South Korea is embroiled in a profound debate over its contemporary history, driven significantly by scholars and politicians associated with the “New Right” movement. These influential conservative figures advocate for a more favorable view of the nation’s authoritarian past and, following their ascension into positions of power, help directly shape the policies and rhetoric of the Yoon Suk-yeol administration.

Historical debates aren’t new territory for South Korea. Many right-wing leaders worldwide aim to reframe their countries’ past positively, leaning on nationalism for political leverage. In South Korea’s case, international media often spotlights Korea’s colonial history, scrutinizing its impact on the country’s relations with Japan.

It is precisely that aspect of history — the Yoon administration’s attempts to overcome them and the Japanese government’s somewhat tepid response to Yoon’s outreach — that are at the heart of the trilateral summit at Camp David.

But South Korea’s domestic battles over its contemporary history are equally fierce and hold significant consequences for the health of the nation’s democracy.

THE NEW RIGHT’S NARRATIVE

Central to Korea’s ongoing debate over history stands the New Right movement. This conservative academic and political wave emerged in the mid-2000s, primarily in response to a series of political setbacks.

Back then, numerous organizations sprouted to bolster this movement. While many have since dissolved, the New Right’s ideologies still resonate in Korean society. Media outlets consistently label scholars and politicians echoing these views as the movement’s affiliates.

Champions of the New Right contend that Japanese colonialism was pivotal in Korea’s modernization. More importantly, they also advocate for a more favorable portrayal of Syngman Rhee and Park Chung-hee — past authoritarian leaders held in high esteem by many conservative factions. For conservatives in post-democratization South Korea, reevaluating these past authoritarian figures is crucial.

The prevailing perception of these leaders is one of a hindrance to Korea’s democratization, suppressors of labor movements and enablers of economic inequality. However, the New Right counters this narrative. They assert that the Rhee and Park regimes’ economic interventions and authoritarianism were instrumental in laying the groundwork for the thriving liberal democracy and robust capitalist economy that defines South Korea today.

Former South Korean presidents Syngman Rhee and Park Chung-hee | Image: Wikimedia Commons, Edited by Korea Pro

YOON’S EVOLVING NARRATIVE

When Yoon visited Gwangju shortly after his inauguration, flanked by an entourage of conservative lawmakers, there was speculation whether the ruling conservative party might embrace a fresh perspective on historical controversies, avoiding the pitfalls of using the past as a divisive political tool.

However, more than a year later, Yoon’s Gwangju visit seems less like a turning point and more of an outlier. Despite Yoon’s initial efforts to bridge political divides in Gwangju, the Korean media spotlighted several of his appointees with ties to New Right organizations, including Kim Tae-hyo, the principal deputy national security advisor. Two subsequent appointments underscore the profound influence of this movement on the Yoon administration.

First, Yoon appointed Kim Kwang-dong to head the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Dec. 2022. Notably, Kim had labeled the May 16, 1961 coup by Park Chung Hee as a “revolution” — echoing Park’s justification for his power grab. At a National Assembly hearing earlier this year, Kim Kwang-dong lent credence to conspiracy theories suggesting North Korean involvement in the Gwangju Democracy Movement.

Given his mandate to unravel the “truth about the anti-Japanese independence movement … atrocities during the Korean War [and] various human rights violations that occurred during Korea’s authoritarian rule,” Kim Kwang-dong’s views of history are consequential.

Second and more importantly, Yoon’s appointment of Kim Yung-ho as the unification minister signals deeper roots. A typical figure in the New Right movement, Kim was a democracy activist and translated Marxist philosophy in the 1980s. But by the 2000s, he radically changed his views and championed the New Right cause. Of particular note, Kim participated in a textbook forum that sought to promote the movement’s interpretations of history to young students.

​​Kim Yung-ho’s past writings reveal the depth of the New Right’s ideology within the Yoon administration’s policies. Speaking at a 2005 event commemorating the founding of the New Right Think Net organization, Kim argued that the movement advocates liberal values that cherish individual freedoms. He emphasized reinforcing the U.S.-South Korea alliance based on the shared values of democracy and capitalism.

Additionally, he advocated recognizing the de facto existence of North Korea as a separate state, encouraged engagement to uplift its circumstances before seeking reunification, differentiated the Kim regime from the North Korean populace and championed human rights for the latter.

President Yoon Suk-yeol appoints Kim Young-ho as Minister of Unification, July 28, 2023 | Image: ROK Presidential Office

HISTORY, RHETORIC AND YOON’S VISION FOR KOREA

Championing shared values such as freedom, democracy, capitalism and a fortified U.S.-Korea alliance while holding North Korea to account for its human rights abuses have all become key aspects of the Yoon administration’s foreign policy. However, a deeper examination of Yoon’s Liberation Day speech hints at how much the New Right has permeated his administration’s policy preferences and ideas about history.

In his address, Yoon praised unnamed past leaders for their “wise decision” to “build a liberal democracy” in South Korea, attributing the nation’s growth and prosperity to this choice. In stark contrast, he alluded to the “forces of communist totalitarianism” masking themselves as “democracy activists, human rights advocates, or progressive activists.”

Yoon’s remarks were ambiguous enough to evade accusations of glorifying South Korea’s past authoritarian rulers. He also took care not to label all democracy activists as communists. Nevertheless, he still drew a connection between present-day “anti-state forces” and “communist totalitarianism.”

Yoon’s narrative crafts an ongoing historical struggle: South Korea’s conservatives, steadfast in their “enduring conviction” in freedom and democracy, versus the insidious communist forces seeking to “disrupt and attack our society.”

This view deviates considerably from the accepted post-democratization narrative of the ROK’s modern history. Nevertheless, such a narrative empowers the Yoon administration to label opposition to its policies as communist or part of a “special-interest cartel” that must be “stamped out.” This approach hasn’t gone unnoticed, with progressives and even some conservatives decrying the illiberal undertones of Yoon’s speech.

However, Yoon is not treading new ground here. His predecessors have employed similar rhetoric. Observers noted with concern when Moon Jae-in spoke of a need to “eradicate deep-rooted evils” during his presidency, fearing such language could exacerbate political divides and jeopardize South Korea’s democracy.

With this backdrop, Yoon’s historical framing — painting a picture of “anti-state forces” and “cartels” — equally warrants scrutiny and caution.