Han Dong-hoon phenomenon’s three criteria

In the end, what matters is not the ability to solve given problems but the ability to look at problems with a new perspective.

Jaung HoonThe author is a political science professor at Chung-Ang University and a columnist for the JoongAng Ilbo. In Korea’s politics, reality often outpaces imagination. I’ve been thinking about writing a column later this year about the so-called “Han Dong-hoon phenomenon.” But the phenomenon already dominates real-life politics ahead of the April 10 parliamentary election. Han — interim leader of the People Power Party (PPP) and former justice minister in the Yoon Suk Yeol administration — is at the center of not only the governing party’s internal power competition but also its battle against the rival Democratic Party (DP). The national election is expected to be an unusual one to evaluate the performance of Han rather than a chance to judge the Yoon Suk Yeol administration. As a new political star rises to prominence, enthusiasm and cynicism follow.

The purpose of this column is not to praise the phenomenon, but I won’t join in the fierce criticism, either. Instead, I’m going to look at the meaning of the phenomenon from three perspectives.

First is the generational change. If Yoon was the last heir to the perspective of the industrialization era, Han, 50, represents the conservative party’s remarkable shift to the post-industrialization generation as mainstream forces of the party.

Second is his competence. Han is the top-notch talent produced by the Korean education system. Will this institutionalized talent — who has climbed the ladder of secular successes based on his excellent problem-solving skills — also perform well in the cruel world of politics?

Third is the dismantlement of the democratization generation. When Han became the chairman of the emergency committee of the embattled party, his top priority was to terminate the privileged class of democratization activists. How supportive will his “fellow citizens” be of his agenda-setting?

Let’s first examine the generational change. In the post-democratization period, conservative parties had to confront a critical challenge: how to achieve the generational change anyway and who would reinvent the conservative party to meet the challenges of the times.

As we enter the third year of Yoon’s presidency after the short period of political upheaval choreographed by former PPP leader Lee Jun-seok, it became clear that Yoon could represent the last symbol of the industrialization period. Just think of it. Contrary to its initial resolve, the Yoon government’s increasing dependency on bureaucracy, focus on growth targets and reliance on hierarchical communication are nothing but a return to the mentality of industrialization. As a result, the generational and cultural shift epitomized by Han are gaining strong popularity among supporters. His tastes in coffee, music and fashion are not just personal preferences; they represent a bold rejection of the collectivism, hierarchy and aggression of the old days.

The sudden rise of leaders from the so-called Orange Generation has baffled many, but they have been in leadership positions for some time in many areas. In the business, arts, culture, and science and technology communities, they have already entered the mainstream — except for party politics, the stronghold of the establishments. The ephemeral conflict between Yoon and Han could signify the beginning of the long-delayed generational change for politics rather than a friction between the PPP and the government.

What stands out to me is the ongoing debate on Han’s capability. Some praise his eloquence and ability to summarize situations, while others turn to cynicism that he has so far demonstrated nothing other than his verbal skills against the DP.

But the problem is that the qualities that helped Han’s successful career are fundamentally different from those of a political leader. Han’s successes in college admission, bar exam and top posts in the prosecution are all based on his ability to solve problems. But in the world of politics, the qualities required of a leader are completely different from those of a problem-solver. There is no set range of questions and no model answers. For instance, which of these — the demographic crisis, social polarization, challenges from artificial intelligence, and climate change — is the most urgent, the most difficult and the most costly?

In the end, what matters is not the ability to solve given problems but the ability to look at problems with a new perspective and adjust the pace of problem solving. In this regard, Han’s abilities as a politician are still being tested.

The first test is the upcoming general election. Han has branded the generational change, the elimination of privileged politics and the dismantlement of democratization activists’ established power as key agendas for this election. How many voters would sympathize with this branding will determine the direction of Korean politics. Will the protracting hegemony war between the industrialization generation and the democracy movement generation finally come to an end? Will the privileges of the political aristocracy steadfastly enjoyed by those former democracy fighters end? Will we really be able to see a new era in which a generation armed with a new worldview leads our major parties?

Translation by the Korea JoongAng Daily staff.