hankyoreh

By Jung Suk-koo Chief Editorial Writer
　
Apparently it’s asking too much to expect reform-mindedness from career politicians. An official is someone who, when a new administration comes into office, implements policies that are the opposite of the previous administration‘s without missing a beat. In the process, they have been described as “soulless bureaucrats.”
Recently, there has been a heated debate over whether the Democratic Unity Party should re-nominate former government officials. In particular, many have wondered how a party that set conglomerate reforms and other forms of economic democracy as its number one goal can conceivably re-nominate economic officials known to hold reactionary views on the economy. Standing at the center of this furor is floor leader Kim Jin-pyo, an economic official with a background in posts such as Minister of Finance and Economy.
The main reason for recruiting civil servants into politics is to make up for the dearth of administrative experience among politicians. This is often the case when it comes to the economy, which demands a high level of expertise in areas like finance, taxation, and budgets. Indeed, the expertise of former economic officials is often helpful in party activities. But that’s about as far as the role of the former official goes.
It is an entirely different issue when former officials attempt to take over the party reins and determine what direction it should move in. That can cause an identity conflict for the party. The reason Kim has come under scrutiny is because as floor leader, he holds tremendous influence over the DUP‘s policy decisions.
Of course, there are people to the right of Kim Jin-pyo in the DUP, and some may argue that someone with a background similar to his is just what the party needs to get elected. But only party members who are fixated on retaking power hold this view; it certainly will not fly with ordinary South Koreans who are looking forward to some real economic democracy with the Apr. 11 general elections. An electorate that is thirsty for democracy will not tolerate this.
This is why the DUP, if it does intend to push strongly for economic democracy after the elections, needs to seriously consider whether it is going to nominate such former high-ranking economic officials. It makes no sense to talk about conglomerate (chaebol) reform while nominating economic officials who lack genuine interest in carrying out more just policies. In particular, a few of the one-time economic officials in the DUP are seen by some as so conservative that they would not be out of place in the New Frontier Party.
A bigger problem lies elsewhere, with the fact that the DUP’s nomination process shows no signs of active efforts to discover and recruit the new leaders needed to properly pursue conglomerate reform after the elections. About the only sign positive sign there is the strategic nomination of Prof. Yoo Jong-il, chairman of the party‘s special committee on economic democratization.
But conglomerate reform is not so simple a matter that one or two symbolic figures can pull it off. We already saw a few reform-minded figures join the Roh Moo-hyun administration, only to meet with failure. Anything less than the number required for a working team would be hard-pressed to withstand the resistance of the conglomerates or officials. What we need to see now are signs of a clear determination to reform through the nomination of a veritable “dream team” for local constituency and proportional representation seats.
In civic groups and academia, we have seen consistent calls for conglomerate reform. Some of them spoke up on the issue in the Roh administration only to end up crowded out, while others tackled Samsung head on. If the DUP intends to hang its fate as a party on economic democracy, these are the people it needs to be putting at the foreground of its reform push through nominations for local constituency and proportional representation seats. It is meaningless to talk about conglomerate reform without people to push it.
In its nominations, the DUP does not appear all that interested in bringing in new blood to make conglomerate reform happen. Its will to affect such reforms can only be seen as suspect. Over the years, there have been a number of moves for reform, but they have all ended in failure. The reasons may have been different each time, but in all cases there was a lack of strong-willed politicians. At this point, reform appears very likely to fall by the wayside yet again if the DUP fails to come up with leaders to push for it in the upcoming general election, and that’s certainly the direction the party is moving in now.
　
The views presented in this column are the writer‘s own, and do not necessarily reflect those of The Hankyoreh.