Mission
Statement |
A Vote for Anti-Americanism? Katharine
H.S. Moon December 19, 2002 With the second victory in five years of a former democracy activist and political liberal, the South Korean progressives can rest assured that the first time they tasted power will not be the last. In the short-term, they will put forth a united front for the sake of solidarity and political coherence. They will want to help foster the image of Roh as presidentially capable, especially in foreign policy and national security, areas in which he does not have experience. By contrast, had Lee been elected, activist pressures would have breathed heavily down his neck. Critics of the U.S.-Korea relationship would have scrutinized his every action and inaction regarding the U.S. Even small gestures of conciliation or agreement with Washington might have been read as grand concessions. He would have had no breathing space. And his noted lack of charisma and loyal personal following would have deprived him of political insurance. But progressives in Korea will not rest easy with Roh or give him a free ride. Korean politics is a rough and tumble arena in which patience is not a virtue. His administration will have to clarify very soon exactly where to draw the line between policy issues and political sentiment. With respect to North Korea, to what extent and in what manner will South Korea pursue an independent approach toward the North? And how will the government measure progress? More important, how will the government define progress to the Korean public? One of the shortcomings of President Kim Dae Jung's "sunshine policy" has been to raise the public's expectations about improved relations with the North without ways to assess whether those expectations are being met. This in turn raised hopes among progressives for big change in peninsular relations and the security relationship with the U.S. But over time, they too grew disappointed because without specific improvements that the public could agree upon, their own activism fell hostage to the process itself. For example, in interviews I conducted last spring in Seoul, progressive activists near the U.S. bases pointed out that if South-North relations have been improving, then it is logical to expect the government to consider alternative economic development plans for those Koreans who are dependent on the U.S. bases for commerce and livelihood. And more broadly, it is logical for Koreans to expect some change in the size and role of the U.S. military. Simply put, it doesn't make sense for the government to assume great change is taking place with the North while pretending everything within the South, including its ties to the U.S., stays the same. But that is what has happened, and the DJ government lost credibility with many of its progressive supporters because of promised change along the DMZ but silence regarding the future role and shape of the U.S. military. So, they took matters into their own hands and transformed official silence into public demonstrations. The new president must be clearer about what the public might expect from engagement with the North and how that will relate to South Korean-U.S. ties. Public discourse in a democracy needs to be vibrant, but it also needs policy parameters. Similarly, how will the new administration measure improvements with the U.S.? Here, Roh wants to have his cake and eat it too: improve relations with his public by pursuing more "equal" relations with the U.S. and improve relations with the Bush administration. His success in both areas will depend significantly on how fast America catches up with democracy in Korea. Korean civil society speaks loudly and carries a big stick. It is famous among NGO circles in Asia for its capacity to seize an issue, mobilize support, frame its rhetoric through the media and internet, and challenge the "big guns" (previously Korean authoritarian regimes and now the U.S. military). It is self-consciously exercising the rights they had fought for and the freedoms that they had admired as American. Korean "anti-American" protesters today resemble the 1960s generation in America that challenged U.S. hegemony in Asia and asserted itself into the halls of Congress and the ballot box of presidential elections. They also gave birth to many of the rights-based organizations and government watchdog groups that test the robustness of our democracy and government accountability to its citizens. Regarding South Koreans as democrats first and allies second and forgoing the easy label of anti-American is a prerequisite to more equal relations and stronger ties that endure. |
