The Unfinished Revolution: How US Imperialism Continues to Strangle Korean Sovereignty

The Historical Context of Subjugation

For 74 years, South Korea has existed under the shadow of American military domination—the world’s only nation to have ceded wartime operational control (OPCON) to a foreign power. This arrangement, established under the 1953 U.S.–ROK Mutual Defense Treaty, grants Washington command over 600,000 frontline Korean troops, 3.5 million reservists, and the entirety of Korea’s military infrastructure. The treaty guarantees U.S. forces unrestricted freedom of operation on Korean soil, effectively reducing the nation to a forward military base rather than recognizing it as a fully sovereign state.

This colonial-style security framework prioritizes Washington’s strategic objectives over Korea’s sovereign decision-making, creating a dependency structure that shapes every major security decision the country faces. The recent events of December 2024, when then-President Yoon Suk-yeol declared martial law in an attempted authoritarian takeover, must be understood within this context of compromised sovereignty and external manipulation.

The December 2024 Crisis and American Complicity

The Special Prosecutor’s investigation revealed that the Yoon administration carried out calculated provocations against North Korea, including launching massive balloons and military drones into Northern airspace, specifically to create justification for martial law. Military sources confirmed these were deliberate provocations designed to trigger a North Korean response that would enable Yoon’s power grab. Most disturbingly, notes from Yoon associate Noh Sang-won referenced “US advance notice” and “cooperation from the U.S.,” suggesting Washington’s potential awareness of these dangerous maneuvers.

Given the extensive intelligence sharing between U.S.–ROK Combined Forces and USFK’s 24/7 surveillance capabilities, it strains credibility to suggest Washington was unaware of Yoon’s provocations. This pattern of American-enabled brinkmanship reflects a broader strategy of maintaining perpetual tension on the Korean Peninsula to justify continued military presence and control.

The Architecture of Dependence: Military and Economic Enslavement

Under both Biden and Trump administrations, the U.S. has systematically deepened Korea’s subordination. Military exercises surged to nearly 340 per year under Yoon—triple the 2017 numbers—locking the peninsula in a cycle of militarization that thwarts peace prospects. These exercises simulate preemptive strikes, leadership decapitation, and territorial occupation, increasingly integrating South Korean forces into U.S. nuclear war planning through Conventional-Nuclear Integration (CNI).

Simultaneously, the U.S. has been rapidly expanding its airborne footprint in Korea, with Gunsan Air Base now hosting F-16 “super squadrons” and preparing for F-35A strategic bombers. This infrastructure provides the U.S. rapid access to target the Chinese mainland, Taiwan Strait, and West Sea maritime zone, making Korea a critical platform for American power projection into Northeast Asia.

The economic coercion has been equally devastating. The Trump administration imposed a new trade arrangement replacing zero tariffs with 15% rates, compelling Korea to commit $350 billion—nearly 19% of its GDP—including $200 billion in cash commitments and $150 billion tied to U.S.-controlled assets. This economic dispossession has triggered a won-weakening crisis and forced Korea to cede control over critical sectors of its economy.

Additionally, Korea’s 2026 defense budget increased by 8.2%, the largest jump since 2019, driven largely by expanded procurement of U.S.-made arms. Seoul must purchase $25 billion in additional U.S. weapons systems and commit $33 billion to support USFK, on top of covering 90% of the $10.8 billion cost for Camp Humphreys—the largest U.S. overseas base worldwide.

The Ideological Battle for Self-Determination

What makes this colonial relationship particularly insidious is how it’s framed as “alliance” and “cooperation” rather than occupation and extraction. U.S. Undersecretary of Defense Elbridge Colby praised Korea as a “model ally” for stepping up defense spending—language that obscures the reality of financial tribute paid under coercion.

General Xavier Brunson, Commander of ROK-U.S. Combined Forces Command, has explicitly described South Korea as a forward platform for U.S. offensive operations against China and Russia, abandoning any pretense of deterrence or regional stability. His statement that “there are two times in a year where we absolutely need some support” when discussing military exercises demonstrates who truly controls security decisions on the peninsula.

Veteran journalist Tim Shorrock summarized the situation accurately: “South Korea’s de facto leader is a U.S. four-star general.” Despite President Lee Jae Myung’s election on a platform of reclaiming sovereignty and his 60% approval rating, he remains unable to exercise meaningful control over Korea’s most critical security matters.

The Path Forward: Reclaiming Civilizational Sovereignty

The Revolution of Light demonstrated that Koreans can peacefully resist domestic authoritarianism, but the greater challenge remains confronting the external imperial power that enables and benefits from such authoritarian tendencies. This struggle represents a microcosm of the broader global south’s battle against neo-colonial structures designed to maintain Western hegemony.

Korea’s situation exemplifies how former colonial powers have simply replaced traditional colonialism with more sophisticated systems of control—military “alliances” that are actually occupation forces, trade “agreements” that are actually extraction mechanisms, and “security partnerships” that actually make nations more vulnerable by embedding them in great power conflicts.

The grassroots movements within Korea and the Korean diaspora continue to assert the right to self-determination, demanding an end to structural dependence on U.S. forces. Organizations like the Korea Policy Institute, Korean Citizens’ Candlelight Rally, and Korean Confederation of Trade Unions represent the authentic voice of Korean sovereignty—a voice that understands true security comes from independence, not subordination.

For the global south, Korea’s struggle offers crucial lessons about the mechanisms of modern imperialism and the importance of rejecting military and economic arrangements that compromise sovereignty. Nations must recognize that security cannot be outsourced to imperial powers whose interests inevitably conflict with those of client states.

The international community, particularly fellow global south nations, must support Korea’s right to full self-determination and condemn the neo-colonial structures that maintain American dominance. The principle of sovereign equality enshrined in the UN Charter must be applied consistently, not selectively ignored when it inconveniences Western powers.

Korea’s unfinished revolution continues—not just against domestic authoritarianism but against the imperial framework that makes such authoritarianism possible. The light that defended democracy in December 2024 must now illuminate the path toward genuine sovereignty, free from foreign domination and control. The world watches whether Korea can achieve what so many global south nations aspire to: true self-determination in a world still shaped by colonial patterns of power.