I was a 14-year-old boy when former President Park Chung-hee was assassinated in October 1979, and emergency martial law was issued. The martial law was imprinted on me as a fear that I could be shot dead if I left the house. I saw soldiers on TV equipped with guns deployed on the streets of Gwanghwamun, Seoul. I'm sure all Koreans my age have kept similar uncomfortable fears in their memories. When I heard the martial law news about 11 p.m. on Tuesday, I felt a chill flowing throughout my body as the fear from 45 years ago was immediately reactivated.

I was shocked in another sense rather than feeling fear. In September, I argued in this column that the rumor of preparation of martial law was an excessive worry. I thought it was almost impossible to prepare the declaration of martial law in a strong democracy like Korea. The thought I was wrong was probably followed less by embarrassment than fear.

Fortunately, the chaos ended in 155 minutes. President Yoon Suk Yeol declared martial law at around 10:20 p.m. The 300-member National Assembly held an emergency plenary session just after 1 a.m. with 190 lawmakers in attendance and passed a resolution calling for lifting the martial law. During the confusing 2 1/2 hours, some special forces troops were deployed to the National Assembly and attempted to enter the plenary session but were unsuccessful. Thousands of ordinary people, surprised by the news of martial law, gathered in a hurry at the National Assembly, and some soldiers dispatched under the martial law wrestled with the protesters, but there was no bloodshed.

The military forces withdrew after the passage of the National Assembly resolution, and the emergency situation came to a close. Though the initial shock was significant, the subsequent relief was also big. First, I was grateful that a peaceful and stable life could continue. Second, I was relieved I was not completely wrong about martial law. I argued that martial law, which means a palace coup, is not possible as the democracy of Korea is strong. I also agreed that some incompetent politicians could discuss a coup to break through the political crisis.

After the absurd dawn, I came to think again that Korea's democracy has some weaknesses, but its resilience has also been confirmed. And I thought it would be good to share the characteristics of Korean democracy with my global friends, who were likely shocked by this incident.

June of 1987 is crucial in the history of Korean democracy. Until then, Korea was either under a military dictatorship or an authoritarian state. Like many authoritarian countries, Koreans were also frustrated with their barbaric reality, in which fundamental human rights were ignored and trampled on. Eventually, however, the Korean people rose to their feet, and military leaders who were suppressing protests with guns and tanks faced a situation where they had to accept persistent public demands for democracy. The situation came to an end with the adoption of a constitution that guaranteed democracy. The dictatorial leaders were later put in prison through trials.

Since those significant days in 1987, Korea has been a liberal democracy. However, some elites with vested interest in the authoritarian system were uncomfortable with the general public who followed the principles of democracy and protested against injustices. They attempted to return to the “good old days” whenever the opportunity arose. Those with vested interests misunderstood that the presidential order could move their military power. From their misplaced perspective, martial law in 1979 was crucially important, and the 1987 pro-democracy protests did not have much meaning. It is a typical case of anachronism. The lesson we have to remember is that these types of people still exist, and they can repeat their reckless attempts.

Despite disturbances that followed the recent martial law declaration, the situation was settled without bloodshed, which also demonstrated the resilience of Korean democracy. Why is Korean democracy solid? Most importantly, a powerful element of the pro-people approach in Korean traditional culture is a strong foundation for the country’s rapid democratic development. In the early days of the Goguryeo Kingdom's history 1,800 years ago, three kings, known as tyrants, were removed through coups by their high-level vassals. The vassals adopted the position that even kings cannot harass people, which has been an essential element of traditional Korean culture. They appreciate people because they needed proactive cooperation from them when a war broke out.

In the Goryeo Kingdom, which began 1,100 years ago, the first king, Taejo Wang Geon, introduced an expostulation system. The expostulators, consisting of young, elite officials, were given the authority to raise questions officially even after the king made significant policy decisions. They took the people-first approach as a key basis for the discussion, and the king could not ignore their suggestion. As a result, Goryeo society began to show that the power of king and bureaucrats was balanced, with people-first at the center.

The balance of power between the king and bureaucrats built a mechanism to prevent the king's tyranny and to produce wise kings. Many consider King Sejong the Great, the fourth king of the Joseon era (1392-1910), to be one of the best examples of a wise king in history. His achievements are countless, including the creation of Hangeul, but most importantly, he adhered to the principles of a people-centered approach. In the publication of a chronology reflecting the Goryeo Kingdom, King Sejong disagreed with a high-ranking official over the title of the king and, after years of arguing with him, agreed to a compromise. Eventually, the tradition of respecting scholars became the soil in which Korea grew its solid democratic system in a short period of time.

President Yoon Suk Yeol may have been unaware of how deep-rooted Korean democracy is. Even in the Joseon era and Goryeo Kingdom, kings could not easily ignore the opinions of his servants under the principle of a pro-people approach. He has to ponder whether he has made a big mistake and how he can help the nation and its people at least once.

- - -

Wang Son-taek is an adjunct professor at Sogang University. He is a former diplomatic correspondent at YTN and a former research associate at Yeosijae. The views expressed here are the writer’s own. -- Ed.