Civil Organizations Oppose Hormuz Deployment

On September 9, 2026, various civil society groups held the 'U.S. Must Not Force Hormuz Deployment; Lee Jae-myung Government Must Firmly Reject It: Civil Society Press Conference Opposing Hormuz Deployment.' A total of over 600 organizations, including religious groups, civil society organizations, progressive public organizations, and political parties, participated in this press conference to express strong opposition to the deployment to the Strait of Hormuz.

Participating organizations argued that the U.S. strike on Iranian leadership was a clear war of aggression aimed at invading Iran. They warned that if the South Korean government decided to deploy troops, it would not only face security risks but also could be exploited for U.S. self-interest strategies.

They analyzed that just as the U.S. pressures South Korea for deployment using its relationship with North Korea as an excuse, it attempts to intervene in Iran in a similar manner. It was also pointed out that the U.S. is trying to distance itself from the Iran issue because South Korea and Japan have high oil demands and naval capabilities.

Opponents of deployment emphasized that the U.S. actions toward Iran have the character of an aggressive war, and if South Korea participates, it could be seen as an accomplice in an aggressive war by the international community.

They expressed concern that if the South Korean government succumbs to U.S. pressure for deployment in such a situation, it would lead to a serious undermining of South Korea's security and national interests.

It was emphasized that deployment to the Strait of Hormuz is an issue requiring National Assembly approval, and the Blue House cannot decide unilaterally. Press conference participants argued that the government should mobilize public opposition and voice its disapproval in advance before making a deployment decision.

They asserted that once the government decides to deploy troops, the situation becomes irreversible, so a firm refusal must be expressed even before the decision. This argument emphasizes the principle that deployment should be decided through democratic procedures and national consensus.

Concurrently, under the leadership of People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy, representatives from various sectors plan to discuss how to engage the public nationwide in opposing the Hormuz deployment.

This demonstrates their commitment to continuing the anti-deployment movement through actual actions and ongoing discussions, beyond a mere press conference.

The Venerable criticized President Trump, stating that he has already lost the trust and leadership of people worldwide, and even questioned whether he makes sound judgments.

He then urged President Trump to immediately cease his deployment demands and apologize to the South Korean people. Furthermore, he emphasized that President Lee Jae-myung, as the President of the Republic of Korea, must make a sovereign decision to immediately reject the deployment.

Venerable Won-gyeong asserted that the deployment demand is unjust and that the South Korean government must respond firmly by prioritizing the will of the people and national interests.

This stance by the religious community is interpreted as showing that deployment is not merely a diplomatic issue but a matter of moral and ethical judgment.

Lee Jeong-a emphasized that even if the Hormuz deployment is disguised under the pretext of ensuring freedom of navigation or non-combat support, it is essentially joining military action. She cited Iran's explicit warning that it would consider the participation of South Korean troops as 'war participation' and asserted that the South Korean government should not succumb to such pressure.

She further stressed that South Korea should not choose to become an accomplice in war rather than a mediator of peace. She expressed concern that deployment would mean participation in war, which would pose a serious threat to security on the Korean Peninsula.

Therefore, she raised her voice, stating that the South Korean government must firmly reject the deployment decision for the sake of its people's lives and safety, and for peace on the Korean Peninsula.

Lee Yong-seok pointed out that the U.S. demand for deployment lacks rationality in its content, procedure, and form. He asserted that the Lee Jae-myung government must also be aware of this fact, and if it decides to deploy troops despite this, it will face fierce anti-war movements and resistance.

In particular, he stated that deciding to become a part of an aggressive war could trigger conscientious objection to military service among the younger generation and a widespread resistance movement.

Jeon Jin-heung argued that forcing deployment, which contradicts the Republic of Korea's constitutional spirit denying aggressive war, is an act of betraying the people and the constitution. He criticized that the current government should remember the downfall of the Yoon Suk-yeol administration, which betrayed the people and the constitution and was impeached for causing a state of martial law.

This suggests that the Hormuz deployment decision could be a challenge not only to diplomatic issues but also to the constitutional values and democratic principles of the Republic of Korea.

This assertion implies that South Korea's sovereignty and national interests must be prioritized in alliance relationships. He insisted that rather than unconditionally complying with U.S. demands, South Korea should protect its national interests through independent judgment and decisions.

Therefore, he maintained that the deployment issue should not be hastily decided merely on the grounds of the ROK-U.S. alliance, but rather the potential impact on South Korea's security and interests should be thoroughly examined.

He raised suspicions that this timeline thoroughly reflects U.S. demands.

This is interpreted as a criticism that the government is rushing the deployment under U.S. pressure, without fully considering public consensus or national interests.

The stance that voicing opposition in advance of a deployment decision is a fundamental aspect of democracy clashed with the argument that the government must listen to the people's voices.

However, opinions diverge on when to clearly state an anti-deployment stance.

Participants argued that it is time for the president to make a decision, emphasizing that national interests should be prioritized regardless of political advantage or disadvantage.

He noted that while Japan clearly refused deployment, South Korea maintains a 'under review' position, angering citizens.

This suggests that the South Korean government also needs to express a firm refusal like Japan.

The over 600 civil organizations that participated in this press conference are expected to join the rally as well.

This indicates that the anti-deployment movement will not be a one-time event but will continue persistently.

Quoting a source, he raised suspicions that individual lawmakers received party directives not to speak on this issue.

This led to criticism that despite being representatives of the people and legislative bodies, lawmakers are silenced by party pressure. It was also noted that opinions were divided among Democratic Party supporters regarding on-site attendance.

Such absence raises concerns that the opposition party's function of checking the ruling party's deployment decision could be weakened.