Jang Dong-hyuk, leader of the People Power Party, delivers opening remarks at a press conference for foreign journalists hosted by the Seoul Foreign Correspondents' Club at the Korea Press Center in Jung-gu, Seoul, on the 8th. [Photo=Yonhap News]

 "It should have been 'Prosecution Withdrawal Special Prosecutor' from beginning to end."

Jang Dong-hyuk, leader of the People Power Party, raised relatively clear issues regarding the Lee Jae-myung administration's foreign and security policy, the ROK-US alliance, the transition of wartime operational control, the unification minister's perception of North Korea, the prosecution withdrawal special prosecutor, and constitutional amendment at a press conference for foreign journalists held at the Korea Press Center on the 8th.

The focus of the opening remarks was not martial law. The core message that Representative Jang conveyed to the foreign press was a critique that South Korea's rule of law and security order have been shaken since the inauguration of the Lee Jae-myung administration.

Representative Jang's strengths are his honesty and logic.

When foreign journalists asked about martial law and impeachment, he did not evade the questions.

He stated that he agreed with the vote to lift martial law, but replied that it is possible to have a different judgment on whether the method of resolving the political situation after martial law absolutely had to be impeachment.

Regarding the impeachment of former President Yoon Suk-yeol, he stated that the People Power Party itself had opened the door to impeachment.

These were not politically safe answers. However, Representative Jang, at least, did not hide his intentions.

The problem was what came next.

A press conference for foreign journalists is a much more dangerous arena than one for domestic journalists.

While foreign media ask about the weaknesses of Korean politics from an international perspective, domestic old media repackage the most controversial parts of those answers back into the frame of domestic politics.

Indeed, after the press conference, the reporting trend quickly shifted from the ROK-US alliance, wartime operational control, prosecution withdrawal special prosecutor, and constitutional amendment issues that Jang raised in his opening remarks, to the issues of martial law, impeachment, and religious remarks. This was a predictable trend during election season.

It should have been 'Prosecution Withdrawal Special Prosecutor' from beginning to end.

Therefore, the regret is even greater.

This press conference should have been about the 'Prosecution Withdrawal Special Prosecutor' from beginning to end.

Even if foreign media asked about martial law, the answer should have led to the prosecution withdrawal special prosecutor.

Even if they asked about impeachment, the answer should have led to the prosecution withdrawal special prosecutor.

Even if they asked about the ROK-US alliance, it should have been connected with the structure that "if the rule of law collapses, the alliance's credibility will also be shaken."

The most potent issue that Representative Jang raised in his opening remarks was precisely this point.

The issue of granting a special prosecutor, appointed by President Lee Jae-myung, the authority to withdraw the prosecution of President Lee's own case is not a simple partisan dispute.

It is a question of whether a structure is being created where the incumbent president can effectively nullify the trial of his own case. This is directly linked to the fundamental principles of a democratic nation: equality before the law, separation of powers, and judicial independence.

The term 'prosecution withdrawal special prosecutor' might resonate within domestic Korean politics.

However, in front of foreign media, this issue should have been translated into international phrases such as "the authority to halt the prosecution of the incumbent president's own case," "a structure where the powerful can eliminate their own trials," and "the collapse of the principle of equality before the law."

If foreign media had asked about martial law, Representative Jang should have followed up with this at the end of his answer:

"I understand you are asking about the debates surrounding martial law and impeachment. However, a more direct threat facing South Korean liberal democracy today is the special prosecutor bill that can effectively withdraw the prosecution of the incumbent president's case. If a structure is possible where the president can erase his own trial, that is the crisis of the rule of law."

With just this one sentence, the focus of the press conference could have been different.

It could have been a press conference to report the prosecution withdrawal special prosecutor to the international community, rather than a press conference defending the martial law frame.

Relations with China should have also led to the issue of electoral sovereignty.

A similar sense of regret remains regarding relations with China.

Representative Jang expressed a relatively strong concern about the Lee Jae-myung administration's diplomatic stance towards China and the potential weakening of the ROK-US alliance. However, he did not directly mention suspicions of Chinese interference in elections.

Of course, this phrase is diplomatically sensitive. Government officials have no choice but to be cautious, considering ROK-China relations, economic dependence, and diplomatic repercussions.

However, Representative Jang is not a diplomatic official. He is the leader of an opposition party. The strength of an opposition party leader lies in the ability to directly raise fundamental issues of democracy hidden behind diplomatic rhetoric.

The Chinese government or entities suspected of involvement have publicly been discussed in various liberal democracies such as Canada, the UK, Australia, and the US regarding their influence on politics and elections.

Therefore, the question that Representative Jang should have raised in front of foreign media was not simply anti-China sentiment.

The core issue was: "Is there a systematic verification process for the possibility of foreign powers, including China, influencing South Korea's public opinion, information environment, and the credibility of election management?"

This is not a diplomatic dispute, but an issue of electoral sovereignty, the rule of law, and the defense of democracy.

While emphasizing the crisis of the rule of law, Representative Jang did not deviate much from the language of diplomatic officials when it came to relations with China.

In that respect, he weakened his own strength as the leader of an opposition party. An opposition party should be able to say what diplomatic officials cannot.

In particular, a press conference for foreign journalists was an opportunity to reframe the possibility of foreign influence on elections not as an internal partisan dispute, but as a common agenda for international democracy. Representative Jang spoke of the dangers of relations with China, but he did not elevate it to the level of a crisis of electoral sovereignty.

The language of an opposition party leader was needed.

This press conference, therefore, showed both the strengths and limitations of Representative Jang Dong-hyuk.

He did not hide. He did not evade difficult questions. He also relatively honestly revealed his thoughts on martial law and impeachment.

However, during an election period, an opposition party leader needs more than just honesty. Beyond answering the questions posed by the opponent, there is a need for aggressiveness to introduce questions that the opponent wants to avoid.

The Democratic Party and left-leaning media clearly desire a framework that confines the People Power Party not as a party with policy alternatives, but within the shadow of martial law and impeachment.

Conversely, the framework that the People Power Party should create is the risk of the Lee Jae-myung administration's rule of law, the risk to the ROK-US alliance, and the risk to electoral sovereignty. Representative Jang's opening remarks pointed towards the latter. However, the Q&A session and reporting trend shifted towards the former.

Honesty alone is not enough.

An assessment of Representative Jang Dong-hyuk's press conference for foreign journalists as "honest but regrettable" is appropriate.

He spoke of the essence of the issues. However, he failed to make the essence the ultimate destination of the entire press conference.

He did not shy away from the martial law frame, but he was not sufficiently successful in returning the martial law frame to the rule of law frame.

He criticized relations with China, but he failed to elevate the possibility of foreign influence on elections and the issue of electoral sovereignty to the agenda for foreign media.

Simply repeating domestic political terms in front of foreign media is not enough.

The crisis of the rule of law in Korea needs to be translated into language that the international community can understand.

He should have been able to speak of the prosecution withdrawal special prosecutor when asked about martial law. When discussing relations with China, he should have pushed the issue to include verification of foreign influence on elections and the possibility of foreign interference.

Representative Jang was honest. However, it is difficult to overcome the election frame with honesty alone.

What the People Power Party needs now is not defensive explanations, but a repositioning of the agenda.

The party needs to move beyond being an opposition party that answers the questions of foreign media, to becoming an opposition party that presents the questions that foreign media should be asking. The regret of this press conference lies precisely there.