close
close

How to avoid another presidential failure

How to avoid another presidential failure

How to avoid another presidential failure

Cho Yoon-je
The author is a special professor at the Faculty of Economics, Yonsei University.

The dismissal of the incumbent president by the National Assembly was a necessary step, consistent with the Constitution. President Yoon Suk Yeol has proven himself clearly unfit to oversee national security and state governance. A new administration is expected to take shape next spring, as the Constitutional Court is unlikely to have difficulty validating impeachment based on obvious grounds.

However, we should not believe that our task is accomplished simply because the gross error of December 3 was corrected by the impeachment and removal of the president and the subsequent election of a new leader. Although Yoon’s perception of the situation and his actions were quite astounding, the latest bout of martial law should not be seen as an irrational act of an isolated individual. This reflects deeper systemic and cultural fissures within our political landscape. Like all major issues, this incident is a complex amalgam of individual shortcomings, structural flaws, and cultural challenges.

The recent series of dismaying events calls for a comprehensive and sober assessment of our political system. The first area of ​​scrutiny must be the process of selecting, evaluating and electing political leaders. How did someone with such fanatical and impulsive judgment, so clearly unfit for national leadership, end up being a presidential candidate for a dominant political party? How did he become president through a democratic election?

The second point of concern concerns our governance structure. Under the current system, the opposition can overwhelm the ruling party after each landslide electoral victory. How can we break out of this impasse, characterized by relentless partisanship and legislative paralysis, where the country’s two major elected powers continually use their authority as weapons against each other?

The third area is our political culture. Many other countries operate under similar systems, but few are plagued by extreme political rivalries, cycles of vengeful politics, and tragic presidential downfalls that seem uniquely rooted in our country. The enormous cost of the current upheaval will be unnecessary if political parties, and society as a whole, focus only on the immediate struggle for power without seriously thinking about these fundamental questions.

Democracy has always had its limits and vulnerabilities. Since the founding of our nation, we have witnessed time and time again the fragility of democratic institutions. To safeguard the fundamental values ​​of democracy, we need checks and balances in governance, a political culture rooted in compromise and restraint, a media committed to truth and intelligence, a vigilant citizenship and inclusive communitarianism. The absence of these essential elements has brought us to today’s worrying quagmire.

Although all of these problems cannot be solved at once, immediate systematic improvements are possible. The current crisis stems largely from the concentration of power in the hands of a single president, underscoring the need for a stronger separation of powers. However, this becomes unachievable when the executive and legislative branches are controlled by rival parties, creating the flashpoint that has led to the current disaster.

Dividing administrative authority between a president and a prime minister could lead to more conflict and stalemate, as domestic and foreign policies are increasingly intertwined in today’s interconnected world. Institutional reforms require a pragmatic approach rooted in an honest assessment of our history and social customs, rather than ideological preferences. For example, synchronizing presidential and legislative elections could reduce the likelihood of divided governance, while refining presidential powers through advisory and oversight bodies could ensure greater accountability.

Addressing political culture will be even more difficult. Korea’s democratic institutions were largely borrowed and implanted rather than domestically originated. Cycles of confrontation and revenge will not disappear with structural adjustments alone. Political parties must mature based on values ​​and visions that go beyond simple electoral victories and power grabs. Voters, in turn, must vote based on these values ​​rather than regional loyalties. Blind allegiance to regionalism distorts party priorities, shifting their focus from national welfare to narrow, selfish interests. The current decisive moment should be used to rejuvenate the National Assembly with younger leaders, less rooted in contentious practices, facilitated by party reforms.

Recent events have demonstrated the public’s willingness and commitment to defend democracy. Now is the time for politics to be elevated to the level of public standards. To prevent the next presidency – which could arrive two and a half years earlier than expected – from ending in another failure, candidates must present detailed timetables for constitutional reform aimed at overhauling the system of governance. They must also articulate clear visions and action plans to improve political culture. Only in this way can we turn today’s costly lessons into valuable opportunities for national progress, rather than letting them become gross waste.

Translation carried out by the Korea JoongAng Daily team.