Diplomatic, economic achievements marred by strained N.K. ties, corruption scandals


President Lee Myung-bak enters the final year of his five-year term on Saturday with mixed evaluations on his state management ― positive for his economic and diplomatic feats, but negative for policies allegedly lacking democratic, egalitarian values.

Experts largely agree that his success in plucking the country from the economic doldrums after the 2008 global financial crisis, hosting global events such as the 2010 Group of 20 Summit and winning lucrative overseas deals are praiseworthy.

But criticism for a string of corruption scandals involving his close associates, his personnel policy purportedly focusing on his regional and school ties and his failure to enhance inter-Korean ties has put him deeper into the lame-duck status.

His pushing ahead with a series of contentious policies such as importing U.S. beef and refurbishing the country’s four major rivers without enough communication with the grassroots has also drawn sharp barbs from his political foes.

“In terms of macroeconomics, his administration appears to have performed relatively well as it walked away from the global financial crisis faster than other nations, while the Europe and the U.S. are still struggling,” said Yoon Pyung-joong, political philosophy professor at Hanshin University.

“But this is not well received ‘internally’ by ordinary citizens as the reality is still bad with many suffering because of high prices, housing problems and deepening social, economic polarization. It was also hard to feel the so-called trickle down effect ― promoted by Lee.”

As major diplomatic achievements, the Lee administration has trumpeted its success in being selected as the host of high-profile events such as the G20 Summit in Seoul in 2010, the Nuclear Security Summit in March this year and the 2018 Winter Olympics in PyeongChang.

Lee’s aggressive overseas “sales diplomacy” has also gained good reviews as it helped local firms win lucrative development and sales deals with foreign nations including those in the Middle East.

Experts say such feats will surely enhance the country’s “soft power” and in turn bolster its diplomatic credentials.

“Even though a country has sufficient hard power with a basis formed by military and economic strength, it should garner global recognition for that to reflect it as part of the overall national power. In that regard, (such diplomatic efforts) apparently helped enhance soft power,” said Kim Tae-hyun, professor at the Graduate School of International Studies at Chung-Ang University.

Kim, however, pointed out that Lee apparently failed to make good on his promise not to be “ideologically skewed” in carrying out his foreign policy.

“The issues concerning the U.S. and North Korea are sort of areas over which there have been intense, relentless ideological disputes here. For this, Lee pledged to carry out a ‘practical diplomacy’ without ideological factors getting in its way,” he said.

“But Lee now faces criticism for failing to do so and being rather stuck in the ideological frame (regarding his diplomacy).”

Pointing to current awkward ties with the ruling Saenuri Party, political analysts said that Lee lacked political finesse to smoothly deal with the political circles. They also cited little progress on efforts to gain parliamentary approval for several key policies such as the military reform plan as an example of his insufficient political ability.

Over the last four years, there has consistently been factional feuding between him and his political rivals in the ruling party. The party now seeks to distance itself from Lee, stepping up efforts to boost its chances ahead of major elections this year.

His personnel policy has also been denounced. Although he claims professionalism and experience are key factors in picking his ranking government officials, critics argue that his picks are mostly from his hometown, alma mater or his church.

Underscoring a vicious circle of high public expectations for a new president and then deep public disenchantment against the lame-duck president, Yoon of Hanshin University said that there should be a change in the state governing system.

“We, South Korea, have an emperor-style president on whom too much power is concentrated. So in the initial stage, the public has excessive expectations for the president, though he or she has limits in state governance. When he or she fails to live up to them, the expectations are quickly converted into excessive disappointments,” he said.

“I am apprehensive that the interval between excessive expectations and excessive disappointments gets shorter and shorter. As part of efforts to address it, the president can share his authority with the prime minister and delegate part of his authority to local governments.”

By Song Sang-ho (sshluck@heraldcorp.com)