President Park Geun-hye’s Tuesday address at the National Assembly was filled with moments that showcased the conservative leader’s relentless conviction to push her agenda, a move that was met with bitter response from opposition lawmakers.

The president devoted most of her 30-minute speech to making the case that South Korea must be united against North Korea’s increased security threat following its nuclear test and rocket launch, which Seoul and its allies view as a disguised test for ballistic missile.

By the end of her remarks, Park shifted gears and made a passionate plea to lawmakers that they should swiftly pass contentious pending bills designed to relax business regulations in the service industry and overhaul the labor market.

“This is the people’s tears, their cries for us to come together as one to overcome the crisis facing our nation,” said Park, citing the business-led petition campaign to pressure the Assembly to enact the bills.

The most frequent words to appear during her address were “North Korea” and “we (or us)” She used these words 54 and 50 times respectively. She also mentioned the possibility of North Korea’s demise for the first time. On the other hand, she barely used words or phrases with pacifist connotations. For instance, she used the word “engagement” only once and “dialogue” was not used at all.

Park’s speech incurred mixed responses from both sides of the aisle.

While the ruling Saenuri Party’s lawmakers welcomed her with a standing ovation and gave loud applause to her remarks. Opposition liberal parties, The Minjoo Party of Korea and People’s Party, were reluctant to exhibit supportive gestures. 

The divided atmosphere was vivid when Park lashed out at the previous liberal administrations’ efforts to engage with the communist regime via economic cooperation.  The late Kim-Dae Jung and Roh-Moo-hyun administrations had provided the North with food and financial aid to boost inter-Korea relations.

Some opposition lawmakers looked at their smartphones or even let out sighs, when Park said, “We should not succumb to the North’s pressure and end up providing loads of money to it.” Those from the Saenuri Party, on the other hand, applauded.

“I think it was a great speech,” the Saenuri Party leader Kim Moo-sung said after the event. “What the president said today was basically what we had wanted to talk about. She has done a great job of delivering the message to the people in a compelling manner,” said Kim.

The Minjoo Party, however, described the speech as a “disappointment.” The main opposition party’s spokesman Rep. Kim Sung-soo said in a statement that the president failed to spell out the reasons why she decided to shut down the cross-border industrial complex.

Kim went on to argue that the failure to specify the reasons is tantamount to tacit acknowledgement that her administration had violated the United Nation’s resolution, which bans its members from helping fund the North’s nuclear and missile programs.

Since South Korea decided to suspend operations at Gaesong Compex, whose earnings the government said had been funneled into the widely-condemned weapon program, lawmakers urged the government to clarify the link and that not doing so would constitute violation of the UN resolution.  

Some experts said the speech could have been designed better to convince people that they should endorse her hardline initiative towards the North and constant efforts to enact economy bills. 

“Park should have focused solely on the national security issue,” said Yoon Pyung-joong, a political philosophy professor at Hanshin University, referring to how one-fifth of her speech was devoted to swift passage of pending bills.

“I think we are in a national crisis. Park, as a leader, should have reassured the people and laid out a solution to tackle the crisis. She could have made her message succinct and brief, so that people would rally behind her efforts to overcome the crisis,” he said. 

Yoon Sung-yi, politics professor of Kyung Hee University agreed. 

“Considering the speech at the Assembly is conducted in a limited time frame, it is unlikely for her to make her case and communicate with the people. She should have set up a press briefing to tell the people why she made such decisions,” Yoon said. 

By Yeo Jun-suk (jasonyeo@heraldcorp.com)