alternatehistory.com

In 1980, the South Korean military brutally suppressed the Gwangju democratic movement with a massacre. The United States did not support the movement, instead seeing it as a rebellion against the government. On May 27, the Department of State even issued a statement claiming that the US government could no longer stand the disorder and chaos in South Korea. Many would interpret it as a signal that Carter was indirectly responsible for the deaths of thousands of pro-democracy protesters in Gwangju, even though the United States never took part in the actual suppression of protesters. When Carter obtained the Nobel Peace Price in 2002, there were also opposition based on his indirect responsibility in Gwangju, in which he never apologized.

Carter would later be shocked by the brutality of General Chun, but he was simply too occupied with Iran at the time, and may have feared the consequences of a revolution in South Korea. However, despite no direct involvement of the US in killing civilians, Carter's support towards Chun was to many, the beginning of strong anti-US sentiment among Koreans living in Liberal Southwest (Jeolla and Gwangju). Throughout the 1980s, there were attacks on American properties taking place at the same time anti-Chun protests broke out.

What if more information about Gwangju came out at the time, and a random Korean-in-exile living in the United States decided that Carter was responsible for Gwangju, and assassinated him in say June 1980? What would be the consequences:

1. Who would the Democrats nominate to replace Carter? Ted Kennedy? Or the establishment would go for Mondale instead, due to the bitter primary campaign?
2. What would be the immediate reaction of US citizens, learning that a South Korean killed Carter for thinking that Carter was behind Gwangju (when he obviously was not)?
3. Would Carter's replacement have a better chance in winning over Reagan, or alternatively - the assassination did not produce much sympathies for months, but instead shows the hypocrite nature of the US' claims of advocating human rights, and led Reagan to an even bigger landslide?
4. Then-prominent pro-democracy activist Kim Dae-jung would be sentenced to death in OTL after Gwangju, but the Reagan administration intervened to save his life. If Carter was killed by a South Korean, would the United States not save Kim but let him "disappear from the world" instead?
5. Would such an incident delay the democratization of South Korea?
Top