The Case of South Korea
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Volume 18 | Issue 14 | Number 10 | Article ID 5426 | Jul 15, 2020 The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus Fostering Trust in Government During a Pandemic: The Case of South Korea Nathan Park of mask-wearing, nor did it see any protest Abstract: With mass-scale testing and against the government-mandated quarantine extensive contact-tracing, South Korea’sof affected individuals (although there were response to the COVID-19 pandemic has been protests for other reasons, to be sure). Toilet among the strongest in the world. This success paper rolls in stores never ran out. has often been credited to the Korean public’s cultural willingness to trust their government International observers ascribed such and put up with measures that supposedly cooperation to the stereotypical image of infringed on their liberties and privacy. While compliant and homogenous Asians, deferential the trust has indeed been important, the to authority and focused on social harmony. reductive attempts to locate the source of the This orientalist caricature is contrary to fact: people’s trust in Korea’s Confucian heritage, the South Korean public, in truth, is marked by homogeneous society, or deferential culture are low trust in government and in one another. As misplaced. Contrary to the orientalistit has only been a few years since former caricature, South Korea’s political culture is president Park Geun-hye’s impeachment, South marked by low trust in government and deep Korean politics have been rife with unvarnished polarization along ideological lines, making it attempts to politicize the pandemic response. an obstacle to be overcome rather than a foundation for success. This paper will analyze Yet it is also true that the Korean society did the measures taken by the Moon Jae-infollow the government’s lead in the fight administration to manage the fractious politics against coronavirus—not because some cultural surrounding the outbreak and foster the public factor made Koreans predisposed to trust their trust in the government’s response, and also government, but because the government explore the limits of such measures. earned their trust. Acutely aware of the previous administration’s repeated failures in the face of major disasters, the Moon Jae-in administration focused on communicating the Introduction message that his government would protect the people and followed through on the message in South Korea’s successful response to the its actions. This posture, standing in sharp coronavirus pandemic won plaudits from contrast to the previous administration’s, led around the world. At one point, with a massive the Korean public to rally around the outbreak in the southeastern city of Daegu in government’s recommendations and also late February, South Korea had the highest reward the Moon administration with an number of COVID-19 cases outside of China. unprecedented landslide electoral victory. Yet, it decisively flattened the curve while many other countries floundered, thanks in no small This article first outlines the arguments part to the orderly cooperation of its citizens. regarding cultural factors in South Korea’s Korea saw no heated debate about the wisdom successful response to the pandemic and 1 18 | 14 | 10 APJ | JF discusses why such arguments are fallacious by caused significant damage to the economy. expanding on the reasons described above. This Through the redoubled efforts to trace and article then examines three critical junctures in isolate the patients, South Korea was able to Korea’s journey through the pandemic: (1) the successfully flatten the curve. airlift of Korean nationals out of Wuhan and elsewhere; (2) the Daegu outbreak, and; (3) the socioeconomic secondary effects such as face mask distribution, online education and holding a national election. At each juncture, the South Korean government took measures designed not only to combat the disease, but also to give the public the sense that the government was doing everything it could to protect them and address their needs arising from the pandemic response. This article concludes with a look toward further challenges that the South Korean government will face in inspiring public trust, especially in relation to marginalized social groups such as LGBTQ. The Cultural Argument Fallacy South Korea’s handling of the coronavirus Source: Statista pandemic has been among the world’s best. While many other countries deserve commendations for their pandemic responses, South Korea’s success is relatively unique in Voluntary cooperation of the South Korean that it managed to quell a huge spike in the public was crucial in this effort. Even without a number of cases without resorting to astringent lockdown, Koreans by and large wholesale lockdown or travel ban. Unlike other followed the government’s recommendations success cases like those of Taiwan or New on mask wearing and social distancing. Except Zealand, which initially had a low number of for a handful of exceptions involving cult cases that were then kept low, South Korea members and other socially marginalized faced a massive outbreak event in the city of groups, those who came in contact with a Daegu, where the secretive Shincheonji cult carrier dutifully self-isolated. News reports members spread the virus while lying to the praised exemplary cases of hygiene, such as a contact tracers about the circumstances of tour guide in Incheon who worked with Chinese transmission. On February 17, South Korea had tourists (MBC News Desk 2020). The tour a total of 30 COVID-19 cases and zero deaths; guide self-isolated, wore a mask and gloves just a month later, the number of cases even inside her own home, and walked to skyrocketed to over 8,000, with as many as 909 clinics rather than taking public transit to get new cases in a single day at its peak (KCDC tested when symptoms appeared. Although the 2020). Yet, South Korea resisted the temptation tour guide tested positive, all 23 people with to implement a harsh lockdown that would have whom she came into contact—including her severely infringed on the people’s liberty and mother who lived in the same house as 2 18 | 14 | 10 APJ | JF she—were unaffected. people willingly submit themselves to authority and few complain . The Confucian emphasis To be sure, it may be fair to say the Korean on respect for authority, social stability, and public had a lower bar to clear. Unlike many the good of the nation above individualism is an other governments around the world, the ameliorating factor in a time of national crisis” Korean government was not asking the public (Martin et al. 2020). Bruce Klingner suggested to essentially put themselves under house Americans would not accept South Korea’s arrest for months. Because Korea already had extensive contact tracing, which included the mask-wearing culture in place, there was monitoring CCTV footage, credit card records little controversy on the recommendation to and cell phone GPS data (Lucas 2020, Kim, wear masks in case of a pandemic. In fact, the Max 2020). commotion about the masks in Korea was more about how to buy them in the sudden spike of These observations, however, do not stand up demand, not about whether or not to wear one. to closer scrutiny. First, contrary to popular When compared to the toilet paper hoarding imagination, South Korea is a society marked and the boisterous protests across the United by its citizens’ low trust in government and in States and Europe by those refusing toone another. In an OECD study from 2016, only acknowledge the danger of the pandemic, it 24 percent Koreans responded they had seems fair to say that the South Korean public confidence in the national government, trailing heeded their government’s suggestions better significantly behind the OECD average of 42 than most. percent and such “independent-minded” Western countries like Canada (62 percent), Observing South Korea’s successful response, Germany (55 percent), the United Kingdom (41 several Western thinkers and media outlets percent), the United States (30 percent), and offered reductive cultural explanations, usually France (28 percent) (OECD 2017). Similarly, in centered on the orientalist trope that Koreans an OECD study from 2014, South Korea’s score are less individualistic, more community- for “average trust in others” was merely 0.32, oriented, and more willing to sacrifice for the trailing such “individualistic” Western societies greater good. Guy Sorman, for example, cited like Norway (0.68), Sweden (0.65), the Korea’s “deep-rooted sense of solidarity,” or Netherlands (0.53), Canada (0.44), the United “the belief that each individual belongs to a States (0.41) and the United Kingdom (0.37) community beyond just oneself, and a national (OECD 2018). mission to unite as a member of such a community,” to explain Korea’s strong response South Korea also had no shortage of fractious to COVID-19, adding he felt ambivalent about politicians seeking to leverage the coronavirus how such solidarity weakens individuality epidemic for political gain. It was only three (Ministry of Foreign Affairs 2020). A similar years before the outbreak that former idea appeared in a New York Times article president Park Geun-hye was impeached and analyzing South Korea’s success: “Social trust removed, leaving a bitter, polarized political is higher in South Korea than in many other scene in its wake. When the pandemic began in countries, particularly Western democracies late January, the all-important National beset by polarization and populist backlash” Assembly elections were just a few months (Fisher et al. 2020). Closely related to this away on April 15. Recalling that Park’s inept analysis is the claim that Koreans are docile handling of the Middle Eastern Respiratory and more willing to follow the government’s Syndrome (MERS) epidemic of 2015 led to the lead.