South Korea's ousted president Yoon plotted martial law to eliminate rivals, probe finds

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — South Korea’s ousted conservative President Yoon Suk Yeol plotted for over a year to impose martial law to eliminate his political rivals and monopolize power, investigators concluded Monday.

Yoon’s martial law decree in December 2024 lasted only several hours and resulted in his rapid downfall.

Independent counsel Cho Eun-suk, who announced the six-month probe’s result, also accused the former president and his military allies of ordering operations against North Korea, in a deliberate bid to stoke tensions and justify his plans to declare martial law.

Despite the lack of a serious response from North Korea, Cho said that Yoon declared martial law by branding the liberal-controlled legislature as “anti-state forces” that must be urgently removed.

There was no immediate reaction from Yoon, who is in jail while standing trials for high-stakes rebellion charges. Yoon has steadfastly maintained that his martial law declaration was a desperate attempt to draw public support for his fight against the main liberal opposition Democratic Party, which obstructed his agenda while holding a majority in the legislature.

Meanwhile, police raided the headquarters of the Unification Church on Monday as they probe separate bribery allegations against more politicians. An independent investigation involving Yoon’s wife and the church has been underway for several months.

Cho said Yoon and his military associates had schemed to enforce martial law since before October 2023 and that they reshuffled top military officials to place their associates in key posts while removing a defense minister who opposed their plan. Cho said they hosted dinner parties to give their martial law plan traction among military leaders.

Cho said Yoon, his Defense Minister Kim Yong Hyun and Yeo In-hyung, then commander of the military’s counterintelligence agency, orchestrated various military operations against North Korea from October 2024. Cho’s deputy earlier accused Yoon of ordering drone flights over the North, which Yoon has argued he hadn’t been informed of.

The lead investigator said North Korea didn’t retaliate, likely because it was preoccupied with its support of Russia’s war against Ukraine, and so Yoon lacked legal grounds to impose military rule, but went ahead anyway to swiftly “eradicate anti-state forces.”

“Yoon Suk Yeol ... tried to declare martial law by inciting military provocations by North Korea, but that plan failed,” Cho said. “Yoon declared emergency martial law to monopolize and maintain power by taking control of the legislative and judiciary branches and eliminating his political opponents.”

In a case that showed the seriousness of Yoon’s hostilities against his opponents, Cho said Yoon called his governing People Power Party’s main rival Han Dong-hun “a commie” and said “I’ll shoot him to death” in meetings with military generals.

Han was at odds with Yoon over scandals involving the former president’s wife. Park Ji-young, a senior investigator on Cho’s team, downplayed suspicions that his wife’s troubles drove Yoon to declare martial law, saying the move was primarily about grabbing power.

Hundreds of troops encircled the parliament building and entered the election commission offices after Yoon declared martial law on Dec. 3, 2024. Thousands of people flocked to the National Assembly at the time, protesting the decree and demanding Yoon step down. Lawmakers made it inside the building and voted down Yoon’s order within hours. Lawmakers later in December voted to impeach Yoon, suspending his powers and putting his fate with the Constitutional Court, which formally removed him from office in April.

Democratic Party candidate Lee Jae Myung became South Korea’s new president via a snap election in June, and he appointed three independent counsels to probe Yoon’s martial law and other allegations against him, his wife and other associates.

Cho said that Yoon and 23 other people, including his top officials, including Defense Minister Kim, Prime Minister Han Duck-soo and Deputy Prime Minister Choi Sang-mok, have been indicted over Yoon’s martial law decree. Some military generals were also arrested and indicted by military prosecutors.

Park said there were signs that Yoon and his allies feared potential interference from Washington and may have timed their martial law attempt after the U.S. presidential election in November to exploit the distraction created by the transition to a new president.

Yoon's wife, Kim Keon Hee, was separately arrested and indicted over charges unrelated to her husband's martial law, including one that she received bribes through an intermediary from a Unification Church official seeking business favors.

Police said they raided several Unification Church -related facilities, including its headquarters in Seoul and its sprawling complex in nearby Gapyeong, following allegations that the religious group offered money and gifts to a wider range of politicians than previously thought, including Democratic Party members. Officers also searched a detention center where the church's 82-year-old leader, Hak Ja Han, has been held since September.

Police also searched the home and office of Chun Jae-soo, Lee’s former minister of oceans and fisheries, and the homes of former Democratic Party lawmaker Lim Jong-seong and Kim Gyu-hwan, a lawmaker with a PPP predecessor, over suspicions that they received bribes from the church.

Chun denied allegations that he received bribes from the church but stepped down as minister last week, saying he did not want to burden Lee’s administration. Lee, during a meeting last week, called for a thorough investigation into allegations of murky ties between politicians and a religious group, without citing the Unification Church by name.

South Korean independent counsel Cho Eun-seok speaks as he announces the results of its investigation into insurrection charges related to former President Yoon Suk Yeol at the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office in Seoul Monday, Dec. 15, 2025. (Jung Yeon-je/Pool Photo via AP)

South Korean independent counsel Cho Eun-seok speaks as he announces the results of its investigation into insurrection charges related to former President Yoon Suk Yeol at the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office in Seoul Monday, Dec. 15, 2025. (Jung Yeon-je/Pool Photo via AP)

South Korean independent counsel Cho Eun-seok speaks as he announces the results of its investigation into insurrection charges related to former President Yoon Suk Yeol at the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office in Seoul Monday, Dec. 15, 2025. (Jung Yeon-je/Pool Photo via AP)

A TV screen shows a file image of South Korea's ousted President Yoon Suk Yeol during a news program at the Seoul Railway Station in Seoul, South Korea, Monday, Dec. 15, 2025. (AP Photo/Ahn Young-joon)

WASHINGTON (AP) — For Democrats demoralized at being shut out of power in Washington, the past several months have offered reason for optimism.

A party often beset by ideological division has largely been unified in opposition to President Donald Trump's hardline immigration tactics, particularly after two U.S. citizens were killed in Minneapolis. Heading into a midterm election year in which they are just a few seats shy of reclaiming the U.S. House majority, Democrats have also kept the White House on defense with criticism of Trump's economic policies and ties to Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted sex offender.

But the U.S. and Israeli strikes against Iran could test the durability of that cohesion. Initially, Democrats balanced condemnation of Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed over the weekend, with calls for Congress to quickly pass a war powers resolution that would restrain Trump's attack options.

“As soon as our resolution comes to the floor, senators need to pick a side,” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said on Monday. “Stand with Americans who don't want war, or stand with Donald Trump as he singlehandedly starts another war.”

But some divisions are surfacing as a handful of Democrats, especially those who are strongly aligned with Israel, express reservations about the war powers measure. Rep. Greg Landsman, D-Ohio, won't back an Iran resolution. Before the strike, Rep. Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., also said he would vote no.

Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., who backed a war powers vote tied to Venezuela in January, also has broken with Democrats over the Iranian measure and rejected arguments that the attack was illegal, spurring frustration among some party leaders.

“John Fetterman knows better,” House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries said Monday on CNN.

Republicans are also facing internal dissent. Trump, who did little to prepare Americans for the prospect of such a dramatic conflict, said Monday the operation could last four to five weeks. He hasn’t articulated a clear exit strategy and warns that American casualties could mount, which will pose a severe test of voter patience for the conflict.

The war could also lead to rising gas prices and economic volatility that may bolster Democratic arguments that the president is out of touch with the financial realities facing many Americans.

Still, Republicans see an opportunity to portray Democrats as reflexively opposed to Trump.

“For my Democratic colleagues, this is not about what's best for our national security or what's best for protecting the American people,” said Sen. John Kennedy, R-La. “This is about how to defeat Donald Trump.”

Democrats have undergone a searing internal debate over the party's relationship with Israel in the wake of the war in Gaza. Then-President Joe Biden's loyalty to Israel during the heat of the 2024 campaign was starkly at odds with younger generations outraged by the treatment of Palestinians in Gaza. By the time Kamala Harris rose to the top of the ticket that year, she struggled to win over some younger voters who are critical to Democratic success.

Paco Fabian, the political director for the progressive advocacy group Our Revolution, acknowledged that Democrats “aren’t monolithic.” But he also suggested a shift was underway, noting the results of a New Jersey special election last month.

During that campaign, the affiliated super PAC of the pro-Israel American Israel Public Affairs committee sought to thwart the moderate candidate, Tom Malinowski, after he questioned unconditional aid to the Israeli government. Those efforts appeared to backfire with the more progressive contender, Analilia Mejia, winning the primary.

“Given what's going on right now, I don't think the moment is doing AIPAC and Israel any favors,” Fabian said.

Sympathy toward Israel appears to be shifting. Three years ago, 54% of Americans sympathized more with the Israelis, compared with 31% for the Palestinians, according to Gallup polling released last month. Now, their support is about evenly balanced, with 41% saying their sympathies lie more with the Palestinians, and only 36% saying the same about the Israelis.

Americans’ initial reactions to airstrikes also appeared more negative than positive, early polling suggested. About 6 in 10 U.S. adults disapproved of the U.S. decision to take military action in Iran, according to a CNN poll conducted via text message over the weekend. A separate snap poll from The Washington Post conducted via text message on Sunday suggested that about half of those polled opposed the strikes, while 39% were in support. Roughly 1 in 10 were unsure.

Democrats and independents drove much of the disapproval in those early polls, while Republicans were much more supportive.

The initial political impact of the attacks in Iran could emerge as soon as Tuesday during the first primary elections of this year’s midterm campaign.

In North Carolina, Durham County Commissioner Nida Allam was already going into her bid to unseat two-term Rep. Valerie Foushee with backing from Our Revolution and other top progressives. After receiving support from groups tied to AIPAC during her 2022 campaign, Foushee’s campaign rejected such contributions this cycle. Over the weekend, she said she doesn’t support “Trump’s illegal war with Iran” and would back the war powers resolution.

Still, Allam, who would be the first Muslim elected to Congress from North Carolina, was quick to release a video ahead of Tuesday’s vote criticizing Trump for “starting another endless war” and promising to never accept support from “the pro-Israel lobby.”

In Texas, home to high-profile Senate primaries on Tuesday, Democratic voters expressed alarm at the attacks.

“It shouldn't have happened,” said Charles Padmore, 45, an independent contractor in Houston. “Affordability should be the top priority on Trump's list.”

Alex Diaz, 31, a biology high school teacher in Houston, called the bombing of Iran “uncalled for.”

“You’re trying to start World War III, and we don’t need that right now,” he said.

The fallout could spread to other contests this month. Ahead of the March 17 primary in Illinois, AIPAC-aligned groups have also criticized Daniel Biss, the Evanston mayor who is aiming to become the Democratic candidate to succeed the retiring Rep. Jan Schakowsky. In an interview, Biss spoke of the “backlash I'm hearing people have against AIPAC, their MAGA-aligned money and their Trump-aligned policy agenda.”

Asked about such predictions, Patrick Dorton, a spokesman for AIPAC’s affiliated super PAC, said “the key distinction will be between those who recognize that Iran is a murderous regime that tortures women for leaving their hair uncovered, hangs gay people, and executes peaceful democratic protestors, and those who will turn a blind eye to the regime’s atrocities.”

As Congress moves toward a potential war powers vote this week, Biss said there was a need for Democrats to act as a “strong, clear, vocal, united opposition party.”

“I also would like to see the Democratic Party united not just on the procedural argument but on the basic acknowledgment that this war is wrong,” he added.

On Capitol Hill, Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, a Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, said he was less concerned about party unity than the prospect of achieving a bipartisan vote on the war powers resolution.

“What I want to see happen is the war powers resolution pass,” he said. “I'm not focused on what Democrats as a whole do. We're going to have differing opinions among Democrats and among Republicans.”

Associated Press journalists Linley Sanders in Washington and Juan Lozano in Houston contributed to this report.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., speaks during a news conference at the Capitol in Washington, Wednesday, Feb. 18, 2026. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., arrives at a secure facility in the basement of the Capitol for an intelligence briefing with Secretary of State Marco Rubio on the Iran war in Washington, Monday, March 2, 2026. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., arrives before President Donald Trump delivers the State of the Union address to a joint session of Congress in the House chamber at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Tuesday, Feb. 24, 2026. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)