Press review: South Korean crisis deepens as Kremlin rules out talks with Kiev

MOSCOW, December 4. /TASS/. A political crisis has unfolded in South Korea, with implications for the country’s future and relations with North Korea; the Kremlin sees no grounds for talks with Kiev amid shifting dynamics in the Ukraine conflict; and Kurdish forces intensify the conflict as the Syrian army faces new challenges. These stories topped Wednesday’s newspaper headlines across Russia.
 
The South Korean government voted to lift the martial law imposed by the country’s president on December 3. Parliament had also rejected Yoon Suk Yeol’s decision to impose such a legal regime in the country. The head of state cited an “attempted coup” and the opposition’s alleged links to North Korea. However, 190 lawmakers voted against the move. Opposition leader Lee Jae-myung declared Yoon Suk Yeol illegitimate. Media reports suggest the president’s pending arrest and the announcement of his impeachment, Izvestia writes.
Immediately after the declaration of martial law, a significant amount of military equipment appeared on the streets of the capital. Nevertheless, 190 out of 300 lawmakers voted to lift it. Speaker Woo Won-shik expressed his disapproval of the head of state’s decision, while opposition leader Lee Jae-myung called on citizens to protest at the legislative building. Yoon Suk Yeol announced overnight at a government meeting that he would lift martial law.
“This marks an intensification of the internal political struggle in South Korea. President Yoon is in a precarious position – his ratings are very low, and petitions for his resignation have been circulating throughout the country for a long time. Even his party does not fully support Yoon. Its leader, Kim Gi-hyeon, called the decision to impose martial law a misstep,” the head of the Korean and Mongolian department at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Alexander Vorontsov, told Izvestia.
The expert added that the parliamentary majority aligns with the opposition parties, which are also investigating corruption cases involving Yoon and his family members.
“The military coup in South Korea is driven exclusively by internal factors, not external ones, despite the president and his entourage’s claims. Russia and China have no intentions of attacking South Korea, and we maintain a defensive treaty with North Korea, not an offensive one. The arguments the president is using in his defense are a blatant repetition of the justifications South Korean military dictators have used for decades: the threat from the North, the communist threat, and so on,” leading researcher at the Center for Korean Studies at the Institute of Socio-Economic Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Alexander Zhebin, told Izvestia.
He further argued that Yoon Suk Yeol’s policies fail to serve the interests of the state or its people. In foreign policy, Seoul remains entirely dependent on the United States and adheres to Washington’s directives.
 
There are currently no grounds for negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told Izvestia. According to him, many countries have offered to act as a platform for such talks, including Qatar, and the Kremlin appreciates Doha’s willingness to mediate. However, Moscow and Kiev’s positions remain completely opposed. Experts, however, told Izvestia that with Donald Trump’s return to the White House, Ukraine’s stance on potential conditions for ending the conflict could become more flexible.
“There are currently no grounds for negotiations,” Peskov said. At the same time, Russia has repeatedly expressed its openness to dialogue, and several countries, including Qatar, have offered their mediation services. “Indeed, Qatar is actively engaging as a mediator on various issues, doing so effectively. Additionally, our bilateral relations with Qatar are excellent. We are grateful to all countries, including Qatar, for their goodwill,” he added.
Negotiations between Moscow and Kiev took place in the early stages of the special military operation in other countries – first in Belarus and then in Turkey. Later, Switzerland attempted to provide a platform for discussions.
Some experts agree that none of these three countries will successfully host a resolution to the Ukrainian conflict. Switzerland is unsuitable for Russia due to its anti-Russian stance, while Belarus is unacceptable to the West and Ukraine because of its close ties to Moscow. Turkey, on the other hand, maintains a relatively neutral stance in the conflict but remains a full-fledged member of NATO.
Meanwhile, China, along with Brazil, proposed their own “peace plan” in May of this year.
“The initiative from China and Brazil holds the greatest chance of success. They do not suggest specific locations for negotiations but instead focus on the substance, which is generally acceptable to us. The choice of venue will depend on their proposal,” Vladimir Vinokurov, editor-in-chief of the journal Diplomatic Service and professor at the Russian Foreign Ministry’s Diplomatic Academy, told Izvestia.
Interestingly, Ukraine’s leadership has recently shifted its rhetoric regarding territorial concessions to Russia as a trade-off for NATO membership.
“As the situation evolves, unfortunately for Ukraine, the idea of returning to the 1991 borders is losing relevance,” Valdai Club expert and scientific director of the Russian International Affairs Council (RIAC) Andrey Kortunov told Izvestia.
 
The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), a Kurdish-dominated paramilitary alliance, have launched an offensive against the government army. The autonomous region in northeastern Syria has become the epicenter of this escalation, while the northwestern provinces remain embroiled in conflict orchestrated by Islamist groups aligned with Turkey, Nezavisimaya Gazeta reports. According to experts, Kurdish forces are attempting to exploit the situation, with a significant portion of the central government’s resources diverted elsewhere, in order to expand their influence.
The area around seven settlements, now controlled by Kurdish forces, is being used as a launchpad for Shiite groups aligned with Iran to fire missiles and drones at the American contingent. These are some of the few areas the Syrian Arab Army (SAA), along with allied paramilitary forces, managed to retain five years ago after the regional balance of power shifted during a previous Turkish operation. However, the conflict over these bases has never truly ceased, the newspaper notes. Arab media sources suggest that Kurdish forces are likely trying to capitalize on the SAA’s focus on the escalating situation in Aleppo and Hama provinces to secure further territorial gains.
As Middle East expert Anton Mardasov told Nezavisimaya Gazeta, the SDF command is seeking to oust the central government and consolidate its own position. “There has been a long-standing conflict there, marked by shootings and clashes,” Mardasov observed. “Additionally, Damascus and the Syrian security services have been quite active in SDF-controlled areas. Local intelligence agencies have had and still have ties with several Arab tribes east of the Euphrates. These groups have carried out covert operations and sought to sow dissent between the tribes and the Kurds. It’s clear that this was at least aimed at complicating the American presence, and at most designed to carve out new territorial gains,” he added. According to the expert, these subversive operations have been successful.
A natural question arises: are the Kurdish forces coordinating their actions with the United States? “The Americans act as advisors to the SDF, but the SDF also operates independently,” Mardasov told Nezavisimaya Gazeta. “It’s important not to assume that the SDF launched its operation at the behest of the Americans. That’s not how things work in this region – it’s a completely different system of relations. The SDF likely informed the Americans of their intention to attack regime positions and other formations, but this is probably their independent decision. The SDF is not satisfied with the current situation,” he added. Mardasov emphasized that there is no need to look for an external agenda behind the developments in northeastern Syria.
 
Ukraine will require $126 bln in 2025 to counter the Russian army on the battlefield, The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reports, citing an unnamed Ukrainian official. The amount requested is significantly higher than what Western countries agreed upon at the NATO summit in Washington from July 9-11. During that meeting, NATO members approved a “minimum baseline funding” for 2025 totaling $43.3 bln, Vedomosti reports.
According to the WSJ source, Kiev understands that Ukraine will not be able to join NATO for the time being. Instead, Ukrainian officials are seeking increased military support from the West to “counter Russia’s rapidly escalating military expenditures.” The WSJ also noted that Washington and Berlin are hesitant to consider Ukraine’s potential membership in NATO. Officials in both capitals, as well as other Western countries, are concerned that closer Ukrainian ties to the alliance could intensify the West’s conflict with Moscow.
The $126 bln requested by Kiev is a considerable sum, surpassing the total (both military and non-military) aid provided to Ukraine by the West in 2024, head of the Ukraine sector at the Institute of CIS Countries, Ivan Skorikov, told Vedomosti. The fact that such a figure has surfaced in the media indicates strong lobbying efforts for further funding of Ukraine, either by Kiev’s supporters in the West or by Ukrainians themselves.
Skorikov believes that, following Trump’s return to power, the United States may shift the responsibility of supporting Ukraine to Europe. To secure new funds for continuing the conflict, public opinion must be swayed, which is what Western media are currently working on, he said.
Europe remains committed to aiding Ukraine, associate professor at the Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Dmitry Ofitserov-Belsky, told the newspaper. Theoretically, the $126 bln per year is within Europe’s financial reach (Germany’s military spending in 2024 is projected to be around $80 bln, and France’s – over $50 bln), though European economies are gradually becoming exhausted. The EU’s continued support for Kiev is primarily driven by its reluctance to allow Russia to gain a strategic advantage, the expert noted. If Russia were to prevail, it would likely negotiate Europe’s future directly with the United States, sidelining the EU.
 
The protests on the streets of Tbilisi, which periodically escalate into violent clashes between protesters and security forces, show no signs of abating, Kommersant writes. At the same time, both sides of the conflict – the authorities and the opposition – are increasing the stakes. The leadership of the ruling Georgian Dream party claims that it will not allow the “Ukrainization” of Georgia and a “color revolution,” which it suspects is being orchestrated by certain external forces and “specially trained groups.” In turn, Georgian President Salome Zourabichvili, who claims the role of informal leader of the opposition, accuses the security forces of repression and Georgian Dream of seizing power.
With each passing day, the Georgian authorities and the opposition are escalating tensions and issuing increasingly harsh statements. On Tuesday, the General Secretary of the ruling Georgian Dream party and Tbilisi Mayor, Kakha Kaladze, drew parallels between the events in Tbilisi and the Ukrainian Maidans. Meanwhile, Georgian President and Supreme Commander-in-Chief Salome Zourabichvili, who actively supports the opposition and, along with them, did not accept the official results of the October 26 parliamentary elections, told French journalists that the Georgian police were “carrying out repressions in the country.”
Meanwhile, people in Georgia are trying to answer the question: was the Prime Minister’s controversial decision to postpone negotiations with the EU a provocation or a mistake? The founder of the Republican Party of Georgia, David Berdzenishvili, told Kommersant that there might be a third option – an “emotionally pre-emptive” reaction to the European Parliament’s resolution on non-recognition of the results of the October 26 elections and the need to impose sanctions on the country’s leadership. According to the politician, the authorities “certainly did not expect such a violent reaction” from their fellow citizens – the leaders of Georgian Dream believed that since the parliament had gathered for its first session despite the opposition’s resistance, this step would be accepted in Georgia without any particular unrest. “But Georgian Dream clearly miscalculated,” Berdzenishvili concludes.
The Constitutional Court’s decision on the request to invalidate the October elections due to numerous violations could have been an opportunity to prevent further escalation of the conflict. However, the court, by a majority vote of seven to two, did not even entertain the petition filed by President Zourabichvili and 30 opposition deputies.
TASS is not responsible for the material quoted in these press reviews