Advice to President Lee

By Tong Kim

An unexpected outburst of public discontent with the fresh government of President Lee Myung-bak ― over the threatening impact of soaring prices, the impropriety of some presidential aids in their pursuit of wealth and the most recent controversy over the alleged risk of mad cow disease ― is not exactly a harbinger to a political crisis in Korea. But mishandling of public concerns could lead to a crisis.

President Lee's approval rating has sharply fallen to a record low of 35 percent with a majority of 55 percent of the people saying ``he is not handling his job well.'' Lee is still doing better than President George W. Bush, who has a 27 percent approval and the highest disapproval rate of 71 percent among modern American presidents.

In a website portal, over 600,000 netizens have signed up in a campaign to impeach President Lee who began his job only a little over two months ago, and 10,000 citizens participated in a candlelight demonstration last Thursday in Seoul to protest the government's complete beef market opening to the United States.

Lee's predecessor Roh Moo-hyun was impeached within a year of his inauguration. A candlelight demonstration in the summer of 2002 to protest over the death of two school girls marked an eruption of anti-American sentiment in Korea that resulted in the election of Roh Moo-hyun, which was the beginning of the trouble in the U.S.-Korea alliance. Some in Washington are still recovering from the nightmare of those difficult years.

In a capricious democracy, public support for a president quickly rises and falls. Trouble for a democratic president often is the consequence of his own words and actions or inactions. In politics, domestic and international, timing is critical, and perception is reality. The ideological pendulum swings back and forth over time.

There is a perception gap between what MB intends to deliver and what the people see is happening. MB means well, but he is not understood well. There is enough evidence that shows he is defeating his own purpose by making imprudent comments on touchy policy issues in defiance of their political sensitivity.

Concerning the beef market, he said on different occasions: ``We will compensate the cattle raisers who are limited in number, and the urban people will be able to eat beef at the lowest price in the world…In 10 years, our per capita income will rise to $40,000, and then more people will prefer to eat high quality Korean beef…In Japan the cost of a head of cattle is three times the price in Korea… Import of U.S. beef is not a forced supply: choice is for the consumers to make…The issue (of beef) should not be dealt with as a political issue…This was something that the Roh government had committed to carry out…"

The problem with President Lee's statements is not found in the logic of his economic argument but in the political predicament of his policy decision and in the responsibility of the government to protect the health and welfare of its people.

I am not a mad cow specialist, and I do not want to partake in the argument of who is right or wrong concerning the danger of U.S. beef. But I eat American beef with millions of other Americans every week. And MB was right to say that millions of Korean travelers and Americans eat beef in the United States.

However, the timing of Korea's agreement to open the beef market was bad: it was the night before President Lee's Camp David summit. As The Korea Times pointed out in its editorial last Friday, it was seen as a Seoul's capitulation to the Bush administration that seemed to expect more from its pro-American ally.

Resolving the beef market issue, along with the passage of the free trade agreement (FTA) by the Korean parliament, is a necessary condition, not a sufficient condition, to U.S. ratification. Yet it did not have to happen at the time it did. U.S. ratification is still a distant possibility before Bush leaves office.

Just imagine what could have happened if the beef issue had erupted one month earlier before the holding of the National Assembly elections! Not tackling this issue along with that of the controversial inland cannel project during the elections was a good ``pragmatic" political decision on the part of President Lee's party.

A successful presidency requires among other things a type of leadership to win the support of other policy makers and the public, political skills to get legislative support, communication skills, and emotional intelligence, with which a president can sell and defend his policy. A successful president can enjoy eight hours of sleep a day. The successful president Ronald Reagan never worked more than 8 hours a day; Bush, a tough president, sleeps an ample eight hours a day.

Advice to the President:

Sleep a few more hours every day ― more than the publicized four hours. Clarify policy objectives. Think carefully before speaking: utilize well-prepared talking points on policy matters. Maintain a balanced view: avoid the impression of favoring one side over the other ― for example avoid the impression of supporting business at the cost of labor. Delegate authority to subordinates ― no one person can do it all.

Show political leadership to galvanize the support of all factions in the ruling and other conservative parties including the pro-Park Geun-hye faction. MB is right in saying he no longer has a political competitor. But his leadership can be challenged. Listen to opposing views from within the government and the party, and especially from the opposition parties. Show respect to dissidents before carrying out government policy.

Streamline the economic policy making mechanism. See to it that all related agencies have the same voice to support the same general policy direction. Closer inter-agency coordination is necessary. Be practical and realistic. Accomplish what is pragmatically possible. Forget about campaign pledges _747 or the cross-country waterway project. People do not expect a miracle. They want to see improvement. Do not push the controversial cannel project, which has an inherently negative perception in the people's eyes.

Clean up the Blue House. Get rid of one or two more senior secretaries who have already tarnished the moral image of the new government through their illegal amassment of fortune. If MB donates his promised personal wealth worth more than $30 million for the restoration of the South Gate, instead of setting up a social welfare or scholarship foundation, it would be more symbolically positive and historically lasting.

Call a meeting with North Korea to discuss humanitarian food aid to the North that faces another likely crisis of starvation. De-link this aid from the nuclear issue, as MB said before. To persuade the North Koreans, as MB said he would want to do, the South should reengage them first. Take the high road over Pyongyang's vituperation of MB's North Korean policy. Seoul's controlled mature response has served as a stopper to further aggravation of inter-Korean relations.

Strengthen combined deterrent quietly, instead of scaring the North Korean military, unless there is an overriding psychological strategic need to publicize the building of offensive arsenal. Work closely with the United States and other participants in the six-party process in search of South Korea's significant and pragmatic role in denuclearization. What's your take?

Tong Kim is former senior interpreter at the U.S. State Department and now a research professor with Ilmin Institute of International Relations at Korea University and an adjunct professor at Johns Hopkins University SAIS. He can be reached at tong.kim8@yahoo.com