[Interview] Han Wan-sang contemplates history of progressivism in South Korea

Posted on : 2013-01-18 16:46 KST Modified on : 2019-10-19 20:29 KST
Former deputy prime minister brings his long historical perspective to comment on recent disappointments
 former deputy prime minister for unification
former deputy prime minister for unification

By Kang Tae-ho, senior staff writer

South Korea’s liberals and progressives have never been able to win by themselves. Their defeat in the first direct presidential election in 1987 was preordained, the result of the so-called “DJ/YS” schism between Kim Dae-jung (DJ) and Kim Young-sam (YS). Kim Young-sam went on to win the 1992 election, but even that only happened after he became a conservative himself through the surprise three-party merger of 1990. Kim Dae-jung triumphed in 1997 on the back of an alliance with Kim Jong-pil’s Alliance of Free Democrats, representing Chungcheong province. In his 2002 run, Roh Moo-hyun was obliged to embrace Chung Mong-joon, another conservative. For 2012’s presidential election, independent Ahn Cheol-soo was in the race. He eventually bowed out to let Moon Jae-in be the opposition’s single candidate, but the result was a loss for the Democratic United Party.

As chairman of the Ivy Forum, Han Wan-sang was an active supporter of Moon. Meeting with the Hankyoreh at his home in Seoul on the morning of Dec. 24, the deputy prime minister for unification said the outcomes of the first five presidential elections since 1987 “pretty much made sense at the time.” After last year’s election, however, he found himself “in a state of mental collapse for the first time in my life.”

The interview was originally planned as a completion of “Searching for the Road,” a memoir serialized in 162 parts. But because Han’s reminiscences sum up the South Korean historical and political climate of the past two decades, the interview inevitably ended up focusing on the 2012 election.

Han explained that he looked back on his time in public office as a “pilgrim for peace” to write the memoir.

Han: “I held public office from the Kim Young-sam administration to the Roh administration, as deputy prime minister for unification, deputy prime minister for education, and Red Cross president. I thought I needed to reflect honestly and faithfully on what I went through as I fought to improve inter-Korean relations and achieve peace on the peninsula. It seemed like the one way to fix the problems today and usher in a hopeful future.”

Hani: Your memoir includes some painful memories - “inconvenient truths,” like the stories about major figures in the Kim Dae-jung and Kim Young-sam administrations.

Han: That was the biggest concern for me - how much I should write about that. The truth always makes us uncomfortable. It can really be brutal. But I decided there was no hope for a better tomorrow without remembering and recording things properly.

Hani: It appears that you had a lot of frank discussions with US ambassador James Laney during the first North Korean nuclear crisis, which occurred during the Kim Young-sam administration.

Han: There was a very intense conflict between Kim Young-sam and US president Bill Clinton in 1993 over how to comprehensively resolve the nuclear issue. Laney was very different from past US ambassadors, who all had a kind of ‘governor-general’ quality to them. He was unfailingly modest, approaching things from a theological perspective and seeing South Korea as a friend, and he was actually quite progressive during the nuclear crisis, arguing that North Korea policy had to be about more than just military deterrence. For the time, he must gotten even more of a ‘pro-Pyongyang leftist’ tag than you see today.

Hani: But you also said there were some things you couldn’t write about. . . .

Han: ‘Searching for the Road’ represents only about one-third of the memoirs I’ve written over the years. The book is based on what was serialized, and it‘s supposed to come out in the first half of 2013. I’m planning to release all of my memoirs as a separate book, probably some time late next year. 

Failed efforts at Korean reunification  

Hani: Under the Kim Young-sam administration, you were one of the most active proponents of the Sunshine Policy. Why were things so uncomfortable in North Korea policy under the Kim Dae-jung administration?

Han: I thought that the alliance between Kim Dae-jung and Kim Jong-pil was a mistake. I was hoping to come up with governance ideas based on Kim Dae-jung’s philosophy on democracy and peace on the peninsula, and to take a guiding role in policy, after the election, at least. But I wasn’t able to. All the key positions - presidential chief of staff, the minister of foreign affairs and unification - were filled with people whose philosophies weren’t consistent with his. Our policies for the first two years or so were a mess, and we ended up giving Pyongyang the impression that the Sunshine Policy was actually a devious scheme to ‘absorb’ North Korea. I think inter-Korean relations would have thawed a lot earlier if they hadn’t done that.

Hani: What is your biggest disappointment of the past two decades?

Han: Kim Young-sam made same historic achievements in improving inter-Korean relations, and I wish he’d gotten the Nobel Prize for that. I think he would have gotten it if he’d realized his policy vision of completing North Korea’s transition out of the Cold War by reaching an agreement with Kim Il-sung on unprecedented reconciliation and cooperation, where North Korea would achieve cross-recognition from the US, China, and other countries. There was a part in his inaugural speech, which I drafted, in which he said, ’No alliance is better than a people united.‘ It had a huge impact, and as soon as I became deputy prime minister for unification, we sent the elderly unconverted prisoner Lee In-mo to North Korea. But then, and it may have been chance or destiny, but North Korea withdrew from the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) the very next day, and things started to fall apart. That was the biggest disappointment, not realizing the dream of reaching a national confederation.

In Kim Dae-jung’s case, it was unfortunate that he wasn’t able to push for a more assertive North Korea policy early on, and that he didn’t realize that his policies for an International Monetary Fund bailout to escape national bankruptcy in late 1997 would have the effect of validating the vices of neoliberalism.

Roh Moo-hyun didn’t go in with conservatives like Kim Young-sam, and he didn’t end up in their debt like Kim Dae-jung, so he had a free hand with his policies. The biggest disappointment there was that he ended up being attacked by progressives five years later for his neoliberal, pro-US, and conservative policies, and ultimately handed power over to the most reactionary Cold War-type administrations.“

Aftermath of the recent presidential election  

Hani: What do you think about this presidential election?

Han: In addition to being innovative, authentic and honest, Moon Jae-in was a politician from outside the mainstream who kept an open mind despite all the disadvantages he faced. That’s why I hoped that Koreans would choose a warm-hearted leader who would turn a listening ear to what they had to say.

There have been five elections since Korea started direct elections in 1987. Kim Young-sam, Kim Dae-jung, and Roh Moo-hyun won three times and lost twice, but I didn’t find myself in shock then. When [the progressive candidate] lost in those elections, there was an explanation.

But this time was especially tough, since I had really believed that the country would be able to choose a president with character, someone that the people loved. However, the shock has also given me an opportunity to do some soul-searching. It seems to me that getting over shock on a collective level can change history, while getting over shock on a personal level makes people stronger.

Hani: There are a number of different assessments of the results of the election.

Han: In the general elections held in April 2012, the Democratic United Party (DUP) missed a great chance to seize majority control of the National Assembly. It was like a baseball game with the bases loaded and no outs, but they couldn’t even get a single hit. That’s what started the Ahn Cheol-soo phenomenon, isn’t it? We’ve got to pay attention to this phenomenon.

The DUP’s criticism of Ahn got in the way of their accepting the phenomenon, and ultimately it resulted in a gap with Ahn. The DUP failed to create a new political culture and only talked about seizing power and winning the election. They had all of the right slogans, but they couldn’t produce an alternative that people could identify with, or in other words, a substantive political force that could tamp down the greed of the market. The DUP needs to ask itself why they weren’t ready to accept Ahn Cheol-soo as a candidate. And Ahn should also reflect on how unprepared he was to be a candidate.

Hani: What is Moon Jae-in’s legacy, and what will he do next?

Han: He stayed committed to the cause from the primaries until the very end. By avoiding mudslinging and being honest and humble, Moon planted the seed of integrity in the hearts of the people. Korea is an aging society, and turning sixty doesn’t mean you’re finished. Moon is just getting started, and he has a lot left to do.

What he needs to do now is keep growing the seed he planted. He may have failed in his bid to become president, but he is still a leader, and he can use this to create a new political culture. Since he’s no longer stuck in the party rut, he’s free to take on the task of creating a new kind of party.

Hani: What are some principles Park Geun-hye should abide by if she is to succeed as president?

Han:There are just two obstacles she must overcome if she is to be a good president.

First, as a new president, she must overcome the legacy of political dictatorship that her father left behind. This means she must also deal with the economic dictatorship of the chaebol and the privileged classes. Only by doing this can she bring about an economic democracy that guarantees the basic right of the people to a decent living.

Second, it is critical that she not follow in the footsteps of [outgoing president] Lee Myung-bak. While it might be hard for Park to emerge from the shadow of her father, it’s entirely possible for her to ease the tense North-South relations [that she is inheriting from Lee]. With Obama in the White House for a second term and John Kerry nominated to become the Secretary of State, we are in a situation where we can expect considerable change in the relationship between the U.S. and the North. Park must not allow herself to be dominated by the Cold War reactionaries. On this point, I believe that Park has such a charisma that Lee doesn’t have.

 

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

button that move to original korean article (클릭시 원문으로 이동하는 버튼)

Related stories

Most viewed articles