Former Prime Minister Lee Hae-chan has never been pushed out of the center of power since entering politics and enjoyed a leisurely life of his own, playing golf in his later years.

Poet and former minister Do Jong-hwan contributed an article to a daily newspaper titled 'Can we also dedicate our lives like Lee Hae-chan?' The subtitle is 'Lee Hae-chan, evidence of this country's democracy.'

When did Lee Hae-chan become evidence of this country's democracy? Let's assume for a moment that he is indeed a witness or evidence.

I have never seen a currently active poet openly praise a specific politician, especially one who was at the pinnacle of power. Even I, who wouldn't flinch at hearing talk of defecation during a meal, was utterly disgusted by his writing.

"I don't know why people lose elections."

Lee Hae-chan himself once 'jokingly' remarked, "I don't know why people lose elections." That's right. He is a seven-term lawmaker, rare in this country. Since entering politics, Lee Hae-chan has never been pushed out of the center of power and enjoyed a leisurely life of his own, playing golf in his later years.

While it is said he dedicated himself to the democratization movement, he received rewards many times longer than that short period of service and acted as the current administration's spokesperson. Not only did he enjoy wealth, honor, and power during his lifetime, but after his death, he was carried in a flower-adorned bier, with the leader of the Democratic Party and the Prime Minister serving as chief mourners, on his final journey.

Wasn't that enough? He should have stopped there. Why is it that even a poet has stepped forward to offer a feast of excessively ornate language, reeking of artificial flavorings, at the grave of the deceased?

In the 1980s, a time when the debate between participatory literature and pure literature was fierce, it is bizarre and grotesque for a poet who moved the public with the emotional depth of 'The Hollyhock Lady,' evoking the image of raindrops on corn leaves, to openly praise a mere politician.

I don't know much about Lee Hae-chan. However, thanks to Do Jong-hwan's praise, I have become curious to know who Lee Hae-chan is.

The source of numerous controversies... A life lacking in consideration

A quick check on Namu Wiki reveals a "Lee Hae-chan Controversy" section alone that would take more than a day to read, so abundant are his political missteps.

Just a cursory glance reveals: raising the "Lee Hae-chan generation," controversies over abusive requests, diplomatic humiliation during a special envoy mission to China, no-show controversy at the 3rd Inter-Korean Summit in 2018, controversy over neglecting parliamentary activities, controversy over abolishing the securities transaction tax without consultation with the Ministry of Economy and Finance, the sake luncheon controversy, conflict with Deputy Prime Minister Hong Nam-ki, controversy over pressuring Assemblyman Geum Tae-seop to switch to the Democratic Party, omission of fever checks at advance polling stations for the 21st General Election, controversy over holding 1,528㎡ of land in Sejong City in his spouse's name, and a celebration for his book release during the social distancing period.

Oh, seeing them all listed brings back memories.

Although not on Namu Wiki, the "Seoul Station U-turn" is also famous. I will quote a Facebook post by columnist Park Ju-hyun to convey this story.

"Poet Do Jong-hwan reveres him as a 'person who proved himself through his entire life' and a 'politician who never loses.' However, in my eyes, the cowardly shadow of the 'Seoul Station U-turn,' hidden behind those splendid adjectives, is more prominent. To designate the main perpetrator of that fatal misjudgment, who caused the loss of momentum by deciding to turn back at the critical moment when the military dictatorship could have been ended in the spring of 1980, as someone who 'dedicated his life to democratization' is an insult to history. It is like awarding a medal to a driver who turned off the engine, calling him an 'unstoppable locomotive.'"

Furthermore, as someone who enjoys golf, there were golf-related scandals during his tenure as Prime Minister, and even after that, there were controversies such as: playing golf during a wildfire on April 5, 2005; playing golf during floods on July 2, 2005; golf meetings with legal brokers and drinking parties at a snow-covered site; the phoenix-patterned golf ball scandal; and the March 1st golf lobby controversy.

Other controversies include: the selection of 5.18 meritorious individuals, the controversy over ballot stuffing in the Grand National Democratic Party's presidential primary, post-retirement controversies, remarks concerning Ukraine, his defense of Cho Kuk, and remarks on Financial Supervisory Service sanctions, making his career rich with controversy. At this point, a book could be published on the subject of "Lee Hae-chan Controversies."

On the other hand, when asked about Lee Hae-chan's achievements, AI responds that he was a giant of Korean politics, serving as a seven-term member of the National Assembly (13th, 14th, 15th, 16th, 17th, 19th, and 20th terms), and was evaluated as a master of planning and strategy and a kingmaker.

Specifically, during his term as Prime Minister (under the Roh Moo-hyun administration), he is credited as the first "powerful, responsible prime minister" in Korea and the mastermind behind laying the foundation for the establishment of Sejong Special Self-Governing City.

However, the hastily conceived administrative capital strategy is criticized for having a greater "straw effect" of absorbing population from the Chungcheong region rather than dispersing the Seoul metropolitan area's population, and the high vacancy rates have led to accusations of ruining the city's economy. What about the cynical jibe of it being a "civil servant city"?

Moreover, in 2016, Lee Hae-chan drew the ire of Sejong City residents due to a "갑질" (abuse of power) controversy, with remarks along the lines of "Don't let the smell of compost near my house."

Lee Hae-chan directly called the Deputy Mayor of Sejong City to complain about the strong smell of compost in front of his house, and the deputy mayor personally went to the site and ordered farmers to remove the compost.

In response, farmers rushed to his house, held a rally, questioning what was wrong with the smell of the countryside in a rural area, and the incident was reported in the newspapers for some time.

In his contribution, Do Jong-hwan eulogizes him as "a person who was strict with others and also with himself." Lee Hae-chan was certainly strict with others. But was he also strict with himself? Truly?

A person who plays politics with their mouth

The most surprising part of the contribution is the statement, "Lee Hae-chan was a politician who played politics with his abilities. How many politicians play politics with their mouths?"

What kind of analogy is this, comparing it to live octopus or calligraphy in a mudflat? Was there any politician who spewed out as many words as Lee Hae-chan? He was a politician who played politics with his mouth.

His numerous assaults and verbal abuses, and statements that caused controversy enough to be reported in the newspapers, include: presidential title controversy, dissemination of false information, remarks on re-examining the National Security Act and prolonged rule, suspicion of involvement in the Cheonan* sinking conspiracy theory, controversy over remarks related to the North Korean Human Rights Act, first and second instances of derogatory remarks related to discrimination against persons with disabilities, controversy over the reaction of reporters to the Hye-gyeong-gung Kim controversy, controversy over asserting the crime of insulting a head of state, controversy over remarks related to COVID-19, remarks on permanent expulsion for running as an independent, controversy over remarks violating election law, controversy over political maneuvering in the Nth room case, verbal abuse directed at the Future United Party, remarks on real estate taxes, rebuking and insulting reporters at Park Won-soon's funeral, using the term "victim complainant" in relation to the Park Won-soon sexual assault case, controversy over derogatory remarks about Busan and Seoul, and remarks on the Democratic Party's 20- and 50-year rule. The list is splendid and abundant.

Of course, internally, he has the credit of leading the Democratic Party to a supermajority of 180 seats in the 21st General Election in 2020. (Whose responsibility was the Democratic Party's disastrous result of 81 seats in the 18th General Election in 2008?)

However, such accomplishments are merely for internal celebrations. Is a society where it is taken for granted that a literary figure steps forward to openly praise a politician, after debating a state funeral and then holding a public funeral at taxpayer expense, truly a properly functioning society?

Have they already forgotten what they did to poet Seo Jeong-ju? Do they truly forget how they attacked his poem praising Chun Doo-hwan, dragging the name of "Mundang" through the mud and even leading to the abolition of the Midang Literary Award?

The masters of history change. History has flowed that way. Even if they were to ask to pass on the eulogy praising Lee Hae-chan later, it would be too late.

Reporter Lim Yo-hee