Uri Party Defectors Divided By Diplomacy and Security Issues

The 23 Uri Party lawmakers who defected the party on February 6 said, “We are free from the far leftists and rightists within the party.” This remark indicates that they will no longer be in conflict with the same party members as the Uri Party became divided between “progressives and pragmatists” over the past three years.

Indeed, they were categorized as moderates among Uri Party lawmakers. Most of the members who withdrew from the party are neither those involved in democratic movements in the 1980s nor pro-President Roh members. They were mostly public officials, scholars, or experts before entering politics. It seems like it will be difficult for them to accomplish a political integrative organization that will eventually lead to a floor negotiation group, and finally a new integrated party, however. When we look at the statements made by each defecting legislator in the past, it is not difficult to notice that some of them have voiced opposing opinions.

Foreign relations and security policies may cause discord-

There are different opinions in foreign diplomacy and security policies, rather than economic ones. Former Uri floor leader Kang Bong-kyun, who led the mass withdrawal, said, “Our aid to North Korea should be phased in accordance with its reform and opening efforts.” When the North tested nuclear missiles last year, he insisted that Korea expand its participation in the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI).

On the other hand, among the defectors, lawmakers Lee Kang-rae, Kim Nak-soon, Ro Hyun-song, Woo Yun-keun, Woo Jae-hang, and Joo Seung-yong signed a statement protesting the expansion of PSI participation, urging a dialogue between North Korea and the United States.

Among those members, Choi Yong-gyu, Roh Ung-rae, Jang Kyung-soo, and Joo Seung-yong were strongly against Japan’s efforts to pass a resolution imposing sanctions against North Korea, saying, “The proposed resolution is likely to destroy the six-party talks, and will take a toll on the inter-Korean economic cooperation.” Particularly, Joo Seung-yong said in last September’s National Assembly Conference for Countermeasures against the North’s Nuclear Weapons, “Negotiation is the only path toward resolving the nuclear crisis successfully, and further sanctions against the North will be a serious blunder.”

When the issue of abolishing the National Security Law was at the forefront in 2004, lawmakers Roh Ung-rae, Jeon Byung-hun, Woo Yoon-keun, Roh Hyun-song, and Jang Kyung-soo protested at the plenary session room in the National Assembly and demanded the abolition of the law within that year.

At that time, one of those defectors, Park Sang-don, posted his opinion titled, “Thoughts of members of Angaemo (a stable reform movement group),” saying, “We should carefully review the counterproductive after-effects of the National Security Law abolition. The public will consider a reform-first and persuasion-later attitude inappropriate,” criticizing those pushing for the immediate abolition of the law. Besides Park Sang-don, legislators, including Cho Bae-sook, Byun Jae-il, Seo Jae-gwan, and Woo Jae-hang belong to the Angaemo.

Some of the defectors including lawmaker Lee Jong-geol are in the pro-Chun Jung-bae group-

Three former Uri Party members, Lee Jong-geol, Woo Yun-geun, and Jae Jong-gil are progressive pro-Chung Jung-bae members. They decided to create a “group for public-welfare politics” on February 7 and will take the same political line.

Unlike the former floor leader Kang, they insist that the nation needs a redistribution-oriented policy. Lawmakers Lee Jong-geol and Woo Yun-geun proposed the disclosure of apartment construction prices and public development of community lands, taking offense with Kang.

Some of the defectors are classified as moderates only because they are not assertive. Kang said, “Even we do not know who we are,” and he added, “We should be together as we agree 70 percent and disagree only 30 percent.”

tesomiom@donga.com