But experts predict ideological division over N.K. issues may lessen due to youth indifference


Ideological conflict last year over a series of issues including North Korea has raised the question of whether it is a sign of South Korea’s vibrant democracy or just deepening social and political division.

A parliamentary melee over the ratification of the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement in November had made many wonder whether the National Assembly is a place for settling or amplifying conflicts.

The latest issue to split the public was whether to send a government delegation to Pyongyang to mourn the death of its leader Kim Jong-il.

Experts note that the North is one of the reasons the South gets easily mired in “unproductive” conflicts ― which Pyongyang apparently seeks to foster to gain concessions from Seoul.

“North Korean issues remain the backdrop of Korea’s modern history. After we experienced the (1950-53) Korean War, there are many issues that have yet to be addressed. They have been expanded into intractable ideological issues,” said Yoon Pyung-joong, political philosophy professor at Hanshin University.

“Through intensive debates over them, we should reach some sort of agreement. If we fail, we have to leave them behind and move on. We should turn such debates into momentum for social development, but such cases are very rare.”

Pointing to the recent conflict over the mourning delegation, experts said that it was less intense compared to the mourning issue when North Korea’s founder Kim Il-sung died in 1994.

They said that as time goes by, division over North Korean issues will lessen as many young people here pay less attention to them and instead focus on more practical and productive matters.

“Behind many of the social, political conflicts is North Korea. They are also affected by the past Cold War-era logic and how we look at the North,” said Kang Won-taek, political science professor at Seoul National University.

“However, these conflicts have decreased recently. Young generations who have lived in a democratic society, a post-Cold War era and good economic conditions have different thoughts. They are also living at a time when an ideological rivalry with the North is meaningless (as the South has won).”

Yoon echoed Kang’s view.

“It is clear now who is the winner in the rivalry between the two Koreas. The abject reality in the North is widely known through the news reports about the increasing number of North Korean defectors. There is no fantasy about the communist society,” he said.

“The North Korean authorities still want to shake the South (by creating division), but South Korean society is no longer rattled. I understand that North Korean issues will not have any definitive impact here any more.”

People here have called conflict concerning the communist state the “South-South” conflict, which experts have warned could undermine endeavors to enhance social cohesion and advancement.

Paik Hak-soon, senior fellow at the Sejong Institute, said that the president’s view of history and adoption of a policy toward the North that is “in line with the times” are crucial to ease “South-South” conflict.

“What is crucial is how the national leader and his aides understand history and what the times call for. They also should understand and be concerned about the possible ramifications of their interpretation of history,” he said.

“Each administration has taken different policies, some of which were successful in easing the conflict while others resulted in intense ideological disputes. The leader’s role is of a great importance in conflict management.”

While saying conflicts in a democracy can be signs of its vibrancy, experts said that South Koreans have to create a more “mature environment” for smoother conflict management.

“Our society is not accustomed to conflict management. It is natural that people have different views in a democracy. But what matters is how to address it through democratic procedures,” said Lee Woo-young, professor at the University of North Korean studies.

“We need to implement a more systematic education on conflict settlement. We also need to secure a venue for communication and the right attitude to acknowledge and understand different views.”

Emphasizing that society without conflict is “dead,” Yoon of Hanshin University said that members of any democratic society should abide by its rules on conflict settlement.

“Our society has conflict settlement methods such as the rule of majority, which, of course, is not always the best option. But we should follow socially accepted rules and make efforts to find common ground with others with different views.”

By Song Sang-ho (sshluck@heraldcorp.com)