In South Korea, a country largely disarmed by strict gun laws, the Democratic Party leader Lee Jae-myung has embarked on an unusual and heightened security regimen as he campaigns for the presidential elections scheduled for Tuesday. This marked a significant strategic decision for the candidate who, last month during an initial campaign event, dramatically removed his suit jacket to reveal a white bulletproof vest, signaling to supporters the seriousness of his situation. During one of his rallies, as he stepped outside the protective environment of the bulletproof glass, supporters urged him to return to safety, underscoring both their concern and the gravity of the political climate surrounding his campaign.

Mr. Lee’s heightened security is not unwarranted; he has firsthand experience with political violence. In January of last year, he survived an assassination attempt when a man approached him for an autograph and then stabbed him in the neck, a clear indicator of the deep political divides in the nation. Compounding his fears, the National Police Agency disclosed that there had been multiple online death threats against him, with at least one case moving toward prosecution.

Commenting on the unusually high threat levels associated with this election, Professor Yoon Taeyoung, an expert in terrorism and intelligence at Kyungnam University, noted that the current environment is more perilous than in earlier elections. Although political violence is generally rare in South Korea, the country has witnessed sporadic violent incidents targeting politicians. The memory of former president Park Geun-hye, who was wounded in a knife attack in 2006, looms large, as does the tragic shooting of her father, Park Chung-hee, by an intelligence chief in 1979, and the hammer assault on Democratic Party leader Song Young-gil in 2022.

As Lee Jae-myung emphasizes his security, he reflects on the precarious state of political conditions in South Korea, and the need for vigilance in public service, drawing a stark contrast to his opponent who questions the necessity of such safeguards. In a time of political polarization, it remains to be seen how these security measures and public perceptions will shape the upcoming election.