Thursday, May 29, 2025

Slovakia's central bank chief convicted of bribery and fined $225,000New Foto - Slovakia's central bank chief convicted of bribery and fined $225,000

BRATISLAVA, Slovakia (AP) — Slovakia's central bank chief, who is a member of theEuropean Central Bankcommittee that decides monetary policy for 20 countries, was convicted of bribery and fined 200,000 euros ($225,000) on Thursday. The verdict against central bank Gov. Peter Kažimír was issued by Judge Milan Cisarik at the country's Special Criminal Court in Pezinok. Kažimír's attorneys argued that he should have been acquitted because of the recent changes in Slovakia's penal code, which reduced punishment for corruption and that recently ended a number of corruption cases and trials. Kažimír wasn't present at the court. He said in a statement that he would appeal. His six-year term in office expires on Sunday. Kažimír was accused of paying a bribe of 48,000 euros ($54,000) at the turn of the year in 2017-18 to the head of the country's tax office in connection with a tax audit of several private companies. At the time, Kažimír was acquiring a luxury villa located in an upscale neighborhood of Bratislava, the capital, from the owner of the companies. Kažimír, who pleaded not guilty, had previously said that he considered the charges to be illegal and fabricated. The case dates to when Kažimír served as finance minister in the leftist government of populist Prime MinisterRobert Ficofrom 2012 to 2019. He was a member of Fico's Smer, or Direction, party before taking the central bank job. Smer lost the 2020 general election and was replaced by a coalition government whose parties campaigned on an anti-corruption ticket. Since that government took power, a number of people linked to Fico's party faced prosecution in corruption scandals. Kažimír was the first minister of Fico's government to stand trial. Slovakia is one of 20 countries that use the euro currency, and Kažimír is a member of the ECB's governing council, its main decision-making body. A number of people linked to the prime minister's party faced prosecution in corruption scandals. Fico returned to power for the fourth time in 2023 after his leftist party Smer won theSept. 30 parliamentary electionon apro-Russia and anti-American platform. In February 2024, lawmakers loyal to Fico's new coalition government approvedchanges to the penal codeand eliminated the office of the special prosecutor that deals with major crime and corruption. The legislation faced sharp criticism at home and abroad while thousands of Slovaks repeatedlytook to the streetsto protest. The changes include a reduction in punishments for corruption and some other crimes, including the possibility of suspended sentences, and a significant shortening of the statute of limitations.

Slovakia’s central bank chief convicted of bribery and fined $225,000

Slovakia's central bank chief convicted of bribery and fined $225,000 BRATISLAVA, Slovakia (AP) — Slovakia's central bank chief, who...

Wednesday, May 28, 2025

Are We Headed for Another Disaster With Fannie and Freddie?New Foto - Are We Headed for Another Disaster With Fannie and Freddie?

The movieThe Big Short—dramatizing the reckless behavior in the banking and mortgage industries that contributed to the 2008 financial crisis—captures much of Wall Street's misconduct but overlooks a central player in the collapse: the federal government, specifically through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. These two government-created and government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) encouraged lenders to issue risky home loans by effectively making taxpayers cosign the mortgages. This setup incentivized dangerous lending practices that inflated the housing bubble, eventually leading to catastrophic economic consequences. Another critical but overlooked factor in the collapse was the Community Reinvestment Act. This federal statute was intended to combat discriminatory lending practices but, starting in the 1990s, instead created substantial market distortions by pressuring banks to extend loans to borrowers who might otherwise have been deemed too risky. Under threat of regulatory penalties, banks significantly loosened lending standards—again, inflating the housing bubble. After the bubble inevitably burst, Fannie and Freddie were placed under conservatorship by the Federal Housing Finance Agency. The conservatorship imposed rules aimed at preventing future taxpayer-funded bailouts and protecting the economy from government-fueled market distortions. Now President Donald Trump's appointee to lead that agency, Bill Pulte, is considering ending this conservatorship without addressing the core structural flaw that fueled the problem in the first place: implicit government guarantees backing all Fannie and Freddie mortgages. If Pulte proceeds without implementing real reform, taxpayers on Main Street are once again likely to be exposed to significant financial risks as they are conscripted into subsidizing lucrative deals for Wall Street. Without genuine reform, the incentives and practices that led to the crisis remain unchanged, setting the stage for a repeat disaster. Pulte's proposal isn't likely to unleash free-market policies. Instead, it could further rig the market in favor of hedge funds holding substantial stakes in Fannie and Freddie, allowing them to profit enormously from the potential upside, while leaving taxpayers to bear all the downside risks. A meaningful solution requires Fannie and Freddie to significantly strengthen their capital reserves. The two GSEs still remain dangerously undercapitalized. A report from JP Morgan Chase describes it this way: "Despite steady growth in [their net worth], the GSEs remain well below the minimum regulatory capital framework requirements set by the Federal Housing Finance Agency in 2020." Imposing robust capital requirements similar to those that govern private banks would oblige the two enterprises to internalize their risks, promoting genuine market discipline and accountability. Further reforms should focus on transparency and oversight. Stronger disclosure requirements would enable investors, regulators, and the public to evaluate financial risks better. Limiting the types of mortgages that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac can guarantee would also reduce their exposure to high-risk loans, providing additional protection to taxpayers. Clear regulations preventing these entities from engaging in speculative financial products would further decrease market distortions. Most importantly, the federal government must be explicit that future bailouts are off the table. While this stance might be challenging to enforce, eliminating, in theory, implicit government guarantees would encourage Fannie and Freddie to operate more responsibly than they have in the past. They would recognize that reckless behavior would lead to insolvency rather than to another taxpayer-funded rescue. Establishing a definitive legal separation from government backing is crucial to reducing moral hazard. Historically, the combination of implicit government guarantees, regulatory pressures from policies such as the Community Reinvestment Act, and insufficient capital requirements created the perfect conditions for the 2008 financial crisis. Ignoring these lessons and repeating past mistakes would inevitably set the stage for another financial disaster. Proponents of prematurely releasing Fannie and Freddie argue that market conditions have changed and risk management has improved. Yet history repeatedly demonstrates that without structural changes, financial entities—particularly those shielded by government guarantees—inevitably revert to risky behavior when market pressures and profit incentives align. Markets function best when participants bear the full consequences of their decisions, something impossible under the current structure of these government-sponsored enterprises. Ultimately, the only responsible approach is removing taxpayers from the equation entirely. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should participate in the mortgage market only as fully private entities, without any implicit government guarantees. The American public doesn't need a sequel toThe Big Short. The painful lessons of the 2008 crisis are too recent and too severe to be ignored or forgotten. Market discipline, fiscal responsibility, and genuine reform—not government-backed risk-taking—must guide our approach going forward. We can only hope that the Trump administration chooses fiscal responsibility over risky experiments that history has already shown end in disaster. COPYRIGHT 2025CREATORS.COM The postAre We Headed for Another Disaster With Fannie and Freddie?appeared first onReason.com.

Are We Headed for Another Disaster With Fannie and Freddie?

Are We Headed for Another Disaster With Fannie and Freddie? The movieThe Big Short—dramatizing the reckless behavior in the banking and mort...
State Department reviewing all Harvard-affiliated visa holders, officials sayNew Foto - State Department reviewing all Harvard-affiliated visa holders, officials say

The US State Department is reviewing all Harvard University-affiliated visa holders, not just students, three senior State Department officials told CNN Wednesday. The move is a notable escalation of the Trump administration's feud with the Ivy League university. The administration previously moved to revoke Harvard's ability toenroll international students, but the attempt has been halted by a federal judge. Harvard argued revocation of its certification in the Student and Exchange Visitor Program was "clear retaliation" for its refusal of the government's ideologically rooted policy demands. The administration on Tuesday directed federal agencies to cancelall remaining federal contractswith the university – totaling about $100 million in all. The officials did not say why the review – which wasfirst reported by Fox News– was being conducted. CNN reached out to Harvard late Wednesday night for comment on the review. The State Department has previously said that security vetting for visas "runs from the time of each application, through adjudication of the visa, and afterwards during the validity period of every visa issued." The recent moves come as the Trump administration takes steps that could deter international students from studying at universities in the US. The State Department announced several other moves this week targeting students who wish to come to the US. On Tuesday, the agency paused all new student and exchange visa appointments as it prepares toexpand social media vettingfor applicants. It is unclear what the expanded social media vetting will entail. On Wednesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubioannouncedhe would "aggressively revoke visas for Chinese students" in a major escalation of tensions with Beijing. Rubio said the State Department would work with the Department of Homeland Security on the revocations, which will target Chinese students, "including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields." The Trump administration's recent actions have thrown the lives of the university'sInternational students– who make up 27% of Harvard's enrollment – in disarray, including leaving some afraid of attending their own graduation on Thursday, a school official told a court in arecent filing. The latest State Department review threatens to extend that uncertainty to visa holders throughout Harvard's network. CNN's Kaanita Iyer contributed to this report. For more CNN news and newsletters create an account atCNN.com

State Department reviewing all Harvard-affiliated visa holders, officials say

State Department reviewing all Harvard-affiliated visa holders, officials say The US State Department is reviewing all Harvard University-af...
Dershowitz Predicts To Megyn Kelly How SCOTUS Will Handle California's Trans Sports AgendaNew Foto - Dershowitz Predicts To Megyn Kelly How SCOTUS Will Handle California's Trans Sports Agenda

Retired Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz told SiriusXM's Megyn Kelly on Wednesday that he believes the U.S. Supreme Court will have to uphold President Donald Trump's order if he goes through with withholding federal funds from California. Trump on Tuesday took to Truth Social tocall outDemocrat California Gov. Gavin Newsom over his state still allowing biological males to participate in girls' upcoming state finals, warning how their federal funding could be held back. The two discussed how 16-year-old biological male AB Hernandez, who identifies as a transgender girl, has been allowed to compete against biological girls in their high school's championship. On "The Megyn Kelly Show," the host asked about Trump's block. "So you think he can get away with the threat, but can he withdraw federal funds? Is that OK, and is this just empty words to the attempt to direct local authorities not to allow it this weekend at the state championships?" Kelly asked. "I think ultimately the Supreme Court is going to have to uphold the withholding of federal funds from states and other institutions that violate federal law. It has nothing to do [with the] particular case. It has to do with the dominance of the Supremacy Clause," Dershowitz said. "Without the Supremacy Clause, you couldn't have the United States of America. There would be the Confederate States." Hernandez, who is a junior on the Jurupa Valley High School track and field team, competed in the California Interscholastic Federation's (CIF's) State Track and Field meet on Saturday and Sunday, as the student is ranked as the state's top athlete in the triple jump and number two in the long jump,accordingto Patch.RELATED: Education Department Issues Ultimatum To University Over 'Extremist Political Project' WATCH: "The difference is that where the federal law and the state laws conflict, the federal law will reign supreme," Kelly said. "In supreme, otherwise we're back to the Articles of Confederacy, and that didn't work. So some of us may not like the way it's being used, and in my family too we fight like children about transgender athletes," Dershowitz added. "There are many points of view on that, and it seems to me that President Trump ran on that theory and the majority of Americans support it, and the law seems to support it," Dershowitz said. "So whatever you think of the policies, I think we're going to see ultimately the Supreme Court upholding most of these Trump initiatives but demanding that they be done with due process." Following Hernandez's win and advancement to the finals, the CIFreleaseda statement regarding the championships and a new pilot "entry process for the upcoming 2025 CIF State Track and Field Championships." "Under this pilot entry process, any biological female student-athlete who would have earned the next qualifying mark for one of their Section's automatic qualifying entries in the CIF State meet, and did not achieve the CIF State at-large mark in the finals at their Section meet, was extended an opportunity to participate in the 2025 CIF State Track and Field Championships. The CIF believes this pilot entry process achieves the participation opportunities we seek to afford our student-athletes." The CIF updatecame afterTrump's pushback against the state. Department of Justice Attorney for the Central District of California Bill Essayliannouncedhe would launch an investigation into the CIF and Jurupa Unified School District and whether their actions in allowing Hernandez to continue to compete violate Title IX. In February, Trump signed an executive order that prohibits biological males from competing in women's sports, with the Trump administration saying the Department of Education will investigate any school that continues to violate the action. In 2013, former Democrat California Gov. Jerry BrownsignedAB 1266, allowing transgender students to try out for sports teams and use locker rooms based on the gender they identify with. Newsomsaidin March that he agreed with Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, adding that "it is an issue of fairness, it's deeply unfair." All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter's byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contactlicensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Dershowitz Predicts To Megyn Kelly How SCOTUS Will Handle California’s Trans Sports Agenda

Dershowitz Predicts To Megyn Kelly How SCOTUS Will Handle California's Trans Sports Agenda Retired Harvard Law School professor Alan Der...
Exclusive: Lee Jae-myung Aims to Steer South Korea Through CrisisNew Foto - Exclusive: Lee Jae-myung Aims to Steer South Korea Through Crisis

Lee Jae-myung as candidate for party leader at the 2022 Democratic Party of Korea convention. Credit - Courtesy of the Lee Jae-myung Presidential Campaign It's with a bashful grin that Lee Jae-myung tugs down his starched collar to reveal the half-inch scar where a would-be assassin's bladepierced his neck. The assailant had asked the leader of South Korea's Democratic Party for an autograph in January last year before lunging at him with a camping knife. "But compared to President Donald Trump," Lee says unprompted, "who had to endure a bullet that went by his ear, I can say that it had less of an impact." While nobody would minimize July'sattempted assassinationof Trump near Butler, Penn., the suggestion that his clipped ear was graver than Lee's wound stretches credulity. Trump walked from the dais triumphantlypunching the air; Lee was air-lifted to a hospital and spent days in intensive care following a two-hour surgery to repair a sliced jugular vein, with the wound a whisker from severing his carotid artery. But if contemporary diplomacy demands anything, it is deference to the notoriously skin-thinned 47th U.S. President—whether about his golf skill, rally size, or near-death experience. And as the clear frontrunner in South Korea's June 3 presidential election, Lee is already in full statesman mode. "He has outstanding skills in terms of negotiation and bargaining," Lee tells TIME in his only interview on the campaign trail. And he stands for the interests of the American people, which I think is desirable. The same applies for my position as well; I also need to look out for the interests of the Korean people, for their better lives, and for South Korea's national interests." Lee's next test in safeguarding those interests promises to be trickier: restoring stability to South Korea following thetumultuous ousterof former President Yoon Suk Yeol, whose impeachment was confirmed in April following his December 2024 declaration ofmartial law. Lee, who lost the 2022 election to Yoon by just 0.7%, led the charge for his rival's removal after live streaming himself climbing the National Assembly fence to bypass a police blockade in order to vote to repeal the martial law order. That controversy brought back dark memories of military dictatorship, as well as tens of thousands of South Koreans onto the street. It also galvanized support for Lee, who has in the eyes of many assumed the moral high ground, despite facingcriminal chargesfor breaking election law himself (the case is pending). Still, as Tuesday's ballot approaches, polls give the progressive Lee a double-digit lead over his closest rival, Kim Moon-soo, who represents the same conservative People Power Party (PPP) as the disgraced Yoon. Trailing the pack is former PPP lawmaker Lee Jun-seok, representing the upstart Reform Party. With the conservative vote split, Lee looks like a shoo-in. "I would say Lee's chances are 95%," says Andrei Lankov, a professor at Kookmin University in Seoul. "And this is a polite understatement." Not that Lee would have much time for celebrations. A packed agenda awaits whoever reaches the presidential office, including fixing a torpid economy, quelling an increasingly belligerent North Korea, and navigating an escalating global trade war. While other nations have been furiously negotiating with the White House to forge new trade deals in the wake of Trump's "reciprocal" tariffs introduced last month, South Korea's political vacuum has meant no progress has been made in reducing the 25% levy slapped on South Korean exports. Last year, South Korea sent cars worth $34.74 billion to the U.S., accounting for 49% of all its auto exports, yet American sales have dropped for thesecond straight month. Lee says that coming to an accord with the world's biggest economy is a top priority. "It is very important for us to engage in reasonable and rational conversations and come up with a solution that would benefit all," he says. Political paralysis is a problem anytime but doubly so when tensions are raised on the peninsula. In recent months North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has deployed troops to aid Russian President Vladimir Putin's war of choice in Ukraine, and Pyongyang conducted 47 missile tests in 2024 alone. But the demilitarized zone that has split the Korean peninsula since an armistice effectively ended the 1950-53 Korean War is far from the most pressing divide requiring attention. Lee will also have to find a way to heal his riven nation, whose people are utterly demoralized with bickering, partisanship, and a pathological inability to find consensus on any issue. Many conservatives and even centrists have been left enraged by how Yoon's impeachment and criminal investigation was handled by law enforcement agencies, courts, and also the National Assembly. Lee sees boosting opportunities for the next generation as one answer, solemnly noting that South Korea's economic growth rate drops by roughly one percent per presidential term, meaning last year's 2% may be wiped out soon unless drastic action is taken. "That has made young people feel that there's no hope for them," he says. "The fundamental solution is to bring back growth, and second is to mitigate the extreme polarization that the society is facing." If the scar that adorns Lee's neck wasn't evidence enough of just how viciously polarized South Korea has become, more comes in the shape of Tom, the lanky German shepherd enlisted to sweep our meeting room on the 9th floor of Seoul's Democratic Party headquarters for explosives. But in the redemptive arc of Lee's life story, even that knife attack doesn't stand out against the myriad hardships he has had to endure. Lee was born the fifth of seven children in an impoverished farming family in a tiny village in South Korea's bucolic east, where the whole family lived in a single room. In his retelling, he would walk a four-hour round trip to elementary school each day before returning home to plow fields. Too poor to even afford paper or crayons, on one occasion Lee was forced to clean the school toilets while his classmates went on an outing to an art contest. The school's small library was Lee's haven, allowing him to lose himself in adventure books such as Jules Verne'sTwenty Thousand Leagues Under the Seaas a fleeting respite from the bleakness that awaited at home. After quitting school at just 13, Lee lied about his age to work in factories and frequently fell victim to crooked bosses withholding wages. At one job, his wrist was crushed in a pressing machine, an injury that left him in constant pain and officially designated as disabled. That anguish, combined with his father's gambling addiction, led the young Lee to attempt suicide. "Having a difficult life is not my unique experience," he says. "But compared to elitist politicians who only view these things from outside, I had the privilege of actually experiencing them." Despite no formal secondary education, Lee was accepted to law school at the first attempt and passed the national bar exam immediately after graduation. He plunged himself into human and labor rights cases, determined to help exploited and disenfranchised workers like his past self. Later he went into politics and was elected Seongnam City Mayor and then Governor of Gyeonggi Province. Lee proved himself both popular and populist, earning the sobriquet of "Korea's Trump" during the 2022 election, though more for his trite solutions than any shared backstory or policy platform. During that campaign, Lee drew scorn for suggesting thathair loss treatmentshould be paid for by the state. He also advocated for a policy where 1 million won ($840 at the time) would be given to every citizen annually. Before the current election, he reprised a diluted version of this policy by proposing cash or voucher handouts of 250,000 won ($180 today) for Korea's entire 50 million population at a total cost of some $9 billion—touting a debunked "hotel economics" theory of consumption whereby phantom cash injections have a similar positive stimulus as real ones. (Lee now says whether to implement the scheme will be reviewed following the election.) But it's a focus on bromide policies that Lee's critics say are papering over cracks of the structural issues that blight Korean society. For ordinary South Koreans, bread-and-butter issues dominate campaigning, such as boosting jobs, lowering inflation, increasing affordable housing, reforming pensions, and tackling chaos in the schools, where bullying and assaults spurred over 32,000 teachers to quit before retirement age between 2019 and 2024, with a record high of 9,194 last year alone. But even if Lee wins as big as polls predict, it's doubtful that he can make any movement on structural reform. His Democratic Party predecessor,Moon Jae-in, had three years with a near supermajority in the legislature but had his agenda frustrated by party colleagues with little appetite for painful corrective measures. Other than doggedly pursuing an ultimately fruitless rapprochement with Pyongyang, the only two policies Moon managed to push through were cutting out nuclear power, which drastically increased South Korea's coal usage, and hiking the minimum wage, which pushed many young people out of work and closed small businesses. "Moon only had these two failed policies in three years [of legislative control]," says Sean O'Malley, a professor and political scientist at Dongseo University in Busan. "So I don't really expect any major structural changes this time around." Red tape and structural bottlenecks are the greatest obstacle to energizing South Korea's moribund economy. Lee has called for over 50,000 GPUs to boost the nation's AI industry, while in February the government announced it was building the world's largest AI data center. But the devil is in the details: the data center alone would require three gigawatts to run—or the equivalent of three nuclear reactors—at a time when state energy company Korea Electric Power Corp. is already $141.5 billion in debt. Lee has touted bringing nuclear back into the mix alongside renewables, but how Korea will power the revamping of its economy remains a huge question. Such woes may come as a surprise to Americans who think of South Korea in terms of world-leading firms like Samsung, Hyundai, and LG, as well as zeitgeist-defining cultural exports like K-pop sensationsBTSorBlackpinkand Netflix dramaSquid Game.But South Korea's story has always been one of struggle. Following the ravages of World War II and the Korean War, South Korea was derided as "the sick man of Asia," and for many years it was even more impoverished than the Stalinist north, which retained most of the peninsula's industrial base. Tuesday's election will come down to domestic issues, but the spectre of relations across the DMZ looms over the ballot. While Lee has made clear his priority is the economy, the occupant of the White House has other ideas. Trump has indicated his desire to return to the negotiating table with Kim Jong Un, after their 2019 Hanoi Summit ended in dramatic failure. Asked by reporters during an Oval Office meeting with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte on Jan. 20 whether he had plans to reestablish relations with Kim, Trump said: "I would … I have a great relationship with Kim Jong Un, and we'll see what happens, but certainly he's a nuclear power." The inference that Trump accepts North Korea as a nuclear state has led to speculation that any future negotiations may focus on reducing rather than eliminating the country's estimated arsenal of some 70 atomic bombs. Meanwhile, Trump's recent promise of a "golden dome" to protect the U.S. from missile threats has further alarmed East Asian allies who rely on America's security architecture. Today, around 70% of South Koreans support developing their own nuclear deterrent. Lee disagrees, however, saying that North Korea's nuclear capability and South Korea's "formidable conventional power" have reached a "balance of terror." Adding nuclear weapons, he posits, would "trigger a domino effect, where Japan and other countries go nuclear. The United States would want to avoid that." Certainly, North Korea's recent moves—sending weapons, ammunition, and troops to aid Putin's war in Ukraine—not to mention development of nuclear missiles, has turned a regional nuisance into a security migraine for Europe and the entire globe. North Korea's extensive help for Russia naturally has South Korean officials concerned about what Pyongyang is receiving in return. Beyond simply cash, this might be advanced weaponry and technological expertise to help North Korea perfect satellite, submarine, and re-entry technology for its ballistic missiles. "North Korea is in the best situation it has ever been for 35 years," says Lankov. "They have money from sales of ammunition and other military goods to Russia. And they have almost unconditional, if limited, Chinese support." At present, Lee's hands are largely tied by the bevy of U.N. sanctions from 2016 and 2017 that effectively bar any economic inducements. But if Trump is to rekindle the world's greatestdiplomatic soap opera—negotiating with the North Korean leader he once mocked as "little rocket man" but later claimed he "fell in love" with—few could stop him. "Kim Jong Un is waiting for some signal from Trump," says Kim Chol-min, a Seoul-based North Korean defector who used to handle the leadership's secret funds in China and the Middle East and uses a pseudonym for his family's security. "Then they will start talking." Lee agrees. "I understand that President Trump expects to engage in dialogue with Kim Jong Un," he says. "That is helpful for the peace of the Korean peninsula, as well as for Northeast Asia." While Moon Jae-in was instrumental in getting Trump and Kim to sit down, once negotiations began, South Korea found itself sidelined. Officials in Seoul are wary of the nation's security being bargained away, mindful of the treatment dished out to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. "It's not like Trump is going to put any interest into what Lee thinks about this project," says O'Malley. Lee sees things differently. "Even if the United States and North Korea engage in direct talks, certain economic cooperation or assistance-related issues could still arise," says Lee. "It's not easy structurally to actually sideline the South Korean government." North Korea has always been a contentious and divisive topic in the South. Since democratization in the 1980s, South Korean politics have been ideologically divided largely along Cold War lines, with conservatives lauding the achievements of the former military regime, favoring ties with Japan, and accusing their detractors of being pro-Pyongyang. Their progressive opponents, meanwhile, accuse the conservatives of anti-democratic tendencies and riding roughshod over human rights. It's not the only split between the camps, of course. In recent years, conservative Presidents including Yoon have increasingly been interested in contributing to regional and global security challenges far from the Korean Peninsula. However, progressive governments have been less adventurous in foreign policy, focusing more on Inter-Korean relations. Asked whether he would come to Taiwan's aid if the self-ruling island was attacked by China, Lee gives a cryptic reply: "I will think about that answer when aliens are about to invade the earth." Lee has previously been known as friendly towards China, though he has toned down some of that rhetoric at the stump to court the centrist vote. And regarding the U.S.-South Korea alliance, Lee has previously been rather cold towards Washington in line with Democratic Party orthodoxy. However, his tone has been more positive towards the U.S. on the campaign trail—and not just because of Trump. "South Korea is one of the world's most pro-American countries," says Lankov. "Even if the leadership of the South Korean left is not very enthusiastic about the United States, open confrontation is not going to sell with the public." Speaking to TIME, Lee even lauded Korean-based American forces that "actually play a very important critical role for the United States policy of containment against China." Lee also praised Washington's nascent rapprochement with Moscow, which he believes is "a means to exert pressure on China," as potentially benefiting South Korea via the possible opening of Arctic shipping routes. "If so, it could offer strategic advantages not only for the U.S. and Russia but also for Korea." More worrying for U.S. regional interests is Lee's attitude towards Japan, which he has repeatedly insisted should offer amore fulsome apologythan the many already issued for abuses during its World War II occupation of the peninsula. Such sentiments sent relations between the neighbors calamitously spiraling during the Moon administration before ties were repaired under Yoon. "We cannot dwell on the past," says Lee. "But Japan continues to deny its history and does not sincerely apologize, which hurts us Koreans." On a crisp May afternoon at Seoul's Songpanaru Park, Lee's 40-year-old presidential rival Lee Jun-seok gives a rousing speech to around 500 mostly male supporters who then line up to take selfies. "We've had enough of the 'woke' agenda," says supporter Lunar Kim, 24, as he watches from the crowd. Kim graduated from college two years ago yet has only just managed to find a job as an airport worker. "Lee Jae-myung says he's for 'equality' but it's actually tilted for women and against men." Yoon's gossamer-thin victory in 2022 was owed in part byweaponizing anti­feminist rhetoric to gain supportfrom disenfranchised young men, even vowing at the stump to abolish the Ministry of Gender Equality (which he ultimately didn't). Despite Yoon's dramatic ouster, this misogynistic base remains galvanized by the spread of misinformation and conspiracy theories on right-wing blogs and social media. South Koreans aged 18-30 face some of the worst relative poverty rates among OECD countries, and the perception among young men is that 18-monthcompulsory national serviceputs them at a marked disadvantage to their female peers, who are exempt. At the same time, the World Economic Forum's2024 Gender Gap Reportranks South Korea 94th out of 146 assessed nations worldwide. Kim Hyun-woo, a 20-year-old student at Ewha Womans University, laments the fact that this is the first South Korean presidential election in 18 years without a female candidate, despite women leading the charge for Yoon's impeachment. "We must not forget the role of women in the square who helped bring about this early election," she says, referring to the street demonstrations that accompanied the former President's ouster. "I want people to remember who created the protest culture." Asked about gender equality, Lee again seeks the middle ground, insisting that "efforts to improve women's rights must continue without fail," while acknowledging "a perception in Korean society that men are also subject to reverse discrimination." Ultimately, Lee knows he's in the catbird seat and is determined to keep his tent as open as possible—seeking not to alienate the progressives, centrists, nor even chauvinists. Supporters say this is the mark of a unifying candidate, though the fear remains that once voting is over, the old bitterness and acrimony will return without wholesale reform. Since democratization, four South Korean Presidents have been imprisoned, one killed himself amid a corruption investigation, and three have been impeached. This lamentable record is spurring calls to amend the constitution from the current single five-year term to two terms, as well as perhaps holding parliamentary elections at the same time as presidential to avoid the executive and legislature being constantly at odds with each other. "The day you get voted in is the day you become a lame duck," says Naomi Chi, a professor focusing on the Korean Peninsula at Hokkaido University. "I strongly believe that Korea should amend the Constitution to have two terms for the President. But people have an allergic reaction when anybody mentions such amendments." Lee is also in favor of constitutional reform, though a provision expressly prevents a sitting President from benefiting. It's set to be yet another divisive issue in a nation where political fissures have a sad history of turning violent. In 2006, future President Park Geun-hye suffered aknife attackthat left her with a four-inch cut along her jaw that required 60 stitches. In 2015, then U.S. Ambassador to South Korea Mark Lippert was alsoslashedin the face. Solving a deep-seated culture of political animosity may be the biggest test Lee has faced in a lifetime of challenges overcome. "The basic values that underpin democracy are all about recognizing the existence of the other," says Lee. "You can never say, 'I'm always right, you're always wrong.' My overarching principle is to meet, talk, and communicate." —With reporting by Stephen Kim/Seoul. Write toCharlie Campbell atcharlie.campbell@time.com.

Exclusive: Lee Jae-myung Aims to Steer South Korea Through Crisis

Exclusive: Lee Jae-myung Aims to Steer South Korea Through Crisis Lee Jae-myung as candidate for party leader at the 2022 Democratic Party o...

 

ISG POLITICS © 2015 | Distributed By My Blogger Themes | Designed By Templateism.com