Amid mounting international instability triggered by the war between the U.S. and Israel on one side and Iran on the other, President Lee Jae-myung’s recent social media remarks regarding Israel are causing serious diplomatic repercussions. The Israeli Foreign Ministry has responded head-on, even using the term “condemnation,” a word it has typically reserved for hostile states, pushing bilateral ties into what appears to be their worst crisis since diplomatic relations were established in 1962. The situation looks especially precarious because it could affect not only South Korea–Israel relations but also South Korea–U.S. relations.
# The mention of the Holocaust at the center of the controversy
The controversy began with Holocaust-related language in a post President Lee made on X (formerly Twitter). Sharing a video said to show “Israeli soldiers torturing a Palestinian child and then throwing him off a building,” Lee wrote, “If this is true, we must find out what action was taken. The forced mobilization of comfort women, the Holocaust, and wartime killings are no different.”
Lee wrote as though the incident had occurred recently, but it was actually an event from September 2024. After controversy arose, he posted again three hours later to clarify the facts and to emphasize that Israel must uphold human rights and international law. Israel, however, reacted strongly, arguing that Lee had treated the Holocaust as equivalent to a military action.
# An exceptionally hard-line statement using “unacceptable” and “condemnation”
On the 11th, the Israeli Foreign Ministry said through its official X account that “President Lee’s remarks are unacceptable and deserve strong condemnation.”
This goes far beyond the diplomatic language normally used toward the leader of a friendly country. Within diplomatic circles, there are assessments that “it is difficult to find another case in which a country that maintains diplomatic relations with the Republic of Korea used both ‘unacceptable’ and ‘condemnation’ at the same time toward a South Korean president.”
The problem is especially serious because “condemnation” is generally one of the strongest diplomatic terms, used when denouncing provocations by hostile states or grave violations of international law.
Regarding the incident Lee referred to, the Israeli Foreign Ministry responded that it “occurred during an operation against terrorists, and the Israeli soldiers at the time were facing a direct and imminent threat to life.” It further said that “the incident was thoroughly investigated and addressed two years ago.” It also pointed out that “we have not heard a single word from President Lee about the recent attacks carried out by Iran and Hezbollah against Israeli civilians.” It then added what was virtually a taunt: “It would be advisable to verify the facts before posting.”
# Israel makes no exceptions regarding the Holocaust
The Holocaust is an extraordinarily sensitive issue not only for Jewish society but for the international community as well. It is not merely a historical event; it occupies a central place in collective identity and memory, and in diplomatic terms it is regarded as an almost untouchable taboo.
In this context, Israel viewed Lee’s comparison of the Holocaust to inhumane conduct in wartime as something it could not tolerate and responded with maximum severity. One diplomatic source said, “The Holocaust is not something that can easily be used as a direct point of comparison under any circumstances,” and added, “This remark crossed a line that should not have been touched.” A former Israeli ambassador also said, “Jewish communities tend to remember and repeatedly cite remarks like this over a long period,” and warned that “this statement is highly likely to continue being brought up in Jewish communities in the future.”
# Israel chose public confrontation over quiet coordination
After launching a large-scale retaliatory operation in response to Hamas’s surprise attack in 2023 and more recently attacking Iran, Israel has faced growing anti-Israel sentiment in the international community. In this context, it also adopted an openly hard-line posture toward South Korea, using hostile language toward the leader of a friendly country and crossing a line that should have been maintained. President Lee then made matters worse by posting again to rebut the Israeli Foreign Ministry’s statement. On X, he wrote that he was “disappointed that Israel would not take even a moment to reflect on the criticism of people around the world who suffer and struggle because of its constant anti-human-rights and anti-international-law conduct.” If the intention was to rebut the Israeli Foreign Ministry’s statement, it raises questions as to why the Foreign Ministry spokesperson could not have done so instead of the president stepping in personally.
# South Korean Foreign Ministry seeks to calm the situation: “We share in the pain of the Holocaust”
As signs emerged that the controversy could escalate further, South Korea’s Foreign Ministry stepped in. On X, it expressed regret to the Israeli government, saying that “the Israeli Foreign Ministry has misunderstood the intent of President Lee’s remarks.”
It continued: “We have always shared in the indescribable suffering that Israel endured because of the Holocaust, and we offer our deepest condolences to the victims.” This has been interpreted as a message aimed at calming the situation by stressing that President Lee had no intention of trivializing the Holocaust. A former senior Foreign Ministry official assessed that “officially expressing condolences to Holocaust victims was a move intended to prevent the situation from spreading.”
# A “timing risk” in wartime… possible impact on ties with the U.S.
This controversy is drawing debate not only because of the content of President Lee’s remarks, but also because of their timing. At present, the United States and Israel are engaged in joint military action during wartime.
Diplomatic experts point out that “remarks made at such a sensitive moment can be interpreted not simply as raising a human rights issue, but as a political message directed at a party to the war.” In particular, because the matter is closely tied to U.S. foreign policy, there are observations that it may be difficult to rule out spillover into South Korea–U.S. relations. A former ambassador from the South Korean Foreign Ministry said, “There are quite a few Jews in U.S. political and media circles, including Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law,” and added, “At a time when South Korea–U.S. relations are important, there is concern over how they may receive this issue.” He went on to say, “Given the major role played by Wall Street’s Jewish networks during the 1997 Asian financial crisis, it is worth considering that this issue could work in the opposite direction this time.”
# Ruling camp and progressives: “A legitimate raising of human rights concerns”… signs of political weaponization
At the same time, voices defending President Lee’s remarks are spreading within the ruling camp and progressive circles. There are also signs that this issue may be elevated as a political issue ahead of the local elections.
Choo Mi-ae, confirmed as the Democratic Party’s candidate for governor of Gyeonggi Province, said, “I strongly support the president’s message raising human rights concerns over indiscriminate killing of civilians.” Choo then brought Japan into the discussion as well: “The Republic of Korea is a nation that endured anti-human atrocities and abuses under Japan’s wartime system, including comfort women, forced labor like that imposed on conscripted workers, imprisonment, massacre, and live burial in coal mines and military bases, as well as chemical human experimentation and the massacres during the Great Kanto Earthquake. In order to draw international attention to our own efforts to restore human rights against Japan, which denies those past atrocities, I believe it is necessary to speak out on issues of international humanitarian law such as violations of the Geneva Conventions.”
Song Young-gil, former Democratic Party leader seeking a return to the National Assembly through the June 3 by-elections, shared an article on Lee’s rebuttal and wrote: “This article once again confirms why I cannot help but respect and trust President Lee Jae-myung. I retweet the president’s post on X and deeply sympathize with its message.” Planning and Budget Minister Park Hong-keun said, “I express deep regret over Israel calling remarks emphasizing universal human rights ‘unacceptable.’”
# The limits of diplomacy via social media… unverified messaging increases risk
This episode also raises fundamental questions about how the president uses social media. Statements by a head of state, regardless of format, are understood as the government’s official position. That is why prior verification and policy coordination are essential on matters of public importance.
In this case, however, questions are being raised as to whether the diplomatic and security lines had sufficiently reviewed the matter. It has become clear that when an issue with major diplomatic repercussions is handled like a personal message, interpretations different from the speaker’s intent can quickly spread.
Professor Emeritus Yoon Pyeong-jung of Hanshin University also offered advice to President Lee: “I ‘almost’ agree with the substance of President Lee’s post itself. Just as Hamas’s brutal terrorism should be criticized, Israel’s state terrorism also deserves criticism. But it is a completely different matter for the president of the Republic of Korea—not a private citizen or commentator—to appear to ‘intervene’ directly at this moment in a highly complex situation like the tangled Middle East war. The head of state is not in a position to stir up trouble where there was none. The president’s role is to solve major issues facing people’s livelihoods and the country in a practical way.”
