A recent scene during a meeting between President Lee Jae-myung and former U.S. President Donald Trump raises fundamental questions about Korea's sovereignty and judicial justice. When a reporter asked Trump, “What do you think about the search and seizure of the church and Osan U.S. military base?” Trump replied, “If that is true, it would be a very bad thing,” and then handed the floor back to President Lee.
On the surface, it may appear to be mere diplomatic rhetoric, but this scene is in fact a classic example of subtle interference in domestic affairs. For a U.S. president to comment on another country’s judicial procedures is inherently inappropriate, especially when asked such a question and continuing the conversation in front of the host country’s president, violating both diplomatic etiquette and constitutional principles.
Particularly since this situation took place on U.S. soil, Trump should have drawn a line, saying, “That question is not appropriate for a head of state. Investigations are the exclusive authority of judicial institutions.” However, he instead characterized the matter as a “bad thing,” appearing to shift responsibility onto Korea’s president.
This stance is not a mere diplomatic slip but a serious act that undermines Korea’s judicial sovereignty. The fact that the investigation concerns illegal activities of certain churches makes the matter even more serious. A church is a place of faith, not a sanctuary above the law.
If illegality has occurred, it must naturally be subject to investigation, and it cannot be shielded by the U.S. Korea’s current social confusion and division stem partly from the excessive political involvement and illegal activities of certain religious groups. Correcting this is the duty of Korea’s judicial authorities, not a matter for foreign political leaders to interfere with.
Just as we would not ask Kim Jong-un to establish judicial justice in Korea, the U.S. president has no such authority either. This incident should not be dismissed as a mere diplomatic happening but should serve as a reminder of where the boundaries lie in defending Korea’s sovereignty and justice.
If this continues, it would be no less problematic for someone to ask Chairman Kim Jong-un to uphold the legal order of Korean churches. Any church that encouraged such a question to a U.S. reporter should make a public apology and close itself down.
Whether it is a church or a U.S. military base, all must be equal before the law. That is true democracy and the foundation of a sovereign state. If a church despises Korea and its people, there is no reason to share the same water. In that case, Kim Jong-un might seem a better friend than such a church.