIran expands deterrence as Gulf strikes expose US munitions limits, analysts say
-
Europe1 week agoGerman industrial bosses push for return to 40-hour working week
-
Russia2 weeks agoRussia warns NATO over Arctic militarisation and conflict risks
-
Asia2 weeks agoBOJ faces critical rate decision as US presses for faster hikes
