Debate Emerges Over Right-Wing Bill to Combat Influence Operations

South Korea’s political divide has spilled into a new battleground: a proposed bill requiring social media platforms to disclose users’ locations. The legislation, intended to combat foreign influence operations, has ignited fierce debate about national security, privacy, and relations with neighboring countries.

On January 15, Representative Kim Jang-kyom of the opposition People Power Party introduced a revision to the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection. The proposal would require major web portals and social media platforms to disclose each user’s location, activity patterns, and any attempts to mask their IP addresses.

The bill draws inspiration from X’s recent implementation of location tags for user accounts and plans to flag commenters using proxy connections. Proponents argue such measures would help South Koreans identify and defend against foreign manipulation campaigns and cybersecurity threats like spoofing and phishing.

However, the Democratic Party of Korea has strongly criticized the bill, claiming it would inflame anti-foreign sentiment—particularly toward China—and damage Seoul’s diplomatic relations with Beijing. Kim Min-joo, the party’s senior deputy spokesperson, expressed concern about potential misuse, telling The Korea Herald: “If I speak ill of Trump, am I interfering in US politics and becoming part of the influence operations against Trump?”

This latest confrontation mirrors a recent dispute over a Democratic Party-sponsored bill to criminalize protests inciting hatred toward specific groups. Conservative lawmakers labeled that legislation as “pro-China,” claiming it would restrict freedom of expression.

While public sentiment appears to favor location disclosure—with 64 percent of respondents supporting it according to a joint survey by Seoul National University’s Institute for Future Strategy and Hankook Research—experts caution about technological limitations and diplomatic consequences.

Cybersecurity specialists question whether the proposed measures would effectively identify sophisticated actors. Olga Belogolova, director of the Emerging Technologies Initiative at Johns Hopkins University, noted that “sophisticated threat actors cannot always be located using IP addresses,” and warned that innocent travelers could be wrongly labeled as foreign operatives.

Luca Luceri, research assistant professor at the University of Southern California, highlighted transparency concerns regarding geolocation technologies. “Without transparency, external researchers cannot independently verify performance claims,” he said, noting that without disclosed methodology or validation procedures, accuracy cannot be guaranteed.

Korea University’s Professor Emeritus Lim Jong-in warned of diplomatic fallout if the legislation targets specific countries. “If the focus goes to a specific country for political purposes, the country will feel intimidated,” Lim said. He suggested that imperfect detection technologies could actually inspire more sophisticated evasion techniques from foreign operatives, who might disguise themselves as users from various countries to sow discord.

South Korea has experienced domestic influence operations in the past. From 2009 to 2012, the National Intelligence Service under the conservative Lee Myung-bak administration conducted covert operations to shape public opinion. Similarly, Democratic Party members later colluded with an online operator known as “Druking” to manipulate opinions between 2014 and 2018.

Recent research has fueled concerns about Chinese influence. A 2024 study by professors from Catholic Kwandong University and Changwon National University identified hundreds of social media accounts suspected of being operated by Chinese entities to disparage South Korean products and services. However, researchers could not definitively confirm the accounts’ origins.

Belogolova suggests alternative approaches, including government support for platform investigations into suspected influence operations and sanctions against individuals orchestrating such campaigns. “There is never a way to completely eliminate influence operations,” she acknowledged, “but companies and governments and members of civil society can create deterrence and make it more difficult for threat actors to run these kinds of campaigns.”

As South Korea navigates this complex landscape of digital security and international relations, the debate underscores how technological policies increasingly intersect with geopolitical tensions in one of the world’s most connected societies.