[Editorial] Regretting Prime Minister Lee’s Interpretation of History

Prime Minister Lee Hae-chan mentioned Dong-A Ilbo again at the National Assembly yesterday. He confirmed that his remark he made 10 days ago in Berlin, describing “Chosun Ilbo and Dong-A Ilbo as traitors of history,” was what he has been thinking intimately. “Dong-A Ilbo fired many of its reporters who advocated freedom of press in 1974 during the Revitalization Reform and has not yet restored them. It is treason against history,” he said.

It is regretful to see such poor understanding from a prime minister of a country. In the Revitalization Reform era, Dong-A Ilbo resisted the dictatorship despite unprecedented oppression done through limiting advertisements. During this resistance period, some reporters had to be fired. It was a sad and unfortunate decision Dong-A Ilbo had to make due to the difference in opinion over how to resist, although the principle, resistance to press oppression, was same.

Nonetheless, it did not mean Dong-A, as a free and independent member of the news media, dulled its criticism. It has criticized and countered political power hard under whatever regime it was at the time. Such spirit became the initial explosive of the Great Democratic Struggle of June 1987 and is still alive. Is this “treason to history?” Then, under the same logic, what can the prime minister say back to an opposition party lawmaker’s accusation against him, saying “Prime Minister Lee, who was the Education minister under the former Prime Minister Kim Jong-phil, a self-claimed main figure of the Revitalization Reform, is a real traitor.”

A prime minister of a country should see history with a more comprehensive and critical eye. Prime Minister Lee, who claimed to have spent his youth struggling through a rough political sea, is making blunt talk without historical understanding of the situation back then. It is just another violent attack made under the protection of the current political power. He should be aware that such behavior is degrading not only the Cabinet he is leading, but also the government he is serving. It is doubtful if our country is in such a condition that the Prime Minister has free time to make an issue out of such matters in the past. Some criticizing voices are heard even from the ruling party.

Under any country and any type of government, there exist independent and critical press media. If the government is really democratic, it should allow criticism and listen to it. It should not blame the press for its own misadministration. If the government doesn’t have such tolerance or confidence, it is not qualified to lead a country.