The politics of negation: A five-year cycle

Kang Won-taek
 
The author is professor of political science and international relations at Seoul National University.

Last week, a forum on advancing Korea’s hydrogen industry, took place at the National Future Strategy Institute at Seoul National University. While attending to deliver opening remarks, I stayed to listen and unexpectedly encountered an insightful discussion. After an overview of industrial trends and technological advancements, the conversation shifted to an evaluation of national policies — at which point politics took center stage. Though not explicitly stated, it became clear that former President Moon Jae-in’s support for hydrogen-powered vehicles and the hydrogen economy had, under the current administration, led to a policy of neglect. It was yet another example of Korea’s recurring political pattern: the systematic dismantling of a predecessor’s policies, regardless of their national significance.
 
This phenomenon is hardly new. Former President Lee Myung-bak’s Green Growth initiative was abandoned the moment President Park Geun-hye took office. It was not merely deprioritized but completely repudiated. Five years of accumulated effort and investment were discarded simply because they were associated with a previous administration. This practice persisted even though both leaders belonged to the same Conservative Party, proving that the impulse to erase a predecessor’s legacy transcends party lines.
 

A hydrogen charging station [INCHEON GOVERNMENT]

 
Korea’s presidential system, which centralizes authority in a single individual, enables such abrupt policy shifts. As recent events in the United States illustrate, President Donald Trump swiftly overturned many of President Joe Biden’s policies upon taking office. However, as a federal system, the United States limits the impact of such reversals on domestic affairs, with the effects felt mostly in foreign policy, such as shifting support for Ukraine. In contrast, Korea’s highly centralized governance means that a president’s personal preferences dictate policy across all sectors. In the previous administration, for example, a single film screening and its portrayal of a nuclear disaster were enough to fuel a drastic policy shift that undermined the nuclear energy industry. This volatility — where each new administration brings an unpredictable overhaul of national policy — undermines Korea’s industrial competitiveness and economic stability.
 

Related Article

• Green growth gets $84M boost for 5-year plan

• Where has the green growth gone?

• Hydrogen fuel demand in Korea’s mobility sector soars 64% in 2024

• 700 hydrogen-powered buses in Incheon by end of 2024

 

All 243 heads of local governments in Korea declare carbon neutrality for 2050 in a special session held at the Dongdaemun Design Plaza (DDP) in central Seoul on May, 2021. Then Korean Environment Minister Han Jeoung-ae, center right, former UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, center left, chair of the council of the Global Green Growth Institution, and mayors and governors pose for a commemorative photo joined virtually by other local government leaders. [PARK SANG-MOON]

Korea’s economic rise was built on long-term strategic planning, particularly through seven consecutive five-year economic development plans beginning in 1962. These provided a coherent blueprint for sustained progress, with each administration working toward shared national goals. However, under the current political framework, such continuity is no longer feasible. Even when long-term policies are formulated, no mechanism ensures their implementation beyond a single administration. Consequently, policy planning is now confined to five-year presidential terms, with a heavy focus on short-term gains that can be showcased before the next election. If an administration stumbles — whether due to electoral defeats or political scandals — its policy initiatives often lose momentum before they can be realized.
 
This structural flaw has left Korean society adrift. The country faces mounting crises, yet no administration has demonstrated the leadership or political will to address them effectively. The looming threats of population decline and regional depopulation have been widely acknowledged for years, yet little has been done. Meanwhile, China has overtaken Korea in core scientific and technological sectors, including semiconductors — an area that once defined Korea’s global economic standing. As demonstrated by the case of the hydrogen industry, the presidential system itself has become an obstacle to industrial and technological advancement. Moreover, the nation’s winner-takes-all political system fosters polarization and entrenches divisions, sapping Korea’s collective potential for progress.
 
The erosion of national vision has left young people increasingly anxious about the future. In past generations, children who were asked about their dreams often aspired to be scientists. Today, they overwhelmingly seek stable, secure careers, prioritizing comfort over innovation. The spirit of ambition and risk-taking is fading.
 

Related Article

• The U.S.-China divergence: Korea’s Schumpeterian Solution

• China tech startups race to capitalize on DeepSeek fever

• Gov't, PPP to discuss AI, strategies to respond to DeepSeek

• Rival parties find common ground on state budget increase, fail to agree on chips bill

In 1987, when Korea’s per capita income was just $3,300, the country embarked on sweeping democratic reforms that unlocked new political freedoms and economic opportunities. Today, per capita income exceeds $30,000, a testament to the progress achieved through those transformations. Yet, as many now fear, Korea may have reached its peak. Without systemic political reform, the risk of stagnation — or even decline — is real. The so-called “Peak Korea” scenario is no longer a distant warning; it is a looming reality.
 
A system that allows a single leader to dictate all policies, that erases hard-won progress every five years and that operates with only short-term objectives in mind is ill-equipped to secure the nation’s future. Reforming governance is not merely about correcting the shortcomings of individual leaders or taming the dysfunctions of a politically fractured legislature. It is an existential necessity in an era of intensifying global competition. The time has come for constitutional reform — not as an abstract political ideal, but as a fundamental step to ensuring Korea’s long-term stability and prosperity. 
 
Translated using generative AI and edited by Korea JoongAng Daily staff.