hankyoreh

By Seong Yeong-cheol and Seok Jin-whan, staff reporters

Park Geun-hye’s comments on the 1961 military coup that put her father in power are drawing heat not only from the opposition but from her own New Frontier Party.

Critics said the presidential primary candidate’s remark that the coup was “unavoidable, the best possible choice, and the right decision” was difficult to accept.

Guro Galilee Church pastor In Myeong-jin, who once chaired the ethics committee of the Grand National Party (the NFP’s predecessor), told the Hankyoreh in a telephone interview on July 17 that Park “keeps stressing ‘principle,’ but the rule of history is that soldiers protect the nation and politicians govern. Moreover, the biggest rule of our constitution is that we are a democratic republic, and I’m not sure that it’s acceptable to break that rule with a coup d’etat.”

In, who was also a spokesman for the Headquarter of National Movement for Achieving Democratic Constitution during the June 1987 Democracy Movement added, “If that’s the case, I personally feel a sense of shame to imagine what that means for the people who were beaten and tear-gassed for democracy.”

In a radio interview with SBS on Tuesday, Kim Moon-soo, another NFP candidate, said the argument that the coup was unavoidable did not accord with the constitution.

“We call it a coup d’etat because they crossed the Hangang River with tanks and took over the government,” Kim said. “We cannot say the coup itself was good because the industrial revolution that followed was successful.”

Rep. Lee Jae-oh, who previously declared he would not run in the primary, asked on Twitter, “If the coup was unavoidable, what are we to say to the descendants of those involved in Japan’s annexation of Korea and the Korean War if someone argues that those were also ‘unavoidable’ and the ‘best choices at the time’?”

Lee added that the events of 1961 were “a coup d’etat that violated the constitutional government and seized power by force of arms. We cannot cover up and distort history.” He also commented on the Yushin regime, writing, “It was an age of the severest oppression of human rights, as the government moved towards a long-term dictatorship. It is not an issue on which we should be reserving judgment.”

Appearing on Buddhist Broadcasting System radio Tuesday, Rep. Nam Kyung-pil also said he found it hard to agree with Park’s comments on the coup. He said, “It won’t be a core issue in the race, but it could have a bit of an effect on centrist voters.”

Stronger criticisms kept coming from the Democratic United Party. At a press conference Tuesday, party chief Lee Hae-chan said, “It was a serious mistake for Park Geun-hye to say [the coup] was her father’s ‘unavoidable and best possible choice.’ ‘Coup d’etat’ would have been a neutral expression, and ‘military rebellion’ would have been more accurate.”

He added, “Soldiers should defend the nation. Who asked the soldiers to choose politics? [The Park administration] did well in leading the economy in a positive direction by setting a course for Korea as an export-oriented nation, but that doesn’t make a rebellion a ‘revolution.’”

Democratic United Party parliamentary spokesman Woo Won-shik also voiced criticisms. In a briefing Tuesday, he said, “In the end, Park Geun-hye chose her father’s misguided historical legacy rather than the path of correct history.”

“Just as Chun Doo-hwan and Roh Tae-woo were the ringleaders of a military rebellion, so was Park Chung-hee,” he continued.

Woo went on to say, “If the events of 1961 were ‘unavoidable’ and the ‘best possible choice and the right decision,’ [Rep. Park] must clearly answer whether her father‘s joining of the Manchukuo Military Academy and his activities as an officer in the Japanese army or in the Workers’ Party of South Korea were also unavoidable and the best possible choices and right decisions.”

Park’s camp was unruffled. One key official said, “Around 70% of the people understand the unavoidability of the 1961 events and think they got us over the ‘Barley Hump’ (pre-harvest food shortage) and laid the groundwork for development.”

He added, “However, 20-30% do not agree, and we’re going to have to convince them.”

Another pro-Park aide said, “Ultimately, this is not going to develop into a situation in which people who would vote for Park won’t and those who wouldn’t will.”

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