[Editorial] Confused “Confidence Nation” Should be Back on Track

A report said President Roh Moo-hyun will make individual meetings with four major party leaders as soon as he returns from the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit on October 24. We hope by all means that these individual talks will bring a breakthrough in such disordered situation. “Disputes on confidence” which is still vague in its purpose and feasibility will make citizens worn out.

Before the dialogues, the president should make his position clear in advance. When President Roh said before his departure, “Confidence referendum issue will be settled in political way,” this remark seemed to withdraw the national referendum and therefore, the Blue House had to declare that there is no change in the national referendum plan. President Roh also stressed that the dialogues with four major party leaders will be an opportunity to persuade them into the public vote. If this is what the president is really thinking, then successful meetings would be far from our expectation.

President Roh must start with a clean slate from the beginning and handle this problem. At this point, it is necessary for the four major leaders to share their opinions with modesty on issues such as: whether it is timely for confidence vote now, will the nation’s burdens be dissolved by the national referendum, is there another solution, and so forth.

It is time the majority opposition Grand National Party (GNP) should also have its clear stance. Although claiming for “Choi Do-sul’s scandal comes first, national referendum comes next,” the citizens are so complicated whether they really want a national vote or not. GNP urged that it will involve an Assembly audit or special prosecution in case of poor investigation on Choi’s scandal. Actually, GNP has power to do that as a majority party. If that is so, the national referendum issue must not be linked to Choi’s scandal, but rather be settled independently.

The New Party for Participatory Union, who shifted from negative to positive, must ponder on the essential part in advance. If the party takes itself as “the moral ruling party,” it has to be concerned about the aftermath of the national vote. It is no big difference to the Millennium Democratic Party (MDP) and United Liberal Democrats (ULD). It is absolutely necessary not to make the dialogues between the president and the four party leaders’ fruitless and repeated disputes ongoing.