[Editorial] Breaking down the walls of distrust

On the eve of the final day of the year, the world was shaken by the news that president Saddam Hussein, the man who ruled Iraq with an iron fist for close to a quarter of a century, had been executed. Before he was eventually removed from power by the unilateral invasion by the United States and the United Kingdom in March 2003, he went to war with Iran and Kuwait and ruthlessly suppressed the Kurds and other minorities and his political enemies. However, at his trial, the only crime his death sentence was based on was a single massacre in Dujail twenty-four years ago. Some are overjoyed at his execution, saying it is a new milestone, while others are mourning him as a hero killed in a political trial after bravely standing up to U.S. hegemony. The reason for the disparity in how the world views his execution lies in the old mistrust that exists between the Arab world and the United States over things like the Palestinian question and the distribution of oil.

The reason the Korean peninsula is still stuck out in the outdated cold is because of deep-rooted mistrust between the U.S. and North Korea. Reconciliation, cooperation, and joint prosperity have become the common slogans of the world since the fall of the Berlin Wall and the dissolution of the Soviet Union, but that positive energy remains a distant concept for the Korean people. Instead, we have lived in a continuous state of confrontation, one with no safety switch in place, and now it has gotten as bad as it can get, with Pyongyang's reckless decision to test a nuclear bomb. There was concentrated discussion at the recent round of six-party talks, negotiations that were held for the first time in 13 months, but the participating countries were unable to set a timetable for resolving the nuclear issue.

We understand only too well how the cumulative effects of mistrust can inflict terrible harm upon people's everyday lives in the form of division and cynicism, and we know this even without having to bring up what it does to international issues and inter-Korean relations. The past year was one of irreverent talk and physical clashes. The fact that we have tragic instances where people choose to take their own lives after feeling cornered by their situation speaks of how our society has a fundamental problem; namely, its lack of quality channels of communication. This social atmosphere is demonstrated with statistics in a study issued at the end of last year by the international policy graduate school at the Korea Development Institute. According to its study of how the public trusts public agencies and private institutions, the National Assembly ranked at the bottom, followed by political parties, the executive branch, non-national governments, and the prosecution. People trust perfect strangers more than they trust members of the National Assembly, the executive branch, and their local elected officials. The National Assembly leaves the country's welfare by the wayside and fights like there's no tomorrow. President Roh Moo-hyun is full of self-righteousness as he lets it all hang out by grumbling on about his grievances. It's no wonder the hearts of the people have been frozen by the executive branch's all too relaxed attitude about the fact that the average Korean is unable to even dream of owning his or her own home.

Even more serious an issue revealed in the study is that of the institutions or organizations that have considerable influence in our society, not one among them have the country's trust. It's true of the big conglomerates, but the media and even unions scored less than a 50-percent level of trust. While there is a danger in over-generalization because it was just a survey of the general public, labor unions are seen as parts of the authority establishment. Educational institutions and civic groups scored more than 50 percent, but just barely.

It is the universities that are most symbolic in demonstrating how Korean society has gotten bogged down in distrust. There is no raison d'etre for our universities to continue to exist, unless the criminal practice of professors plagiarizing works of knowledge is eradicated. How can professors assert their authority to train young people and show them the methods of scholarship when their very status as scholars is under suspicion? The old saying, "don’t step on even your teacher’s shadow," doesn't mean anything in such a climate.

The biggest event in the year ahead is the presidential election, which the country will have to face head-on. Sadly, there's no assurance that we are not going to see a repeat performance of the same old dirty play, such as a prematurely overheated campaign, campaigning - including negative campaigning - that would be better characterized as a taking of sides, "disclosure wars" based on groundless assertions, and a brand of "image politics" that lacks substance.

Despite all the negative things that come with elections, they remain almost the only method our society has to debate points of contention and look toward our future, and to find legitimate ways to solve the issues before us. If citizens exercise mature civic consciousness and are proactive about participating and keeping watch on the debates and campaigns, we could see the beginning of the kind of communication and understanding that breaks right through the walls of distrust that are obstacles in our society. It's so bad right now it is suffocating; turning the cynicism, discouragement, and division into participation, hope, and community depends on the aware citizens of our nation.

Please direct questions or comments to [[e-mail]]