By Tong Kim
Korea Times Columnist
Since the ``beef candle demonstrations” of 2008, President Lee is facing perhaps the most serious challenge in political, military and diplomatic terms.
Even before deciding what to do about the aftermath of the Grand National Party’s (GNP) defeat from the local elections, and before the government’s evidence of the Cheonan’s sinking is fully accepted at home and abroad, with China and Russia still reserving their assessment of the evidence, the Board of Audit and Inspection (BAI) _ a similar organization to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) _ announced a shocking investigation result to discredit and denigrate top military leaders _ including the Chairman of the ROK Joint Chiefs of Staff and navy admirals who were directly involved in the initial response to the Cheonan incident.
The BAI accused the military leaders of having filed a delayed false report to their superiors after the ship was attacked by a torpedo, which tore up the ship into two, killing 46 sailors. According to the BAI, they distorted facts in an attempt to protect themselves from their failed responsibilities. The JCS Chairman had several alcoholic drinks, before he showed up at his command post and stayed there only a few hours on that fateful night, while a desperate search for the missing sailors was underway.
This revelation of unprofessionalism and misconduct has undermined public confidence in the military. It also raised more doubts about the credibility of the Cheonan investigation, which was conducted under military leadership. It tarnished the image of the ROK military, which has enjoyed international acclamation for a high standard of professionalism and discipline. Critics, including opposition leaders, asked, ``How can we believe an investigation result that was produced by military authorities who have been caught lying?”
Although the president seems reluctant to reshuffle his cabinet ministers and presidential advisors as demanded by the opposition Democratic Party (DP) and a group of freshmen and second-term GNP members of the National Assembly, he is expected soon to punish and replace those military officers involved, as recommended by the BAI.
After the local elections, the GNP chairman resigned and the chief presidential secretary at the Blue House submitted his resignation, pending acceptance by the president. Apparently, the Blue House’s strategy is to wait until after the July 28 by-elections for several vacant National Assembly seats, before the president will consider changing some cabinet ministers. Improving economic indicators are good news for the president, who was quoted as saying, ``We should think hard about the election result and concentrate on our priority agenda, the economy.”
Reasons for the GNP’s defeat could be numerous but the chief cause was the voters’ turning their backs against the government and the party of President Lee Myung-bak. The votes were against the government party candidates rather than for the opposition party candidates, who were the beneficiaries of the voters’ discontent with the governing party. The recent election has shown a possibility that the progressive DP may recapture the reign of government in 2012, if President Lee and his party do not get their act together to do a better job. Lee Hoi-chang, an unsuccessful presidential candidate in 2002 who also resigned as the chairman of the Advanced Liberal Party after the election, said, ``it was like 2002” when he lost to Roh Moo-hyun.
In election politics, the challenger benefits from a poor performance by the party in power. Lee Myung-bak was elected in 2007 largely because of the voters’ frustration with Roh Moo-hyun’s leadership style and their fatigue with his reform programs. Lee’s theme of an ``economic president” had also appealed to the people that year.
If the president wants to help the GNP succeed in the general elections and the presidential elections in 2012, he will have to address the following issues as a minimum while pursuing his signature policy of economic growth: (1) improve the living standards of the poor, (2) increase communication with the public including opposition parties, instead of unilateral ``bulldozing,” (3) reassess the political burden of carrying out the revised plan for Sejong City now that both Chungchong provinces will be controlled by opposition governors, (4) reconsider or revise the four-river refurbishment projects to cut the budget and to stop environmental controversies, (5) reshuffle the cabinet and staff members to enlist balanced views that can help bring about national integration, (6) reestablish the high standard of military discipline and professionalism as a reinforcement to deterrence against security threats from the North, (7) reexamine the goal of the current policy on the North and determine what and how much the president wants to accomplish (if a clear objective is set, be pragmatic to accomplish it) and (8) embrace and unite all conservative forces, including the supporters of Pak Geun-hye and Lee Hoi-chang.
If the tension is not eased or if the tension escalates between the North and the South, that is likely to become a major election issue in 2012. Unaddressed, the security issue would end up helping a major opposition candidate, especially if he or she runs as a coalition candidate on behalf of all major opposition parties and if the candidate runs on a theme that the election is about a choice between forces of war and forces of peace. Security was a non-issue in 2007, and it did not have a decisive impact on the local election. The Cheonan factor probably had an offsetting effect for both parties.
The recent local election has some sensitive caveats for the United States as well. Unreserved support for a hard line policy on North Korea may backfire as did the mishandling of the accidental death of two schoolgirls in 2002. The United States need not antagonize the progressive Koreans in their 20s, 30s and 40s. The majority of voters do not want an escalation of tension that may jeopardize the peace, while they condemn North Korean provocations. The Obama administration should revive diplomacy at some point to move forward beyond the diplomacy of punishing the North. What’s your take?
Tong Kim is a research professor with the Ilmin Institute of International Relations at Korea University and an adjunct professor at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS). He can be reached at tong.kim8@yahoo.com.