[Opinion]

In a society that is so inclined toward success like Korea, becoming a government minister is a sign of societal respect, renown, and fame. The right to govern entrusted to him indicates that the public acknowledges his abilities and character. Hence, around the time of Cabinet reshuffling, countless people hang on to their phones and wait impatiently for the `heavenly will` to bless them while gossip about who may be chosen fill the living rooms.

This trend, however, seems to have gone through a major change since the current administration came to power. The January 29 Cabinet reshuffling drew much criticism in the press for several days but gradually quieted down. This is because some feel that it is useless to make a fuss about the President`s personnel decisions or that making reforms at the end of the term has its limits. In any case, the value of the minister position has fallen drastically since the present administration came to power because of the incessant Cabinet reshuffling.

The pride of becoming a minister is for a fleeting moment. Soon it becomes difficult to take care of oneself in the chain of scandals, and one may be fated to be dismissed in the name of personnel censure and government reform.

To speak metaphorically, a minister post has the same weight as the royal minister of the Choson dynasty. In the past, if one were not the most talented, most knowledgeable, and most determined, it was not possible to be appointed in the most powerful post in the royal government. Since the post of royal minister was life-long, it was difficult to get rid of the king`s subjects who bothered him with honest counsel and appeals. He valued the principles of Confucian political philosophy more than appearance of power. Although it is not a direct analogy, the situation back then was so different from now when the minister faces a greater risk of being dismissed if he cannot read the President`s will. In a democracy which all the more requires progressive and free speech, the degradation of the minister may signal the fall of political leadership. It is understandable that there would be people who positively refuses to become a minister.

The amusing thing is that the short lifespan of the minister has become worse under a democratic administration than an authoritarian government. According to one survey, the average term of a minister under Chun Doo-Hwan was 18.3 months and 13.7 months under Roh Tae-Woo. In contrast, it was 11.6 months under Kim Young-Sam and not even 10 months under Kim Dae-Jung. In the last four years, the ministers in education, maritime affairs, and justice department changed 6 times, 4 times in finance and economy, 7 times in policy planning, and six times in political affairs. Two or more people were cut immediately after appointment. They probably felt like they bungie jumped from the cliff of honor and disgrace.

Here, the absence of principles in personnel matters gets worse. The new Cabinet reshuffling was like a bucket of cold water thrown on the people who had expected the reform of an administration marred by scandals. The stubborn solicitude for people like Park Ji-Won is quite a contrast to other people who were used like disposable items. Anyways, the fact that there has been so many reshuffling shows that the personnel around the President and the administration have been extremely disorganized. Officials must have wasted a lot of time on reviewing the new ministers while Cabinet members must have tried their hardest to read the President`s mind.

There are many explanations about why the span of the ministers` term in office is so short and why personnel matters have no apparent logic to them under a democratic administration. One says it has to do with the President`s `psychological panic` another says that it is the President`s endless mistrust of his Cabinet members. Perhaps it just was not so easy to find someone who had the same high level of intelligence as the President.

The thing that concerns us more is the wide gap between the will to reform and the ability of the administration to do so. Even if the will is strong, it is easy for a minority administration which lacks the ability to carry out the reforms to leave reform policies to float and make repeated mistakes. The anxious desire to make a breakthrough makes the ruler thirst for more new personnel. The more frequent the change, the less consistency there is, and the words of the minister have no weight. The royal minister who formerly protected the principles and logic of government has now turned into a shield who defends government reform and appeases the press.

It may not be a bad thing, after all, for persons in the political, academic, and financial worlds who seek high government positions to coil away from an administration that is desperate enough to complete its reform policies by changing the ministers as many times as possible. There may be those who still feel that it is `family honor` or an `immeasurable grace from the ruler` it may be better to stay away from the phones when there is a Cabinet reshuffling and turn down the offer with dignity when there is a summons. A time when one needs to learn how `not to become a minister` is a sad thing.

Song Ho-Keun (Seoul National University, Professor of Sociology)