Improbable choice

Park’s naming of aides doubtful in style, standards

―Usually, a president-elect’s chief of staff and spokespeople are not inordinately influential figures, and go about carrying out their boss’s errands during the transition of power period. Politically, however, the naming of these closest aides can be quite revealing, allowing voters to get a sense of the next leader’s mentality and thinking.

―President-elect Park’s appointment of four people Monday surprised many people in this regard, raising doubts about both her style and standards in terms of personnel assignments. And popular criticism focuses on her naming Yoon Chang-jung ― an ultra-rightwing journalist-turned-commentator known for his extreme ideological bias and use of provocative language ― as her chief spokesman.

Park cited two elements as her criteria for making her appointments; the nominees’ potential contribution to national unity and their professionalism. Yet it is hard to understand how Yoon, who condemned the opposition candidate Moon Jae-in, supported by 48 percent of voters, as the “leader of anti-South Korea forces” fits the first criterion. Park’s move is especially questionable, as it came at a time when the success of her administration hinges on cooperation from the opposition party and its supporters.

Yoon described some conservative figures who supported liberal Moon Jae-in as ``political sluts” and ``dogs,” while painting Moon and nearly half of his voters as ``pro-North Korean” elements. In short, Yoon was Korea’s very own Rush Limbaugh.

The president-elect might have given high marks to Yoon’s seeming conviction, which left no politicians, including Park herself, as exceptions from his ideological wrath. But she could have changed her mind had she looked more closely at her choice’s track record, which shows Yoon has been anxious to join the political community, either liberal or conservative, whenever he sees a chance. His omni-directional attacks should be seen as efforts to get the attention of people, especially conservatives.

Little wonder that the opposition United Democratic Party calls for nullifying the appointment of Yoon, comparing him to Joseph Goebbels from Germany’s Nazi era.

Even more serious, from the perspective of considering long-term state administration, was Park’s manner of decision-making when filling key posts, which she seems to have done mostly alone behind locked doors.

Such a one-woman-show is most undesirable not because it runs completely counter to democratic principles and the importance of communicating with the people. Personnel appointments are of course one of the exclusive rights of a chief executive. But this right also derives from and is entrusted by the people. Park’s well-known preference of and reliance on a few long-time confidants also runs the risk of giving them unwarranted, discretionary power. She must know that a mechanical, cursory allocation of people according to regional backgrounds does not ensure neutral and harmonious personal management.

The key lies in how much sympathy Park can earn from the public, including those who are unsupportive of her. The long, and important, process of assigning the right people to numerous government posts apparently began on the wrong foot. Park should know it is not only the opposition party that wants her to reverse her decisions. And that she is causing unnecessary anxiety even among those who wish her and her yet-to-be formed administration every success.