By Na Jeong-ju
As he enters the second half of his five-year tenure today, President Lee Myung-bak faces daunting tasks to create fresh momentum.
He must work harder to persuade the opposition and public for his controversial project to refurbish four major rivers and pursue his reform agenda.
The sluggish job market and the widening income gap between conglomerates and small businesses are the two biggest challenges Lee must most urgently tackle to ensure stable and balanced economic growth. The country’s worsening fiscal health poses a consistent problem.
On the diplomatic front, Lee will focus on consolidating ties with not only advanced nations, but also the underprivileged nations in Asia and Africa, as well as take advantage of Korea’s hosting of a G20 meeting in November in Seoul. His new approach reflects confidence that Korea’s ties with its traditional allies, such as the United States, have improved significantly since Lee took office in February 2008.
However, North Korea remains the administration’s most contentious challenge. Lee has shown few signs of changing his tough stance, while provocations from North Korea are a constant threat as seen with the March 26 sinking of the Korean frigate Cheonan, killing 46 South Korean soldiers.
Lee is expected to continue his hard-line policy toward the regime for the time being. However, he should consider an exit strategy from the Cheonan tragedy when the suitable time comes.
Lee’s first two and a half years were marked by a slew of controversies over policy that was criticized by some as catering to the wealthy and conglomerates, a jolting wave of street protests over his decision to resume U.S. beef imports, a global economic crisis and sharp military tension with North Korea.
Nevertheless, the Lee administration engineered a fast recovery for Asia’s fourth-largest economy, but it has struggled to tackle the widening gaps between the haves and the have-nots.
Opposition lawmakers and other critics argue that South Korea’s democracy has regressed and that social polarization has deepened under his high-handed leadership, lacking in communication within political circles and with the young generation.
In contrast, Lee’s supporters emphasize his diplomatic feats, including Seoul’s successful bids to host the G20 summit and the Nuclear Security Summit in 2012 and winning the contracts for the construction of nuclear reactors in the United Arab Emirates. They also praise the government’s unyielding stance toward the North’s continued provocations.
Reflecting the mixed sentiment, the governing camp was on a rollercoaster ride in recent elections.
The ruling Grand National Party (GNP) suffered a shocking defeat in the June 2 local elections, dealing a blow to the president’s reform drive. The GNP, however, turned the table with a small but meaningful win in the July 28 parliamentary by-elections.
“President Lee will readjust his policy priorities to strengthen his vision of centrist pragmatism and enhance the services available for ordinary people and less-privileged citizens for the remainder of his term,” a presidential aide said.
Lee Nae-young, a professor of political science at Korea University, said the President is steering in the right direction to push for the “people-first” policy and co-prosperity between conglomerates and smaller firms.
“But it is hard to be optimistic of the outcome,” the professor said. “I’m doubtful about the Lee government breaking its conservative image and whether the public will believe the sincerity of its policy measures.”
The four-river restoration project will remain a source of political contention. The government is determined to press ahead with the project aimed at preventing floods and securing a stable water supply in spite of a fierce backlash from opposition parties, environmentalists and religious circles fearful of negative environmental consequences.
Another dilemma for Lee is a lingering conflict with Park Geun-hye, former GNP leader who is said to be among the strongest candidates to become the country’s next leader.
On Aug. 22, the estranged conservative leaders held their first meeting in 11 months at Cheong Wa Dae to discuss the next presidential election and other political issues, raising hopes for conservatives for reconciliation between the GNP’s rival factions.
A close relationship with Park is also important for Lee not only in his campaign for national unity but also for his political reform drive, as about 50 ruling party lawmakers are loyal to Park.
Observers say the issue of revising the Constitution and the electoral system will likely emerge as a main political topic this or next year. In his recent Liberation Day speech, Lee demanded political parties start related discussions.
Some lawmakers say the country should adopt a U.S.-style four-year presidency allowing reelection, while others prefer a power-sharing presidential system in which the President deals mainly with diplomacy and national security and the prime minister exerts more authority on domestic issues.
Critics have accused Lee of broaching the sensitive subject in a bid to distract public attention from his policy debacle.
Some analysts say North Korea will fully denuclearize only when it has obtained the political arrangements that guarantee its survival. These include formal diplomatic relations with the United States, a peace agreement that officially ends the 1950-53 Korean War and integration into the global economy.
“Some American hawks cannot accept that the United States lets a repressive government like North Korea’s stay in power. The alternative, however, could be much worse,” said Robert Gard, chairman of the Washington-based Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation.
“Attempts at regime change might cause Pyongyang to become desperate and lash out violently at its immediate neighbor or launch a missile aimed at U.S. forces stationed on Guam or Okinawa. A sudden change in government might unleash even greater human suffering or even outright war with South Korea, with all the frightening consequences.”
U.S. President Barack Obama, like his predecessor, has not made a big departure from the conventional perception that U.S. presidents are preoccupied with the Middle East and that nuclear terrorism is basically a problem contained in that region.