In the wake of the government’s latest decision to deploy a disputed U.S. missile defense system here, Cheong Wa Dae has come under fire for failing to address questions and concerns.

Merely reiterating that the decision was one made for “self-defense,” Cheong Wa Dae on Monday continued to spurn mounting questions on the diplomatic impact of the deployment, Seoul’s plans or long-term vision to counter any geopolitical backlash, as well as relevant technical issues of the system’s location and expenses.

“The (forthcoming) deployment (of the Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense) is a self-defensive action to guard the nation’s security and the people’s lives and properties,” presidential spokesperson Jung Youn-kuk told reporters Monday.

His remark came in response to a question concerning recent protests from China and Russia who say that the far-reaching antimissile battery will infringe on their security interests.

In answer to all other related questions, Jung simply repeated the term “self-defense,” refusing to elaborate further on the Blue House’s stance.

The spokesman’s defensive tone was later echoed by President Park Geun-hye.

“As president, I have the duty to protect our people and nation, and will take every necessary measure so as to guard the people’s lives from North Korea’s threats,” Park said during a meeting with senior secretaries.

She also underlined that the defense-oriented THAAD will not infringe upon the security interests of any third country.

The state leader, however, sidestepped key questions raised mainly by the opposition and a rising number of civic groups, such as the disputed location of the deployment, the possible impact it might have on the nation’s shared defense costs, and the consequent diplomatic and trade retaliation threats from surrounding countries.

“(The government) will select an optimal location that not only guarantees military efficiency but also the safety of the local residents,” said Park, before moving onto economic topics.

The president did not mention the defense cost issue, but Defense Minister Han Min-koo had said last week that South Korea will bear no additional financial burden besides providing the site for the system’s installment.

Meanwhile, interregional conflicts between the potential sites continued to escalate as the government remained tight-lipped on the candidate site.

Protesting rallies were held over the weekend in areas such as Chilgok in North Gyeongsang Province and Gyeonggi Province’s Pyeongtaek.

The southeastern part of the country, which some local media have suggested as a plausible alternative, also expressed anxiety.

Their common point of concern is that the antimissile system may cause damages to the environment and the human body, and also become an easy target during military aggression.

Opposition parties largely blamed the presidential office for rushing the critical decision without due parliamentary approval or public consensus.

“The government and parliament need to discuss the issue closely,” said Kim Chong-in, the interim chief of The Minjoo Party of Korea, during a party meeting.

“The general public still has considerable doubts on the effectiveness of THAAD, so the government needs to make more efforts to persuade the people.”

Rep. Kim Song-sik, the chief policymaker of the runner-up People’s Party, highlighted the ruling Saenuri Party’s apparent inconsistency, as it had advocated the disputed antimissile system but boycotted the system’s installment in its stronghold regions.

“It is irresponsible and self-contradictory to agree to THAAD but to say that it should not be located in Daegu and North Gyeongsang,” Kim said.

By Bae Hyun-jung (tellme@heraldcorp.com)