BEIJING - When South Korea's new president, Lee Myung-bak, took office in
February there was a palpable expectation in the air that this time things
would be different. After all, Lee won a presidential election landslide,
outpacing runner-up Chung Dong-young by more than 5 million votes.
To meet people's expectations, Lee pushed himself hard, just like a "bulldozer"
- the sobriquet bestowed on him when he had been a powerful, daredevil business
tycoon. At one time, it was known that the overzealous workaholic president
slept only two hours
each night. Unfortunately, a very strange thing has emerged: people began to
dislike him.
It's very tempting to see Lee's poor popularity as "presidential tradition" in
South Korea, arguing that the nation in its recent history saw its leaders
enjoying a short honeymoon period. Equally tempting is to point out South
Koreans' peculiar psychological predilection to disfavor their leader once they
elect him to office.
The argument is flawed. And the symptoms of Lee's case show that this might not
be a fleeting presidential rite of passage. Lee's recent approval rating
plummeted to a rock bottom of 22%, much lower than that in the honeymoon
periods of all the other previous South Korean presidents, even breaking the
"all-time-low" record of Roh Moo-hyun's 40.2%. Roh's predecessor Kim Dae-jung
had a 62.2% approval rating, and his predecessor Kim Young-sam enjoyed a
whopping 83.4% support for the initial three months in office.
Lee is also different from his predecessors in that when previous presidents
were under fire, it was because of criticism from political opponents. In Lee's
case, it's friendly fire, in addition to the broadsides from his foes. Even
South Korea's largest and staunchly pro-Lee paper Chosunilbo Daily said in an
editorial that Lee's performance so far amounts to a "pure deficit", pointing
to Lee's "words, decisions and actions" as the source of his problems. This is
self-restrained criticism, falling just short of saying "everything" about Lee
is problematic.
Strangely, Lee who won the presidency by sculpting an image far different from
his predecessor Roh, is receiving the same criticism Roh had received: he
doesn't understand how people think about him. Actually, Lee has something in
common with Roh: he might get impeached. Already, 1.32 million South Koreans
penned their name in a petition to impeach him.
Feeling the heat, Lee last week made an unusual televised apology to the
public, saying: "It is all my fault." It was the first time in South Korea's
history that an incumbent president, who has yet to count his 100th day in
office, had publicly apologized.
What did Lee do wrong? Some say it was his signing of a beef import deal with
the US that poses, in the minds of some South Koreans, a health hazard. In
fact, that was the most immediate and pressing motivation behind Lee's public
apology. Yet many also indicate his insensitivity to the needs of his people.
Also, it was his unwillingness to give more political room for his intra-party
rival, Park Geun-hye. It was also his inconsistency on putting conditions over
North Korea's food aid. It was also his "English immersion" educational
initiative that went against national sentiment. It was also his selecting
wrong aides, many of them turned out to belong to the richest 1% in the nation.
Essentially, however, all of these - even the US beef import deal - are only on
the sidelines of the real issue: Lee's much-celebrated "bulldozer" leadership
style that was so successful in his business career. Now, as president, he
wants to run the country as its chief executive officer (CEO). In a meeting in
Washington, Lee actually proclaimed he is the "CEO of South Korea". This
attitude is his real problem.
Lee's macho approach certainly worked as a corporate CEO. He was a captain of
industry and he showed his people the goal that they needed to achieve. It also
worked nicely as mayor of Seoul. At that time, Lee told the city's people that
he would remove a seven-kilometer elevated highway that once covered the
Cheonggyecheon Stream in downtown and replace it with a riverfront park. His
opponents insisted that the plan would cause traffic chaos and cost billions.
He bulldozed through the opposition and marched on. Three years later,
Cheonggyecheon was reborn - changing the face of Seoul. Since the end results
were good, people relented.
However, as president of a nation with an extremely diverse spectrum of
opinions to accommodate, the gung-ho leadership isn't faring well. A lawmaker
belonging to Lee's own party commented: "The whole situation has partly come
from the president's mistaken judgment that if he calls shots the rest will
follow. Lee as a presidential candidate pledged that he would serve the people.
I hope he now understands how he does it."
The people in Lee's own camp believe the safety issue of US beef is greatly
misrepresented by Lee's foes, yet they also point out that Lee handled it with
his typical "bulldozer manner" without building enough emotional rapport with
the public to allay their fears. After all, the beef deal is an emotional issue
in that people fear their health will be harmed.
As people have become tired of a president who doesn't communicate with them
enough, it has created psychological resistance and the public is now more
willing to oppose whatever Lee is trying to do.
After Lee's apology, the majority of South Korean media outlets that analyzed
Lee's speech expressed that Lee still doesn't get it. In the case of the
controversial beef deal, 77% of South Koreans demanded the Seoul government
redo the negotiation with the US. Lee's apology didn't quell the angry public
either. For the three nights after Lee's apology - and until the early hours of
Tuesday - there were continuing street protests in Seoul..
Sohn Hak-kyu, leader of the main opposition United Democratic Party, condemns
Lee as "still not being on the same page with people" and adds: "Unless Lee
realizes where he is fundamentally wrong, it will be impossible for him to earn
the hearts of people."
Lawmaker Rhyu Si-min observed in a radio show: "President Lee said he would
communicate with people more. He's right on. He also said that he would behave
humbly. That also makes sense. But now is not a time for talking, but for
action."
In a sense, Lee's muscular leadership style is similar to that of the late Park
Chung-hee, who was blamed for being a dictator. But under Park's strong
leadership, South Korea had a period of vibrant economic development. At that
time, no one was opposed to Park. Those who dared were purged, if not killed.
But now in a democratic South Korea, it's difficult to have a nation-wide
uniform opinion. On the same day that Lee made the televised apology, he also
muttered: "Politics is something that can be done very efficiently if people
all agree." Yonsei University sociology professor Kim Ho-ki characterized Lee's
such attitude as "authoritarian".
A usually pro-Lee JoongAng Ilbo daily said, "The problem with the Lee
administration is that it is without awareness for ordinary people's concerns
... The current situation is a grim omen for a major crisis ahead."
Starting on Tuesday, Lee is visiting China. The South Korean people and media
visibly expect him to recover some popularity points by inking major deals with
China. However, this is quite unlikely as a South Korean Embassy official told
Asia Times Online: "China is still in a mourning period due to the earthquake
disaster. We expect it to be a quiet visit."
Lee, a pious Christian, who once said he would dedicate Seoul to God when he
was mayor, perhaps can gain some insight by re-reading the Biblical story of
Moses. While Moses was on Mount Sinai for 40 days to receive God's 10
commandments, people down on the field were left on their own and started to
build idols that they emotionally identified with.
Lee might now realize it is time to descend from the holy mountain of
self-immersion and talk to his people.
Sunny Lee, a native of Seoul, has lived in China for the last six years,
working for the United Nations and as a journalist and writer. Lee is a
graduate of Harvard University and Beijing Foreign Studies University.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
