South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol makes surprise visit to Ukraine

Jul 15, 2023

South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol has made a surprise visit to Ukraine

KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol made a surprise visit to Ukraine on Saturday, offering support for the invaded country in its

war with Russia

while demonstrating his own nation's cooperation with NATO.

Yoon’s office said he traveled to Ukraine with his wife, Kim Keon Hee, following trips to Lithuania for a NATO summit and

to Poland

. It’s his first visit since Russia invaded Ukraine almost 17 months ago.

Yoon toured Bucha and

Irpin

, a pair of small cities near Kyiv where bodies of civilians were found in the streets and mass graves after Russian troops retreated from the capital region last year. He laid flowers at a monument to the country's war dead.

The South Korean leader was scheduled to hold talks with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy later in the day, Yoon’s senior adviser for press affairs, Kim Eun-hye, said in a statement.

South Korea

, a key U.S. ally in Asia, joined international sanctions against Russia and has provided Ukraine with humanitarian and financial support to Ukraine.

But the Asian nation, a growing arms exporter, has

not provided weapons

to Ukraine Ukraine in line with its long-standing policy of not supplying arms to countries actively engaged in conflict.

Earlier this month, Yoon said in written responses to questions

from The Associated Press

that supplies of de-mining equipment, ambulances and other non-military materials “are in the works” following a request from Ukraine.

He said South Korea already provided support to replace

the Kakhovka Dam

, which was destroyed last month. The Russian and Ukrainian governments have

accused the other of blowing up the dam

, but the evidence suggests Russia had

more of a motive

to cause deadly flooding, endanger crops and threaten drinking water supplies in a contested part of Ukraine.

“The government of the Republic of Korea is firmly committed to actively joining the United States and other liberal democracies in international efforts to defend the freedom of Ukraine,” Yoon said in written responses to the AP.

During a January visit to South Korea, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg called for the country to provide direct military support to Ukraine, saying Kyiv was in urgent need of weapons to fight off the prolonged Russian invasion.

South Korea is not a NATO member, but like Japan, Pakistan and a handful of other countries it is considered a global partner of the military alliance. Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida visited Ukraine in March.

In May, when Yoon met Ukrainian first lady Olena Zelenska in Seoul, the president said he would expand South Korea's

non-lethal aid to Ukraine

. Yoon’s spokesperson, Lee Do Woon, said at the time that Zelenska made no request for South Korean weapons supplies during her conversation with Yoon.

Since Russia’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine, South Korea has reached billions of dollars worth of deals to provide tanks, howitzers, fighter jets and other weapons systems to NATO member Poland.

An American official said in November that the United States had agreed to buy 100,000 artillery rounds from South Korean manufacturers to provide to Ukraine, although South Korean officials have maintained that the munitions were meant to refill depleted U.S. stocks.

Yoon and Zelenskyy met in May on the sidelines of a Group of Seven industrialized nations summit in Hiroshima, Japan. Zelensky thanked South Korea for its humanitarian shipments of medicines, computers and generators and requested additional provisions of non-lethal items, Yoon’s office said at the time.

The two leaders also agreed to work to assist South Korean companies taking part in post-war reconstruction projects in Ukraine, according to Yoon’s office.

“Yoon’s visit to Ukraine reflects his globally-minded foreign policy and shows South Korean solidarity with NATO partners in defending the rules-based international order,” Leif-Eric Easley, a professor at Ewha University in Seoul, said. “Seoul’s support of Ukraine includes not only humanitarian assistance, but also arms sales to backfill NATO countries providing military aid to Kyiv, and plans for post-conflict reconstruction of infrastructure.”

Yoon and his wife's visit came two days after Russia launched another

barrage of Iranian-made drones

at the Kyiv region. Ukrainian officials said their air defenses intercepted the drones but that wreckage fell on four districts of the capital, wounding two people and destroying several homes.

Although Kyiv did not come under attack in the hours before the South Korean president's arrival, Ukrainian forces on Friday and overnight downed 10 Russian drones across the country, the Ukrainian air force reported Saturday.

In a Telegram post, the air force added that Moscow fired six Iranian-made Shahed drones at Ukraine’s south and east during the night, four of which were shot down. It did not immediately give details of any casualties or damage.

In southern Ukraine's Zaporizhzhia province, where Ukraine has been engaged in a counteroffensive to take back occupied territory, there were 45 air and artillery attacks between Friday and Saturday, Gov. Yurii Malashka reported.

Russian forces shelled neighboring Kherson province 70 times over the same period, using mortars, artillery, drones, tanks, aviation and multiple rocket launchers, Gov. Oleksandr Prokudin said Saturday. No civilians were wounded, he said.

Russian shelling over the past day killed one civilian in eastern Ukraine's Donetsk province, Gov. Pavlo Kyrylenko reported Saturday. Ukrainain forces have been pressing their counteroffensive in the area, inching their way from Velyka Novosilka down toward the

Russian-occupied city of Mariupol

.

___

Follow AP's coverage of the war in Ukraine:

https://apnews.com/hub/russia-ukraine

More News

Democrats have big healthcare plans. The industry is preparing for a fight.
Oct 29, 2026
Democrats have big healthcare plans. The industry is preparing for a fight.

Protesters in Minnesota advocate for universal healthcare. | David Berding/Getty Images for People's Action Institute Americans want changes to their healthcare, and the candidates in this year’s midterms are making bold promises about how they are going to improve it: Medicare-for-all, or a public health insurance option, or free primary care for everyone. If Democrats win big this year, they could build up momentum to control Congress and the White House in 2029, which could leave them well-positioned to take on the thorny problem of how to fix the US health system. History suggests that this won’t be easy. For every Affordable Care Act, you have the failed attempt to repeal it or the calamity of the Clinton-era healthcare initiative. Americans want change — but they fear it, too. I’ve spent years reading healthcare polls, talking to voters, attending focus groups. The public’s opinion of the healthcare industry has grown more and more sour, and distrust of the medical establishment is at an all-time high. People are sick of having a broken health system, but they worry that big changes could end up being bad for them.  Even though a meaningful attempt at reform is still years away and universal health care in any form might seem like a progressive pipe dream, the industry is not sitting idly by.  As Democrats have started to roll out policy proposals in anticipation of winning back Congress, the industry has been there to start making its case. In some campaigns, that means backing Republicans, but it also means lobbying Democratic Party leaders to hold the line against their more progressive members who want to push for far-reaching changes.  The question now is: Will their old playbook work? Can the industry convince Democrats to scale back their policy ambitions, or is their grip on Congress loosening? “The next two years are actually quite pivotal, for doing the groundwork and all the necessary socializing, consensus-building,” said Kim Monk, a former congressional healthcare staffer who co-founded the private-sector research firm Capital Alpha Partners. “That’s the work that gets you to a point where either party decides, okay, this will be on our platform — or not.” That will be the tug-of-war of the next two years: a PR battle waged between health companies with hundreds of millions of dollars at their disposal on one side and progressive lawmakers, activists, and patient advocates on the other that will ultimately determine what’s possible in the next phase of American healthcare. The healthcare industry doesn’t want Democrats to win too big In the short term, the industry is hedging its bets in the face of a Democratic wave.  Private enterprise has historically backed the Republican Party, but that’s starting to shift. What the healthcare industry values above all else is balance. Democrats operating without any constraints are more likely to impose government regulations on medical companies. But full GOP control comes with its own risks, like the $1 trillion in Medicaid cuts passed as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which has already led to clinics and hospitals laying off staff or even closing facilities altogether. Sign up for the Good Medicine newsletter Our political wellness landscape has shifted: new leaders, shady science, contradictory advice, broken trust, and overwhelming systems. How is anyone supposed to make sense of it all? Vox’s senior correspondent Dylan Scott has been on the health beat for a long time, and every week, he’ll wade into sticky debates, answer fair questions, and contextualize what’s happening in American health care policy. Sign up here. “At least for the short term, I imagine the healthcare industry would welcome control of Congress by Democrats, creating more predictability, forestalling more cuts in Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act, and potentially reversing or delaying some of the cuts that have already been made,” said Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health policy at KFF. “The longer-term political calculus for the healthcare industry is more complicated. Many Democrats are pushing for a bigger role for government in health care.” In other words, while healthcare companies might welcome a Democratic House as a check on President Donald Trump’s unpredictability, they aren’t necessarily hoping for a massive blue wave that could make significant reforms a serious possibility if Democrats were to win the White House in 2028.  The industry’s MO when it looks like a wave election is brewing is to balance the scales: I reported in 2016 how, in what was looking like a good year for Democrats, the drug industry poured money into the campaigns of Republican candidates by a 6-to-1 margin in competitive races, hoping to stifle the agenda of presumed President Hillary Clinton. (Of course they, like the rest of us, are still susceptible to being wrong.) And that’s how the industry has been approaching the 2026 election: In many of the pivotal House and Senate races, they are backing the GOP.  As healthcare journalist Merrill Goozner reported last week, the American Hospital Association PAC and PhRMA, a drug industry trade group, have given a combined $14,500 to Republican incumbent Jon Husted and none to his Democratic challenger Sherrod Brown in the historically expensive Ohio Senate race. In Maine, Republican Sen. Susan Collins has received donations from all of the major healthcare trade groups — hospitals, pharma, insurers, and doctors — while her opponent, Democrat Troy Jackson, got none. (He also has sworn off corporate PAC money.) Even in an open race without an incumbent, like the Iowa Senate campaign, the Republican candidate has scored donations from hospitals and pharma, but the Democrat has not, Goozner reported. If Democrats take the House but not the Senate, that would immediately put a damper on their healthcare reform plans — whereas winning a Senate majority would allow them to start drafting and debating bills in both chambers with an eye toward what could actually pass if they win in 2028 too. “If there is actually a blue tsunami next week and Democrats get 51-plus [members] in the Senate, that’s a really big deal,” Monk said. “You can’t just say this doesn’t matter because Trump’s going to veto it, because I think it very much becomes a 2028 issue.” And even as they work to push the next Congress more to their ideological liking, the healthcare industry is preparing for the fight that comes after. The industry is prepping its counterattacks on ambitious healthcare proposals After the midterms wrap up, the next two years in Congress and on the presidential campaign trail will be crucial. The industry is already working to set the terms of the debate and push back against big changes. Each subset of the industry has its own versions of this argument: Pharma warns that price controls could stifle innovation, insurers warn that coverage mandates will increase premiums, hospitals warn that constraints on their funding could lead to closures and job losses. (There’s a well-known saying among DC insiders that every congressional district has a hospital, making every member potentially susceptible to the industry’s message that new healthcare legislation could result in their own constituents losing their jobs.) They’ve started by trying to discredit the more sweeping health policy proposals before new members ever arrive in Washington, DC. In Texas, for instance, Republican groups have leaned on an industry-commissioned study to attack Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico for supporting Medicare-for-all, warning that it would lead to cuts for rural hospitals — at least according to an analysis produced by the Partnership for America’s Future, a coalition of industry groups that exists explicitly to oppose Medicare-for-all or a public option. They ran a similar ad against Democrat Janelle Stelson, who’s trying to topple incumbent Rep. Scott Perry in Pennsylvania.  The industry is trying to plant the idea in voters’ minds that these big, bold proposals may sound superficially appealing, but carry significant risks: You could lose your plan, you could lose your doctor, you could pay higher taxes. (And they often have their own studies to back those arguments, like the one cited in this year’s campaign, to counter the evidence offered by advocates in support of reform.) And it might work exactly like it has in the past. As John McDonough, a former congressional healthcare staffer and author of America’s Wrong Turn: US Health Care in the Neoliberal Era, put it to me, the history is clear: “Every comprehensive effort, defeat, and every incremental effort succeeds.” That is in part because of the healthcare industry’s influence and its success in framing the debate. On top of trying to sway the competitive races, the industry is also trying to keep its most important allies within both parties happy ahead of the midterms. As the Center for Health and Democracy’s data shows, the health insurance industry PACs alone have given tens of thousands of dollars to Democratic and Republican leaders, as well as senior members of the healthcare-focused House and Senate committees. It’s another hedge, an attempt to keep the members who will decide what’s on the agenda next year on their side. The industry supports reversing the GOP’s massive Medicaid cuts and increasing funding for the ACA marketplaces, two top-priority items for Democrats if they win Congress in the midterms. But they are hoping the party’s leaders will steer their members away from some of their more radical ideas for overhauling healthcare. Because while individual sectors within healthcare may squabble over smaller-scale reforms, the entire industry is united against plans to fundamentally change the US health system. (They are also increasingly owned by the same parent company, as consolidation in the medical sector becomes more and more common.) “The healthcare industry is al

Expert Features

The Expert Features reports on the issues and the world’s everyday news. Handled by experts in different niches, you will find different subjects and perspectives.