(EDITORIAL from the Korea Herald on Jan. 10)

Soul searching

Ideally, dialogue and compromise should be the main pillars of parliamentary
politics, with the dominating party refraining from beating the opposition into
submission and the minority force respecting majority rule. There is every reason
to abandon no-holds-barred contests and foster a live-and-let-live attitude
toward inter-party relations.
In down-to-earth politics, however, rival parties tend to fight fiercely. Still,
they may occasionally try to settle disputes in good-natured negotiations. But no
such possibility appears in Korean politics, as shown by the parliamentary
session that was closed on Thursday.
The opposition Democratic Party, with 82 seats in the 299-member National
Assembly, is no match for the ruling Grand National Party, which has 172 seats.
But by resorting to violence, the main opposition party was able to gain much
more concessions than it deserved from the ruling party.
Buoyed by the victory, the Democratic Party is planning to go on a road show next
week to drum up public support for its second "legislation war," which it expects
will start next month. But there is nothing to celebrate. Instead, it should be
ashamed of its physical clashes it had with security officers while it was
forcibly occupying some committee chambers and the main hall of the National
Assembly.
Rep. Chung Sye-Kyun, leader of the Democratic Party, was grossly misguided when
he said, "People will feel more comfortable because parliamentary politics has
been resuscitated. We will never tolerate any attempt (by the Grand National
Party) to make bad laws." Few in their rational mind, however, would attempt,
even in rhetoric, to equate the use of violence with the revival of parliamentary
politics.
The party may have won back some of its estranged militant supporters, raising
its low approval rating by several notches, as it claims. But it should be aware
that any attempt to block the legitimate lawmaking process with sit-in protests
will not help a party consolidate and expand its support base any further.
Of course, the Grand National Party was far from unblemished. Its cardinal
mistake was its short-lived determination to ram all of the pending bills through
the opposition's throat. The party mistakenly believed the sheer number of
lawmakers under its wing would clear the way for legislation. But a more sensible
approach would have been to prioritize the bills, determine which bills it could
make concessions on, and dig its heels when it came to negotiating others.
Another grave mistake the party made was to believe that the National Assembly
speaker, who had been a GNP member, would come to its rescue when opposition
lawmakers locked themselves in the main hall. But the speaker refused to heed the
party's request to haul the squatters away and put all the pending bills to a
vote. The ruling party had no other choice than to make concessions to the
Democratic Party.
To make matters worse, Rep. Park Geun-hye, a former leader of the Grand National
Party, appeared to be taking sides with the Democratic Party when she said,
"(Some) of the bills being pushed by the Grand National Party are disappointing
and painful to the people." Rep. Park, who leads the second largest faction in
the ruling party, added that she felt the same as the Democratic Party when the
GNP was under her leadership as an opposition party.
Now the Grand National Party is embroiled in an internecine and factional fight
over who should be held accountable for "waving a white flag of surrender." But
the party will remain impotent if it fails to overcome its internal division and
develop a sensible strategy toward the opposition. It will have to do much soul
searching before a new special session opens next month.

(END)