hankyoreh

By Cho Hye-jeong and Seong Yeon-cheol, staff reporters

The New Frontier Party (NFP) decided on June 12 to let up on its efforts to brand political opponents as pro-Pyongyang, in what observers are saying is a response to concerns that a backlash against the red-baiting tactics could boomerang and hurt its chances in the upcoming presidential election.

Some within the party said that while the accusations of allegiance to North Korea could deal a blow to the opposition, the NFP had “more to lose.” Another factor cited by analysts was the possibility of the controversy hurting the party‘s leading presidential contender, Park Geun-hye.

NFP floor leader Lee Hahn-koo previously proposed that the National Assembly vote on the eligibility of the Unified Progressive Party’s proportional representatives Lee Seok-ki and Kim Jae-yun to serve as lawmakers. At the time, Lee Hahn-koo said no decision had been made on whether the eligibility review would focus on the procedure for selecting proportional representatives or on the issue of allegiance to Pyongyang.

But with remarks on June 1, Park Geun-hye shifted the focus to philosophical vetting, saying that “persons with suspect national views should not be National Assembly members.” This was followed by a number of similar statements from other NFP figures. Lee said that “even former spies are trying to join the National Assembly,” while lawmaker Han Ki-ho recommended “testing whether those thirty [opposition lawmakers] have been converted” from communism.

As the NFP‘s red-baiting push gathered steam, some of the remarks went beyond the pale and drew criticism from the public. Meanwhile, the Democratic United Party (DUP) went on the counterattack, demanding that Park explain why she previously said the coup that put her father Park Chung-hee in power in 1961 was a “revolution of national salvation.”

Critics within the NFP argued that it made no sense to expel the two lawmakers for their “views on the nation” when the essence of the issue was the lack of democracy in the UPP’s election process.　Analysts said the party likely saw it as awkward to continue making ideological attacks under these circumstances.

Also, the red-baiting efforts backfired somewhat on Park by further painting her as anachronistic. Some critics even questioned her very understanding of the nature of democracy.

A lawmaker in the NFP’s Park wing said, “I’m sure a lot of NFP lawmakers also think you shouldn’t expel people for their views. Park Geun-hye went too far.”

The same lawmaker added, “As someone who wants to become president, she took a hit by giving the impression that she doesn’t really understand democracy and doesn’t have democratic leadership skills.”

Another factor cited by observers was the party’s efforts to get the DUP into negotiations on how to put together the new National Assembly. The DUP is opposed to expelling the UPP’s Lee Seok-ki and Kim Jae-yun for their views.

Lee Hahn-koo said, “If we want to get Lee Seok-ki and Kim Jae-yun ousted, we’re going to need the National Assembly to be organized.”

Cho Won-jin, who heads the NFP’s strategy and planning headquarters, said, “We’ve done about as much as we can with the North Korea allegations. What’s important now is opening the National Assembly quickly. The opposition had its leadership set up now, so we need to go back onto the floor.”

But the NFP’s ideological offensive hasn’t stopped completely. A second-term lawmaker from the greater Seoul area said, “Some are questioning how we can avoid a political debate ahead of the presidential election. This isn’t an issue that we can go after if we want to and leave alone if we don’t.”

A prominent lawmaker from the Yeongnam region said, “The press is going to keep asking what Park Geun-hye thinks, and there are also going to have to be debates during the contest to select a presidential candidate. Park Geun-hye won’t be able to get out of giving an answer.”

Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]