President Lee's Beef Blunder
by Junn Sung-chull
Posted July 11, 2008
Americans must be baffled to see hundreds of thousands of protestors continuing to wave candles on the streets of Seoul even after the recent “Supplementary Agreement” between the U.S. and South Korea supposedly eliminated the potential for Koreans’ exposure to mad cow disease. Some analysts attribute the protests to liberal elements in South Korea trying to oppose and weaken the new conservative government. Others attribute it to anti-American sentiment still simmering in Korea. I must respectfully disagree with both of these opinions.
The turmoil stems mainly from a crisis of trust on the part of many Koreans in the regime of President Lee Myung-bak. Why are Koreans so angry at President Lee? When he announced last April that Korea agreed to re-allow American beef into the Korean market, Koreans simply could not understand (1) why President Lee so hastily concluded the agreement, just a few hours before a scheduled meeting with President Bush; (2) why Korea, unlike Japan, has to allow imports of American beef cows of 30 months and older which are more susceptible to mad-cow disease; and (3) why Korea abdicated its sovereign power to unilaterally take preventive measures should a case of a mad-cow disease occur in America.
Many Koreans, frankly, felt President Lee had sold out their interests to the Americans and as such their national pride was compromised, to say nothing of the national health interest. They demanded explanations. But the Lee government failed to provide persuasive and timely answers to these legitimate questions. Critically, President Lee made the mistake of not seeing the issue as a matter of national pride but merely as a question of science and statistics, arguing that the chances of a mad-cow case in the United States are so low that Koreans shouldn’t worry.
Frustrated by the government’s misplaced response, Koreans began to ask the fundamental question of whether the Lee government was to be trusted at all. The crisis deepened. In a matter of weeks, Mr. Lee’s approval rating plummeted to below 20%, a state of virtual political bankruptcy.
As June started, hundreds of thousands of Koreans took to the street to protest. They demanded “renegotiation” of the beef agreement with the U.S., they wanted, among other things, to establish an import ban on American beef from cows of 30 months or older and to secure other unilateral rights to take preventive measures. To many Koreans the word “renegotiation” became a symbol of healing he wounds in their national pride.
Baffled and embarrassed, the Lee government rushed to renegotiate the Beef Agreement with the U.S. The officials of both countries succeeded through a seven-day marathon negotiation to produce a set of agreements that addressed, pretty effectively, the concerns of the Korean people.
President Lee, however, made the mistake of calling this process a “supplementary negotiation” with the U.S. rather than a “renegotiation”—a problem of semantics but a problem nonetheless. The Korean people had demanded a “renegotiation” and by calling it a “supplementary” negotiation Mr. Lee appeared to be kowtowing to the Americans.
After the “Supplemental Agreement” had been reached, the Lee government made another critical mistake by not giving the people the time they needed to come to terms with the deal before it was enacted. Within just a few days, the Lee administration—denying the people so decisively an opportunity to appreciate the impact of the deal on their national pride—rushed to officially open up the Korean market to American beef, which began to appear in markets almost immediately.
This move infuriated many Koreans, who began to feel that their president was unquestionably indifferent and insensitive to the feelings of the people. This is why the candle light persists in Korea and why Koreans continue to chant “Renegotiate the Beef Agreement.” A recent poll shows that close to 30% of the Korean people still support the continuation of the candle-light demonstrations.
As recently as a few days ago, President Lee made another big mistake by limiting the size of his cabinet reshuffle to just three ministers. This has been widely criticized by even senior members of Mr. Lee’s own party as contrary to the expectation of the Korean people.
True, there are elements of anti-Americanism inflaming the protests. True, liberal parties are trying to take advantage of the turmoil. But the main problem here and why the protests continue is the bumbling and outrageous insensitivity, tantamount to arrogance, of the Lee government. Clearly, anti-American sentiment and a fringe progressive movement do not explain why tens of thousands of people, many of whom are religious leaders and mothers strolling baby carts, march the streets night after night waving candles. They feel slighted and trampled down by their leaders.
America, as an interested party in Korean affairs with strong defense and trade ties, should understand what is really happening in Korea—especially with regard to the sensitivity and pride of the Korean people. Rash and uninformed actions would not be in the interests of either country.
Mr. Junn Sung-chull is CEO and chairman of the Institute of Global Management in Seoul.
