If this little piece of South Korean political history wasn’t so damn disturbing, I might find it kind of interesting. Anyway, the day started off with an early morning press conference by President Roh, in which — as usual — he said a lot of interesting things. Among them:
- He’ll make some kind of major political decision, depending on the results of the general election.
- Despite what prosecutors have apparently concluded, his campaign didn’t surpass the infamous “one-tenth.” And even if it did, he didn’t really mean it when he said he’d resign.
- Yeah, some aides broke campaign funding laws, and for that he was sorry. But he thanked them for not pocketing the money themselves.
- Pointing to an episode in “West Wing”, he said we should “throw away the double standard… The President is a politician.”
- As far as the opposition demanding that he apologize, they could go kiss his ass.
He also had some nasty things to say about former Daewoo Construction head Nam Sang-guk, who apparently tried slipping Roh’s older brother Roger Clinton Geon-pyeong W30 million for him to get his younger bro to help him [Nam] keep his job:
I hope that people like the former head of Daewoo Construction, who have attended good schools and have greatly succeeded, will no longer go to small people in the countryside and pass them money for their own interests.
Noh went on to say he made sure Nam got sacked for trying to corrupt his country bumpkin brother. Clearly, the former Daewoo Construction head was more than a little humiliated by this public thrashing, because upon hearing it, he proceeded to the Hannam River Bridge and jumped off it. In broad daylight.
Anyway, the opposition parties — planning, as they were, to vote on an impeachment motion today — were none too impressed by Roh’s comments. In fact, some openly called them political suicide. It seems younger members of the GNP — many of whom were hesitant about the impeachment vote — are now solidly on board, and GNP floor leader Hong Sa-deok is already talking smack:
As of 8 p.m. yesterday, we secured enough votes, so the incumbent president is as good as impeached. Now there is only left the procedure of a final vote.
Appears they have 190 votes; they need only 181. That is, if it ever comes to a vote — Uri Party lawmakers have been camped out in the National Assembly building, physically preventing Speaker Park Kwan-yong (he’s got to be awfully tired of this shit by now) from opening a plenary session. Look for this to continue tomorrow:
Chung Dong-young, chairman of the Uri Party, urged opposition parties to withdraw the impeachment motion and try to resolve the political deadlock through dialogue between Roh and the heads of four major political parties. Chung vowed that his party would continue a sit-in at the parliament until the opposition backs off. / Chosun Ilbo English Edition
Now, the Yangban suggests:
If the boys in the OOP do this again tomorrow, Speaker Park Kwan-young should have security guards drag them off.
Well, guess what, Andy… that’s just what he might do. Reading this little piece by CBS Radio, it would seem that Park hinted several times today that he might call in the guards if the shenanigans continue. The problem as far as Park is concerned is this — Korean parliamentary culture has a high tolerance for these kinds of games, and the guards have only been called upon five times in Korea’s constitutional history. And the last time was in 1979, and that was, oddly enough, to expel then-Assemblyman (and later President) Kim Young-sam. It’s not a right resorted to lightly by the speaker, and Park has to be very concerned about resorting to tactics that remind everyone (and the Uri Party, in particular) of the strong-arm tactics of yesteryear.
Oh, and before I forget, we have our second dead guy — a pro-Noh protester decided to light himself on fire in front of the National Assembly building so that politicians “wake up.” Just lovely (UPDATE: My bad — the human torch in question ain’t quite dead yet. Thanks go to Hanin for the correction).
Now, the question very few seem to be asking themselves is, did the National Election Commission actually say Noh violated election laws? If you think it did, and can specify what the NEC said exactly, the Oranckay is running the following contest:
S/he who can tell me where the NEC said Roh is in violation of the Election Law wins the gift of a free copy of a fine Korean dictionary I recently recommended to Weblog @ Oranckay readers, , by ???????. You need to tell me exactly what the NEC said, not what others said it said, and it has to say he was in “violation” or that he “broke” the Election Law, not some roundabout “recommendation” that he “cooperate” in “maintaining neutrality” or some other diplomatic attempt to please the opposition without falsely saying that he was in violation. You must also quote a source.
First person to identify the “violation declaration” wins. There can only be one winner, whoever finds it first. I’ve been known to be wrong from time to time and don’t want to be put out of business. I will mail you the book anywhere in the world, though on the slowest boat possible. Contest ends at the end of the month.
All are encouraged to participate.
16 Comments
To all who have hated, flamed and decried me since Comrade Roh got elected:
I TOLD YOU SO!
I December 2002 I correctly forecast that Comrade Roh and the Keystone Commies would be a disaster for Korea.
i think they should not be allowed to impeach him. i want the koreans that voted for Noh to eat as much bitter karma as possible. they voted for him only because he was anti-american and not because he was the best man for the job. i’d love to think that a light would come on at some point in their heads but i won’t hold my breath.
Some kind of motion to censure would be more appropriate, his comments were far from an impeachable offense. This could be the growing pains of a relatively new democracy, or the result of politicians watching too much WWF on TV. Thanks for the info on calling out the guards, people in our office were wondering about that. I’ve been to the Assembly on business, it’s remarkably lax on security–no bag checks, no metal detectors, nada.
I say let them impeach the clown, he’s done more than enough damage already. Afterall, whoever ends up in office after him is just going to pardon him anyway in an effort to “show goodwill” or something like that.
Unbelievable. I was particularly struck by the news of the two suicides. By the way Marmot, it seems the Noh supporter who set himself on fire is actually alive. As to Mr. Nam who jumped off a bridge, I couldn’t believe reading the damn filth coming out from Noh’s morning speech using such an opportunity to find the weak scapegoat. And even though the whole impeachment business is embarassing, Noh needs to somehow dissapear from Korean politics, in the quietest way possible. There is no need for tears. Enough with wax clean dreams of “democracy” in populist fashion; damn demagogue swayed by mass fervor. I am dreading to see how the Court will decide on this. This whole thing could still be a bit bearable only if it wasn’t for that bloody temper of Koreans.
Being opportunistic and impeaching a novice politician for misspeaking is really petty–it’s the presidential office that’s being dragged through the shit, not Roh.
I am almost afraid to ask….but….
does anybody have any idea what the family background of this man was in relation to the Japanse colonial period?
This is a wild guess since I haven’t had the stomach these last two weeks to pay close attention to what is going on in Korea…..
but by any chance could this guy’s family line and/or corportation have been fearing the up coming pro-Japansese (anti-Korean????) fiasco???
Is Noh being impeached for only mis-speaking? You could go on forever trying to defend all the novices out there but for sure South Korea is in no position or does it really have that luxury to tolerate political leaders that may very well enfeeble the country’s sense of stability. But I do agree this event, if dragged out does not help the “authority” of the executive office. I would be interested in hearing many of your impressions of the Nixon period; of course I’m assuming a lot of you are of that generation.
Hanin,
You ask an excellent comperative question. It’s interesting to consider…
I’m not of Nixon era age, so I can’t comment from having lived through it, and I can see easily there are valid points of view all the way around the issue, but here is my two cents on the broader issue of the impeachment and likely kicking out of office (officially) Nixon would have suffered.
It greatly damaged, so far…beyond repair, the faith the general public put in the government….
….but, it was also a successful test of the US system. It was highly painful and changed American society, but the system functioned and survived.
The same can be said about the 2000 presidential election. It threw the society into an intense period of anguish and deep emotions and bitter hatred —- but as I’m happy some political analyst pointed out at the time and made me see the light at the end of the tunnel —- the system still worked and survived.
Whether people hate the US Supreme Court decision that led to Bush officially winning and prefer the Flordia State Supreme Court decision that would have made Gore president, the system still functioned…….and the nation moved on.
The federal supreme court is the ultimate judge in the legal area and its decision, while still being attacked on a personal level by many people even today, its authority to make such ultimate judgements was respected. Again, the nation moved on and the political fight is going to be taken up in the Bush vs Kerry election. Which is as it should be. (There was also the 2002 election where the voters could have voted to vent their post-2000 election results anger).
I can’t really claim this as truth, but my feeling after teaching Korean adults and studying Korean history is that Koreans place too much emphasis on the role of one man or the immediate moment in time. For example, I’ve heard many Korean adults who don’t like Park Chung Hee’s history in Korea still tell me, “But who else could have led us at that time?”
I resist this kind of thinking. A nation can’t be built or maintained (or destroyed?) by one person. I think that is an adequate general rule.
Currently, I’m reading about Alexander the Great. Of course, Alexander didn’t accomplish all he did in a vaccuum — apart from any social history before or around him — but in a sense, he was the only man behind his rule, because after he expanded to create such a huge kindom, it fell apart after his death.
What I’m trying to say is that I think a nation has to be able to survive both its great and terrible rulers….
Nixon caused a lot of anguish in the US, but the nation didn’t come apart —- even though at the time, it was a traumatic experience day to day….
Of course not–he’s being hanged out to dry for a variety of stupid-ass moves. But the mis-speaking was the trigger. Nixon is not an apt comparison because S. Korea has the National Assembly instead of the Senate and House system, and no vice president–in other words, presidential power here is more of a two-way struggle, as we’ve seen conclusively today.
So are you suggesting that S.Korea as a fledgling democratic system will not survive this? I don’t have an answer to this myself, but I just was not sure of your position.
For all they were worth, the Uri-dang was a minority party. I forget the numbers but a 20’s membered party trying to physically take up the podium, against the 200’s rest makes it pretty obvious that legislator’s understanding of what is of priority was flop-sided. And this goes for those Uri’s as well as those who were willing to defend such a tactic. I very much hate this news of the moving-of-the-bodies this morning, but was it within the guidelines of the floor procedures to allow representatives to physically take “mutiny” over the podium? It really does not seem to leave any choice for the opposition but to use the necessary measure such as the accompanying guards or police officers to get on with their business.
And you’re right, stable government systems are never built in a day. But I believe this whole ordeal is part of Korea’s experience testing and trying out their system; but perhaps to the detriment of the country’s long-term. But at this particular juncture I am only looking for the bright side where there may be none.
And the only reason why I am trying to justify the shenanegans here is because of South Korea’s foreign policy situation. If there was no foreign “threat” plausibility, I wouldn’t lean towards supporting the politized scheme of this morning.
By the way, thanks for the Nixon reply. As to the system surviving in America, I have to say that Americans came to understand their government system to be more political than they had previously understood it to be. This applies also to the Bush v. Gore decision. But you know what?, I rarely come across Americans who ever talk about this in daily conversation today. After the series of Alan Dershowitz interviews and TV debates, we stopped talking about it. And I guess it was all we could do.
And of course you can see this sort of psychology within the older Koreans who you converse with about Park Junghee and his hey day. I have to say I’m of their disposition myself….as one CNN analyst is well to put, ‘it was the economy stupid.’ It has more to do with Pzerkowski and Huntington’s theory about the actual coming of third wave democracies and the real substantive reasons why they were able to make their break. By the way, when Park was assassinated, my mother took a picture of me standing in my little boy sub 4 foot frame next to his funeral observance. I’m still trying to look for that picture. But I’m digressing here. Apologies.
All the fighting and stuff reminds me of why the British Parliament had an armed censor in the middle of its floor for several hundred years.
Hanin,
Time will tell. I wasn’t saying the current situation in Korea was going to cause the fall of the Korean system. Korea has a history of this happening in 1961 and 1981. But I was mainly considering the American experience in my reply. In relation to Korea, your reply to my reply made me think of this —- I think the bigger, long term problem with the impeachment as it has come about is connected to Korea’s habit of changing its constitution frequently.
I can’t remember where, but one of the Korea bloggers wrote yesterday Korea was slated to re-write the constitution. This is, I think, part of what I meant by the system surviving.
It’s good to have a system in which it makes adjustments to its mistakes by amending the consitution, but when you have a situation where the constitution is being changed routinely every few years, you can’t really grow confidence in the system or say it is surviving.
(Of course, SK can say it has succeeded as a (growing) democracy and capitalist nation when many other nations over the past 50 years have failed in the true sense of the word —- completely….
I should have added above that if the parties that impeached Roh turn around and also amend the constitution too, it hurt the system of government in Korea rather than improving it — the long run perspective. I also wouldn’t bet that in the short run getting rid of Noh (who I don’t like) is going to lead to a betterment of the situation in the short term. I would bet the next president, whoever, will have no chance of being successful. I would guess Korea’s chance to move forward significantly will have to wait until the next regular presidential election…..but these are just predictions….
Your points are very well taken. And my political instincts agree to virtually all of them, so I can’t really add further comment.
However your thoughts lead me to consider what I always find fascinating in the difference between various western democracies. It’s the difference between parliamentary systems and presidential systems. The “other Korea blogger” you mentioned, I believe is Oranckay—his comment about the possibility of Korea using this opportunity to amend their government. Personally, I find the parliamentary system a lot more appealing; particularly for a country as dense and small as Korea. Now I do note another’s comment about the differences between a successful one—such as Britain—and a not-so-successful one, such as Italy; but, my hunch is that parliamentary systems are geared towards societies that have a long history of well ingrained social norms and customs. I’m not implying that there is a particular tradition that is more fitting for a parliamentary system. But what I am saying is that Korea is a place where the notion of its people living beyond the accepted norms of society is much less encouraged or even thought of. Of course there is a sense that parliamentary systems are prone towards distancing the people from their government. Perhaps they will have less access to their politicians and will be unable to affect the government when desired; but this could also be a good thing. It gives a certain distance to the politicians; and perhaps it may be too elitist but I also believe that the format of the debate in a parliamentary system will challenge these elites to be better “men.” I strictly have the British debates, through C-Span, in mind. Everytime I watch them, I find myself more entertained than the drizzle of the US House quorum count. So engaged, and yes, many of them quick to temper, but always moderated by their habituated decision to keep it to words—no matter how vituperative it may be. I have no idea how the parliamentary system is showcased in Japan; and I figure it wouldn’t be as entertaining nor engaging as the British one; matter of fact I have no idea how their Parliament seating is. Nevertheless, it prevents boys such as Noh from becoming the nation’s leader by way of an internet flash mob event. And that is certainly important for long term government.
So you’re right, the fact that Koreans are always changing their procedures of government just because they don’t like the results is a practice they need to stop altogether. Hence, no to any amendments; it just means Koreans will have to take the task of educating their citizens more seriously.
Do you know of any interesting stories about the Ministry of Education. I alway hear gossip time to time about how they’ve changed, i.e. the representation of the Nork’s.
I don’t have the Korean language skills to answer your last question. Marmot or Gerry at Korea Media Forum can answer it better. But, it would seem highly likely the Korean education ministry is in lock step with the trend in Korean society - and beyond - of burying the bad on North Korea and highlighting the positive to the point of not telling the truth. I am thinking of the news story in Korea that favorably compared the child care system in NK to that in SK.
I also heard a Korean prof in the US who had special experience recently in NK explain how she and many other profs she knew felt they needed to censor themselves when it came to the negatives of NK. She said she did it simply because she didn’t want to “insult” North Koreans….
So it would be more suprising if the SK education ministry didn’t bury the negatives…
On the difference between the government styles, I really can’t offer much of an opinion. I don’t know much of how well or why it works in those European nations, but it clearly does work for them. But I’ll stick with the US system for us.
The one thing I would worry about with a parlimentary system where a vote of confidence can lead to the fall of the government in a nation like Korea is that you would see events like the impeachment of Noh occuring as regularly as Haiti has coups…
Korean political parties seem to split and join and have break away groups all the time. I would think that would make a parlimentary system difficult in Korea. But in the US type system, you have more stability in the top position.
Also, I think there have been a handful of times in the European style system where a prime minister was recalled at a crucial moment during multinational discussions on a crucial international issue because the tension of the moment caused the government back home to fall.
That would worry me. I prefer the US system where you replace a president or take his party out of the majority in Congress more after the fact in the next election rather than in the heat of the moment….
PING:
TITLE: Stupid on stupid in the National Assembly
BLOG NAME: Flying Yangban
[NOTE: For more in depth coverage of the current fiasco (including why security guards haven't been called out already), check out the Marmot's latest post.] Just in case anyone missed it, opposition lawmakers tried to bum rush the OOP members
PING:
TITLE: Korea news
BLOG NAME: Silent Running
The incompetent twat the got elected on a wave of anti-Americanism in South Korea just got impeached. Who would have thought that such a one dimensional candidate would have turned out to be such an ineffective president? Recently, Noh distinguished…