[Analysis] Why is the political opposition so inept?

Posted on : 2014-08-02 13:37 KST Modified on : 2019-10-19 20:29 KST
To have any hope of remaining relevant, opposition needs a vision and to groom young and fresh leaders
 Aug. 1. The lawmakers had gone to MBC to investigate why the network had reported that all passengers from the Sewol had been rescued
Aug. 1. The lawmakers had gone to MBC to investigate why the network had reported that all passengers from the Sewol had been rescued

By Lee You Ju-hyun, staff reporter

“I don’t get why they won’t take what’s fed to them. There’s nothing else you can call them but inept.”

This was the verdict from a third-term lawmaker with the ruling Saenuri Party (NFP) after witnessing the opposition’s defeat in the July 30 by-elections. Since arriving in the National Assembly in 2004, the lawmaker has seen three general elections, two presidential elections, and two municipal elections. In the 2004 general election, the opposition earned a majority amid the backlash over impeachment proceedings against then-President Roh Moo-hyun. In the 2010 municipal elections, it put in a strong showing with a campaign going after the ruling party on the controversial Four Major Rivers Project and emphasizing free school meals. But it lost four of the other elections - the 2008 and 2012 general elections, the presidential races in 2007 and 2012 - and played to a tie in the 2014 municipal elections.

The inept opposition today is utterly unfeared by its rival. So how did this situation come about? A look back at a decade of disaster shows a recurring pattern, with every new situation getting the exact same reaction.

First, there has been a call for “unity first.” As the election draws closer, the opposition has rushed to regroup. In the latest election, the New Politics Alliance for Democracy (NPAD) and the Justice Party rallied together behind a single candidate for Seoul’s Dongjak-B district. It was symptomatic of a larger trend - taking it easy until election eve, before finally getting down to the squabbling over a deal to avoid splitting the opposition vote. The 2010 municipal elections and 2012 general election also saw the different parties reaching an agreement only for as long as the contest was going on. To date, it hasn’t led to any kind of productive relationship in terms of joint policy development.

After the Democratic United Party lost the 2012 general election, it became preoccupied with the question of whether to reach a deal on a single opposition presidential candidate with AhnLab chairman Ahn Cheol-soo, then riding a wave of popularity. Meanwhile, then-Saenuri candidate Park Geun-hye was targeting the middle class with a bold platform of economic democratization and welfare. Things reached the point where one lawmaker in charge of strategy for the party said, “A deal with Ahn Cheol-soo is the only way we can win this election.”

For the municipal elections this past June 4, the Democratic Party decided to merge with Ahn’s new party, agreeing to conditions that were seen as shocking by many. Its choice was motivated by fears that Ahn’s candidates could end up splitting the opposition vote. Even without straightening things out with its central and local committees, the newly minted NPAD managed a draw in the election, helped by popular shock over the Sewol ferry tragedy. But on July 30, judgment came knocking.

The NPAD’s co-leaders, Ahn and Kim Han-gil, failed to achieve unity within their ranks. Instead, they focused on specific interests, opting for political nominations over strategic ones. The result was a blowout, the hasty alliance left vulnerable to the DP’s complex web of factions.

The fumbling at the opposition’s helm has resulted in a vicious cycle: election losses lead to the creation of an emergency committee and hastily staged convention. Between the 2004 general elections and Park Young-sun taking the reins as acting leader this week, the opposition has changed leaders a total of 24 times. The average leader has served just six months. In contrast, the Saenuri Party has changed leaders just 10 times over the same period.

“The Saenuri Party has an instinctive sensitivity to power,” said one NPAD official on condition of anonymity. “They aren’t like our party, with all its ‘bosses.’ They’ve got a simple split - mainstream and non-mainstream - and the weaker ones know when to yield to the stronger. But our party doesn’t support its leadership. And then, whenever they’ve let an opportunity slip, we’ve torn them down. We’re all in the same party, but we’re secretly thrilled when the other guy doesn’t do well.”

Observers in and around the party are now saying the NPAD has no future if it can’t come up with a vision and policies. After the 2010 municipal elections, the DP responded to the popularity of free school meal pledges by declaring a “left click” and amending its constitution. Then, when the conservative press came out with its “populism” frame, the shift was quietly abandoned.

Another problem is the gulf in abilities between the Saenuri’s think tank, the Youido Institute, and the NPAD’s Institute for Democracy and Policies (IDP). For more than a decade, the Youido Institute has been conducting opinion polls and surveying the changing election terrain and voter wishes. The IDP, in contrast, has focused less on data administration and collection, and more on generating figures for the opposition leadership to refer to. During the last election, Youido Institute survey data were shared around the party, providing a picture of overall trends. The IDP’s data were shared with just a few people, including Kim Han-gil.

The opposition’s biggest need right now may be fresh blood. Indeed, some have already begun pointing fingers at the so-called “486 generation” - the newer faces brought into the fold to such high hopes ten years ago. At the 2010 convention, the 486ers made a bid for independence, led by lawmaker Lee In-young. But they never ended up making a new voice heard; instead, they worked behind the scenes in advisory roles for party heavyweights in the 2007 and 2012 presidential elections. When candidates were being nominated for the 2012 general election, they focused more on taking care of their own than on breaking up the “National University Student Representatives Association Alumni Association” frame. No time was spent grooming young and fresh new faces.

Many observers are saying nothing will change until the faces do. But in the past ten years, senior adviser Sohn Hak-kyu has been the only big name to make the decision to leave politics over an election drubbing. Most of the multi-term lawmakers who lost in the 2008 general election earned badges in the more favorable clime of the 2012 race, but they’ve contributed almost nothing within the party.

“If you’re going to bring new people in, some of the places will have to open up,” said Lee Cheol-hee, director of the Dumun Institute of Political Strategy. “For the 19th general election, a lot of the mainstays are going to have to announce that they’re not going to run.”

 but were blocked from entering the building. (by Kim Tae-hyeong
but were blocked from entering the building. (by Kim Tae-hyeong

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