[Public Opinion Briefing Vol. 55-1] Summary: Korean Political Leadership Faces a Triple Crisis

[Public Opinion Briefing Vol. 55] Survey on the Trust and Influence of Powerful Political Leaders and Public Opinion on Constitutional Amendment

1. Summary: Korean Political Leadership in Crisis: A Survey of Trust and Influence

2. Basic Analysis 1: Analysis of the Korean Leadership Landscape in 2009

3. Basic Analysis 2: Public Desire for Constitutional Amendment to Ensure Balance and Stability Over National Governance Efficiency

Survey on the Trust and Influence of Ten Powerful Politicians: Absence of Leadership Leads to Chronic Political Instability

Influence: Lee Myung-bak ranked 1st > Park Geun-hye ranked 2nd > Kim Dae-jung ranked 3rd > Chung Sye-kyun ranked 4th

Trust: Park Geun-hye ranked 1st > Kim Dae-jung ranked 2nd > Lee Myung-bak ranked 3rd > Yoo Si-min ranked 4th

The three most influential politicians in the current political climate are President Lee Myung-bak, former Grand National Party leader Park Geun-hye, and former President Kim Dae-jung, in that order. In terms of trust, former leader Park Geun-hye and former President Kim ranked first and second, respectively, with consistent support nationwide, followed by President Lee. Among those at the center of the political turmoil following the death of former President Roh Moo-hyun, Democratic Party leader Chung Sye-kyun and former Minister Yoo Si-min, National Assembly Speaker Kim Hyong-o, and Grand National Party leader Park Hee-tae, their fortunes varied. Former Minister Yoo, despite low influence, surged to fourth place in trust, while Party leader Chung ranked fourth in influence and fifth in trust, securing a position after the top three. Conversely, Speaker Kim and leader Park Hee-tae fell to the bottom ranks in trust.

This is the result of a survey conducted jointly by JoongAng Sunday, the East Asia Institute (EAI, Director: Lee Sook-jong), and Korea Research on July 25th, targeting 800 adults nationwide aged 19 and over. The survey asked respondents to rate the influence and trust of ten prominent politicians on a scale of 0 (not at all) to 10 (very high). A score closer to 10 indicates higher influence or trust. Although ten of Korea's most prominent politicians were surveyed, the average influence score was 4.3 out of 10, and the average trust score was 3.7, both failing grades.

The results of this survey clearly indicate a crisis in Korean political leadership. First, there is a crisis of legitimacy. The leaders who wielded the strongest influence, including the President, the National Assembly, and the ruling party, showed lower trust relative to their influence. President Lee Myung-bak ranked first in influence with 6.15 points, but only third in trust with 4.27 points. This is a concerning outcome, as lower trust relative to influence weakens the legitimacy of power. It foreshadows difficulties for the President in leading the political agenda going forward. National Assembly Speaker Kim Hyong-o and Grand National Party leader Park Hee-tae, who ranked fifth (4.02 points) and sixth (4.01 points) in influence, respectively, ranked eighth (3.38 points) and tenth (3.18 points) in trust.

Second, there is a crisis of institutionalization. The fact that politicians not currently in office wield significant influence compared to official party representatives reveals a reality of regressive backroom politics at play. Former leader Park Geun-hye and former President Kim Dae-jung received relatively high scores in both influence and trust. Former leader Park ranked second in influence with 5.61 points but first in trust with 5.01 points. She ranked first in trust across the Seoul, Incheon, Chungcheong, and Yeongnam regions, and fifth in Honam. Across age groups, she received consistent trust from those in their 20s and 30s, as well as those in their 40s and 50s and older. Despite health issues and not holding office, former President Kim Dae-jung ranked third in influence with 4.87 points and second in trust with 4.74 points. His strong influence and trust, comparable to current politicians, suggest he is expected to exert significant influence in the future realignment of the opposition and in the next presidential race. This appears to be the result of opposition supporters focusing their expectations on him following the passing of former President Roh Moo-hyun, a key figure in the opposition.

Third, there is a crisis of stability. Similar to previous administrations, the leadership of the ruling party in the current government is continuously subject to distrust, and power shifts to the opposition. A survey in 2007 also showed low trust in the ruling party politicians of that time, with conservative politicians ranking high in trust. However, after the change of government, the current ruling conservative leaders are experiencing declining trust, while trust in opposition leaders has sharply increased. The rise of former President Kim Dae-jung from fourth in trust in 2007 to second, and former Minister Yoo Si-min from last place to fourth, are prime examples.

Ultimately, the crisis in Korean political leadership stems from the scarcity of leaders who wield strong influence while also earning public trust. Consequently, extreme confrontation between ruling and opposition parties has become commonplace in Korean politics, and public distrust is deeper than ever. However, there are few leaders with the courage and ability to resolve this situation, leading to a persistent stalemate. For Korean politics to offer hope to the public and demonstrate productive leadership, there must be an increase in leaders who possess political power and inspire public confidence.

Public Desire for Constitutional Amendment to Ensure Balance and Stability Over National Governance Efficiency

Discussions about constitutional amendment have been steadily emerging recently within political and academic circles. However, considering that constitutional amendment is ultimately decided through a national referendum, it is necessary to understand the extent to which the public truly feels the issue of constitutional amendment and what values and interests they seek to realize through it.

First, regarding public interest in constitutional amendment, six out of ten Koreans (59.8%) responded that they are interested in the issue of constitutional amendment (17.1% very interested, 42.8% generally interested). Given the significant political and social events such as the death of former President Roh Moo-hyun, the dispute over the irregular employment law, the struggles over the media legislation, and the SsangYong Motor incident, this indicates considerable public interest.

In terms of preferred power structures, the most common response was for a system of power-sharing, where the president handles foreign affairs and the legislature handles domestic affairs, with 45.2% support. In contrast, a pure presidential system concentrating responsibility and authority in the president received 17.3% support, and a parliamentary cabinet system concentrating responsibility and authority in the legislature received 26.4% support. This indicates that a majority of the public prefers a system that balances presidential and legislative power for stability, rather than a pure presidential system with excessive concentration of power. Even if the presidential system is maintained, the public showed a greater preference for a four-year term with the possibility of re-election (35.5%) over the current five-year single term (30.2%). Support for a four-year presidential-vice presidential system was 19.2%, and a five-year single-term presidential-vice presidential system was only 9.0%, indicating a negative view towards establishing a vice presidency.

When asked about the reasons for their preferred power structures, the most important goals and values the public seeks to achieve through constitutional amendment were 'stable national governance' and 'reflection of public will.' Among those who preferred the most common system of power-sharing, 50.5% cited the possibility of stable national governance as their reason, and 23.5% cited the effective reflection of public will. In contrast, only 19.4% cited national integration, and 3.3% cited the possibility of strong leadership. Among those who preferred a pure parliamentary cabinet system, 36.2% cited 'national stability,' and 35.0% cited that the cabinet system better represents public will. 'National integration' accounted for 17.7%, and emphasis on 'strong leadership' was 7.3%. Among those who preferred a pure presidential system, the most common reason cited was the possibility of exercising strong leadership (42.0%), but the proportion citing stable national governance was also significant at 37.5%.