SOUTH KOREA PERSPECTIVE

South Korean media coverage reveals a perspective deeply aligned with American strategic interests, but with particular focus on domestic economic repercussions. The Yonhap agency adopts a resolutely accusatory tone toward Iran, uncritically echoing Hegseth's statements about the Iranian new leader's 'disfigured' state. This depersonalizing and dehumanizing approach to the Iranian adversary fits within a logic of conflict legitimization, where South Korea appears to fully endorse the American narrative of 'Operation Epic Fury'.

The most striking emphasis concerns immediate economic impact: stock market falls, oil rising toward $100, and especially the hasty introduction of fuel price caps. This priority given to economic consequences reveals the central preoccupations of an export-dependent economy particularly vulnerable to energy shocks. The detail of sectoral performance (Samsung, SK Hynix, airlines) shows a very pragmatic approach, oriented toward South Korean investors' concerns.

The silences are revealing: no historical contextualization of the conflict, no questioning of the legality or proportionality of 'Operation Epic Fury', and especially no mention of implications for Asian regional security. This omission is particularly significant given that articles mention the redeployment of American military assets from Osan base to the Middle East, raising questions about deterrence capacity against North Korea.

The narrative framing clearly structures roles: the United States and Israel as legitimate forces against a 'desperate' and 'hidden' Iran. This Manichaean dichotomy reflects strategic alliance with Washington, but also Seoul's particular geopolitical position, caught between the need to maintain Atlantic solidarity and its own energy vulnerabilities. The repetition of derogatory terms concerning Iranian leadership ('cowering', 'lacks legitimacy') suggests a delegitimization strategy serving the interests of the South Korean-American alliance.