Opposition infringes on diplomatic authority

I hope our politicians demonstrate a mature compliance with common sense — and a minimum sense of self-restraint on diplomatic issues.

Jhe Seong-hoThe author is a professor at the Chung-Ang University Law School. The Democratic Party (DP) has decided to send a letter to Pacific island nations to call for their cooperation on forming a united front against the Japanese government’s plan to discharge the treated water from the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant to the ocean. The letter of cooperation contains a request for a provisional measure from the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and an emphasis on the need for an international alliance over the issue.

The letter was sent to 18 members of the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) — including Australia, Fiji and the Marshall Islands — and the Secretariat of the PIF. But many Koreans wonder if such a diplomatic move by Korea’s opposition party is really appropriate after the DP tossed a political and social issue — which should be dealt with through a domestic political process — into the realm of diplomacy and international relations.

Such a novel move is certainly off track — pernicious enough to embarrass and frustrate Korea’s frontline diplomats engaged in an all-out battle to protect national interests. On Sunday, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs finally expressed regret over the DP’s plan to send the controversial letter.

General international law stipulates that a head of state retains the right to represent his or her country externally — and exercise diplomatic authority. Clause 1 and 4 of Article 66 and Article 73 of the Constitution also clearly acknowledge the president’s diplomatic prerogatives. For instance, establishing Korea’s position on major diplomatic issues, proclaiming it to foreign countries, and determining whether to file a complaint at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) fall under the jurisdiction of the president. In this context, the opposition’s behavior represents a clear infringement on the head of state’s innate rights to diplomacy.

The DP’s act of arrogation also violates the convention of the international community cherishing the singleness of diplomatic activities. Disparate voices from the executive, legislative and judiciary branches — and from central and local governments — can critically hurt the unity of a country’s diplomacy and trust in it. Such heterogeneous reactions from a country can lead to a substantial weakening of negotiating power of its government.

That’s why the legislature and political parties in many countries stop at domestically expressing their position on their government’s diplomacy — or criticize its diplomatic policy on their own. Of course, they can check the president’s exercise of diplomatic privilege through a legislative probe or audit in the National Assembly. But it all takes place within the boundaries of the country.

It is very rare that an opposition party in a certain country launches an offensive campaign against its government and other’s. If the majority party really can share the responsibility for state governance — and if it has any ability to run the administration after winning an election — it must immediately stop diplomatic contacts with the Pacific island nations or a political propaganda war over the contaminated water from the Fukushima plant.

Democratic Party (DP) leader Lee Jae-myung, right, listens to opposition to the scheduled discharge of treated water from the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant to the Pacific from two DP lawmakers on a hunger strike in front of the National Assembly, Monday. [KIM HYUN-DONG]

If the People Power Party (PPP) chooses to ignore the DP’s presumptive behavior this time, the DP will not be able to find fault with the PPP over diplomatic issues when the DP takes power next time. In that case, diplomatic confusion and division of national opinion, not to mention the apparent damage on the nation’s integrity, are inevitable. The price will have to be paid by the general public eventually.

Double standards must be avoided in the diplomatic realm above all. Members of the DP provoked controversy over their visit to Tibet to participate in an event carefully orchestrated by the Chinese government. After their behavior triggered an outburst from the Tibetan government in exile in India, they had to apologize to the majority Buddhist sect in Korea.

Of course, an opposition party can engage in diplomatic activity. But it should be compatible with common sense. The DP’s pursuit of a solidarity with Pacific island nations over Fukushima went beyond international norms, let alone critically damaging other countries’ trust in Korea’s diplomacy.

Such a farce must not be repeated. Intellectuals must try to correct it by building healthy public opinion in Korea. Political circles must stop seeking partisan interests and instead put top priority on national interests. I hope our politicians demonstrate a mature compliance with common sense — and a minimum sense of self-restraint on diplomatic issues.

Translation by the Korea JoongAng Daily staff.