Park a victim of SK’s democracy defect
South Korean prosecutors said on Monday that they were seeking an arrest warrant for the country’s former president Park Geun- hye for her abuse of power and her role in a corruption scandal. In the end, Park failed to escape from the fate of her predecessors – the nation’s presidents all ended their terms in a perplexing predicament.
Likely to be jailed, Park is another victim of the South Korean style of democracy, which begs the question: What exactly is the root cause of all these failures in South Korea’s politics?
Many scholars have begun analyzing the political problem since Park’s corruption scandal was exposed. Some said that since South Korea’s democracy came after decades of martial law, the creation of the government structure may have lacked intellectual input.
Others argued that the “miracle on the Han river,” which refers to the rapid economic growth in South Korea following the Korean War ( 1950- 53), was just a freak product of the then autocracy.
And, still others believed the monopolization by financial magnates and their relations with politicians to be the cause of political conundrums in South Korea.
In my opinion, the failure of Park and her predecessors are the result of South Korea’s cultural traditions and social divergences, as well as the deterioration of the political structure.
First, from a cultural perspective, South Korea, like its neighbors Japan and China, is influenced by the philosophy of Confucius. But it is different from Japan, the island country which observes “shame culture,” and China, the continental country which advocates “harmony.” Situated among various powers, whose relationship is uneasy, any small but wrong move Seoul makes may lead to a disaster. That was indeed proved by the dilemma on the Korea Peninsula after WWII.
Geopolitical concerns, thus, have ingrained itself into everyday life of South Korean, suggesting that political leaders who make any mistakes would become the target of national hatred. Before political leaders’ scandals or missteps come to light, people may uphold the leaders as saints. Once the missteps, especially those fatal ones, are disclosed, the leaders will turn into the targets of public anger and ridicule. Park, to some extent, is the sacrificial lamb of her country’s cultural beliefs.
Second, South Korea’s political environment is the most immediate and lethal cause of the failures of its presidents. Though the country witnessed robust economic development after the then president Park Chung- hee created the economic “miracle,” the political constitution of South Korea, however, remains frail and far from mature.
For the sake of a rapid boost to its economic power, the government was solely focused on supporting financial magnates who benefited from biased government policies and funding.
It’s true that dozens of global corporations like Samsung have seen great success, but the engine of the state has become rusty. Therefore, these economic phenomena are just the half- made product by an authoritarian regime and its own version of democracy.
The politics- business relationship formed in this political environment entitles magnates to enjoy extravagant privileges not given to common citizens.
In this regard, the political environment of the country is largely dependent on the personal views and beliefs of the president. But, the problem is that the president is not a saint.
Third, South Korean democracy has its own drawbacks, which are fatal. The country experienced several military dictatorships, along with bloodshed events like the Gwangju Uprising ( 1980) before following in the steps of Japan as the second Asian country to become a democracy.
South Korean people have taken pride in this. But this accomplishment came from the compromise between the authoritarian power and urban intellectual elite. In other words, South Korean democracy was produced amid a temporary cease of authoritarianism.
Hence, the remnants of authoritarianism and insufficient democracy are at the base of South Korea’s national government, which means that the president has too much power while the check and balance is too weak.
The uprising populism, which has clouded the seemingly cheerful democratic atmosphere, could coerce the demise of democracy if a crisis develops.
Park’s destiny may make people sigh. But given the complexity behind the country’s democracy, it is still possible to see a similar tragedy take place.