Saenuri reignites THAAD controversy

Latching on to the drastically pro-U.S. sentiment here in the wake of last week’s knife attack on the top U.S. envoy, the ruling Saenuri Party is bringing sensitive security issues to the fore, namely the highly tricky debate over a possible U.S. deployment of an advanced missile defense system in Korea.

The party seeks to discuss the issues of the U.S.’ Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense system and the enactment of antiterrorism acts at a trilateral meeting of officials from the party, the government and Cheong Wa Dae, on Sunday. It also plans to hold a general policy meeting of its lawmakers on the issues by the end of the month.

Through such publicized discussions, the party appears to be seeking to strengthen its conservative policy platforms ahead of the by-elections on April 29, although the issues have lost traction amid a partisan dispute and the government’s cautious stance, observers said.

“The THAAD system is a matter of national survival ― an issue about how we can fend off North Korea’s nuclear attacks and which path we should take as we are put between the U.S. and China,” said the party’s floor leader Rep. Yoo Seong-min during the Supreme Council meeting on Monday.

“As a floor leader, I have the responsibility to gather party members’ opinions on the issue. Through free discussions on the important issue at a general policy meeting later this month, I will seek to forge the party’s consensus.”

The main opposition New Politics Alliance for Democracy, meanwhile, denounced the Saenuri Party for taking the attack on U.S. Ambassador Mark Lippert as a political opportunity.

“(Despite the Defense Ministry’s repeated denial of a deployment), it is incredibly inappropriate for any political party to take the lead in arguing for a deployment of a certain weapons system,” said Rep. Baek Kun-ki.

“It is deplorable that the ruling party is moving to (politically) take advantage of the attack on U.S. Ambassador Mark Lippert,” he said.

Saenuri officials insisted that their discussions over the THAAD issue will strictly be from the standpoint of national security. They also accused its rival NPAD of “acting as if it spoke for China and North Korea.”

The U.S., a core security ally of South Korea, has expressed its wish to bring THAAD to Korea to better counter the North’s escalating missile threats. But Beijing, Seoul’s crucial partner for trade, tourism and efforts to denuclearize the North, believes THAAD could potentially target it ― the reason why Seoul remains cautious about the deployment of THAAD.

Seoul has said that THAAD would help better defend its country. But it has said that it will not introduce the system here, and that it would develop its own low-tier multiple-interception missile defense system.

“Seoul’s Defense Ministry has no plans to purchase THAAD interceptors,” ministry spokesman Kim Min-seok told reporters. “We will build our independent ballistic missile defense mechanism by developing L-SAM (long-range surface-to-air missile) and M-SAM (mid-range surface-to-air missile).”

Some observers said that the ruling party’s support for THAAD could complicate the Seoul government’s strategic calibration of security interests, and trigger concerns that politicians would meddle too much in crucial defense affairs.

On the back of growing public angst against terrorism in Korea, the ruling party is also pushing for three antiterrorism bills that it has submitted.

“It is crucial that we create an impression that the Republic of Korea is a country where it is fundamentally impossible for terrorism to occur,” Saenuri Party leader Kim Moo-sung said at a party meeting. “Time is ripe for us to enact the antiterrorism laws.”

Efforts to enact antiterrorism laws began in 2001. But the legislative efforts have been stymied by partisan wrangling. The opposition parties have underscored that in the process of enforcing the acts, executive power could be abused and human rights could be infringed upon.

By Song Sang-ho ()