[Editorial] Stopgap Measures by Government

The Cabinet reshuffle undertaken by President Lee Myung-bak yesterday greatly disappointed the nation. Many expected his administration to start afresh after resolving the current crisis and to rebuild a strong human platform which will assist the president in keeping what he promised to the public at the time of his inauguration. However, the reshuffle is generally viewed as a "stopgap measure” despite long contemplation. It seemed like dismissing three ministers was enough for the president even though the administration’s failure, which caused the prime minister and 15 ministers to submit resignation en masse, has yet to be addressed. It is simply far from an appointment that caters to the needs of the public like President Lee once promised.

The crisis has been exacerbated by the administration’s spineless approach to the allegation that “U.S. beef is contaminated with mad cow disease.” Instead of actively convincing the public that the allegation was a result of instigation based on groundless facts, the administration seemed intimidated by the candlelight protesters, thereby exposing its indecisiveness. It should have responded firmly to the “mad cow disease scare” even if it meant owning up to its mistakes in the negotiation and running into harsh public criticisms. Instead of committing itself to protecting the rule of law in the face of violent and illegal protests that paralyzed the capital city for more than two months, self-preservation seemed like higher priority to the government, which made the historic power transition completely useless.

The government remained silent when candlelight prevailed on the street, but never failed to seize the opportunity to present ineffective discourse when the protests softened. Who protected the nation from being “burnt to ruin” by candlelight protests and stopped their march towards Cheong Wa Dae? The majority of the people, conscientious social groups and mainstream press who did not want to see the nation adrift saved the government from its complete destruction.

In contrast, what did the administration do while the very survival of small business owners and citizens were under threat at the heart of the nation? If the president and his administration showed an unswerving resolve to protect free democracy and the market economy from illegal protests, it would have at least prevented religious leaders from taking to the street.

Although the nation gave the president an indecisive victory with the hope that he can restore free democracy, the market economy and the rule of law, he failed to show decisive leadership when his administration was driven into a corner after making a series of mistakes in the Cabinet appointment, party nomination of parliamentary candidates and negotiations with the United States. When it gained some room, it gave the strong impression of an administration only interested in self-preservation through implementing makeshift measures. All the public asked for in the reshuffle was to show a new vision and a system in leading the nation in the next five years after undergoing serious soul-searching. Judging from where things stand at the moment, there seems to be no hope for this administration, which utterly failed to lift the spirits of its disappointed and devastated people.