On leadership and vision

By Eugene Lee

In the face of many mounting crises, South Korea is beginning to struggle on multiple fronts. It's got rising market volatility paired with inflationary pressure on the monetary and fiscal systems of the country, a brewing housing market bubble getting ready to pop, along with rising product and energy prices, and unhappy labor and even government employees in between. In simple terms, people's wealth is slowly being wiped out and they are getting angrier day by day.

Of course, one way of dealing with it is to stick to the letter of the law ― what the current administration is touting to be a solution. However, giving an extra thought to the idea raises several questions. First of all, about the law itself. Generally, it falls into two areas of function ― the law either prevents its subjects from doing something wrong or it punishes the subjects for any wrongdoing later.

But, in the case of governing a country, there isn't exactly a law or even a manual that would tell you exactly how to do any of that. Usually, state leadership would rely on a number of advisers in particular fields, be it academics or high-level practitioners ― in other words, people who are equipped with various theories about reality and backed by current data.

So, appointing someone with a background in law to run any particular field without any knowledge is bound to be a problem down the road. Yes, the appointee might apply their knowledge to investigate the field or industry, but what kind of knowledge this person is going to rely on when faced with policy selection leaves me wondering if the choice is going to be what we usually would call "educated."

For the sake of argument, let us assume for a moment that there is a perfect law which would tell you how to run a country in any situation. The reality is, the body of law practiced in South Korea is far, far away from it. Often, a law may be created on earlier precedents, meaning that it is constantly being updated and open to various interpretations, which we usually call common law ― and yet again, the law system in South Korea is not common, it is civil ― if the law isn't written, then events are beyond the law's reach.

The question is which law the administration is going to apply, if it doesn't even exist. My guess is that those newly selected appointees will end up pursuing their legitimacy and redirecting attention toward something else, and I won't be surprised to see some scapegoat-searching and finger-pointing very soon on matters of much lesser importance.

In running their countries, presidents rely on teams of people with a common political philosophy. In South Korea, the political spoils system is faltering, as it is being replaced by tribal politics. And the lack of expertise and qualifications of new appointees will significantly damage the state of national affairs. We already see the signs of it in the erosion of investor confidence reflected in falling domestic markets. Plus, with the current exchange rate, my bitter praise goes to those who have kept their savings outside the country ― the last thing that we need right now.

We know that leadership plays a paramount role in guiding a country. The leader's job is to inspire and support the administration's responsibility in devising a better future for the country. We can compare it to a team of pilots in the cockpit of a jumbo jet with a myriad of buttons, levers and indicators. The leader must provide a set of exact commands for specific operations and maneuvers in any given condition. There is no room for sloppy communication, otherwise you'll end up with a nose-diving plane, god forbid, in a deadly spiral!

Forget the plane analogy ― the country's existence is at stake. Today, the geopolitical opportunism on the international arena is threatening the very fabric of the international system that gave birth to South Korea as an independent country. Any perceived weakness may prompt an aggressive action that may lead to a very quick escalation. The administration needs to tread carefully and boldly and start from well thought-out political messages in regard to the strategic situation on the peninsula.

Between many, yet another important component the leadership dreadfully needs is bigger and more sensible strategic thinking. The current focus on self-created grudges or executing random responses to endless issues of domestic politics indicates the absence of a larger and broader vision for the country. We can't follow leaders who are going nowhere! It needs to think of changes that are rooted in reality, based on data. The vision needs to echo in people's imagination, it must inspire and, most of all, it must make sense.

There is no time to waste! The lead that South Korea has achieved through many tribulations and suffering will be lost in a matter of several years, if not months. Understanding risk, thoughtfully connecting the present to the future and skillfully communicating these ideas while seeking consensus will end in one thing ― getting everyone onboard with so much needed unity instead of division. So, let this vision be your guide, be our guide.

Eugene Lee (mreulee@gmail.com) is a lecturing professor at the Graduate School of Governance at Sungkyunkwan University in Seoul. Specializing in international relations and governance, his research and teaching focus on national and regional security, international development, government policies and Northeast and Central Asia.