Search results
511 results
-
Understanding Iran: A Nation Beyond Oil and Military Might Iran is not just a country in the Middle East. It is the land of Cyrus the Great, a nation that stood against Rome for 700 years, and a civilization that connected East and West through the Silk Road. However, history alone cannot fully explain modern Iran. The true forces driving Iran are not merely military power, oil, or nuclear development programs. Instead, they stem from deeper spiritual foundations, religious worldviews, and a collective memory accumulated over thousands of years. In this war, the United States analyzed the Revolutionary Guards capabilities and the scale of its nuclear facilities, calculating missile ranges and drone production capabilities. Yet, the core driving force behind Iran is far deeper than military bases. It is the flame of Zoroastrianism, the martyrdom spirit of Karbala, and the will for independence left by the Khomeini Revolution. While the U.S. focused on military strength, Iran viewed history; while the U.S. calculated the present, Iran calculated civilization.Today, the world refers to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam as Abrahamic religions. However, tracing their spiritual roots deeper leads to the vast civilization of Zoroastrianism. Emerging around 1000 B.C. in the Persian region, Zoroaster viewed the human world as a constant struggle between good and evil. The worldview of the good god Ahura Mazda and the evil force Angra Mainyu later evolved into concepts of heaven and hell, final judgment, salvation, and demons, significantly influencing Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Although Iran became Islamic after the 7th century, the spiritual traces of Zoroastrianism have not completely disappeared. Today, Irans society strongly retains a moral worldview of justice versus injustice, good versus evil, resistance versus martyrdom, which has become a crucial pillar of national identity.This Zoroastrian worldview has gained even greater spiritual strength through its intersection with Islam, particularly Shia Islam. While the vast majority of Muslims worldwide are Sunni, Iran is an exception. It is the central nation of the Shia world and can be considered the capital of Shia civilization. This stems from the Safavid dynasty in the 16th century. At that time, Persia had to confront the Sunni superpower Ottoman Empire and adopted Shia Islam as the state religion to maintain its unique civilizational identity. As a result, Iran has taken a completely different path from Saudi Arabia, another Islamic nation. The languages, histories, and worldviews differ significantly. While Saudi Arabia is the center of the Arab world, Iran is the heir to Persian civilization. Although they share the name of Islam, it is not an exaggeration to say they belong to fundamentally different civilizational spheres.The core spirit of Shia Islam was born at Karbala. In 680 A.D., Imam Hussein, the grandson of the Prophet Muhammad, fought against the overwhelming forces of the Umayyad dynasty and was martyred. While it was a military defeat, Shia Islam remembers it as a martyrdom for justice. To this day, millions in Iran commemorate Husseins sacrifice during the annual Ashura observance. This is not merely a religious event; it is a collective ritual reaffirming national identity. In the Shia world, sacrifice is not defeat but a testimony to uphold justice and a historical legacy passed on to future generations. Western strategists who believed they could subdue Iran through economic sanctions and military pressure failed to fully understand this spiritual structure.Over the past half-century, Iran has faced numerous crises. The Iran-Iraq War, which began with the invasion by Saddam Hussein in 1980, lasted for eight years, resulting in an estimated one million casualties in both countries. Even after the war, U.S. economic sanctions continued. Iran was effectively excluded from international financial networks, faced restrictions on advanced technology imports, and struggled to freely export crude oil. Nevertheless, the Iranian regime did not collapse. Instead, these pressures strengthened a collective consciousness among many Iranians that we do not succumb to foreign powers. While this may seem irrational from a Western perspective, it is a natural phenomenon when one understands Irans history and religion.The 1979 Islamic Revolution was a pivotal event that translated this spirit into a modern political system. At the time, the Pahlavi dynasty was one of Americas most important allies in the Middle East, and Tehran was considered the most modernized city in the region. However, behind the facade of economic growth, anxiety over identity loss was growing. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini capitalized on this sentiment. His revolution was not merely a religious one; it was an independence revolution aimed at breaking free from American influence and a national revolution to restore the pride of Persian civilization. The declaration, We are not a satellite state of the United States, was not just a political slogan but a revival of the historical memory of Persia, which had resisted foreign powers for thousands of years.The Revolutionary Guard, established after the revolution, is one of the key elements to understanding modern Iran. Western media often describe the Revolutionary Guard as a military organization, but its actual role is much more complex. They serve as a military force, intelligence agency, economic power, and political entity. Their influence extends across construction, energy, finance, and telecommunications. The Revolutionary Guard identifies itself as the guardian of the revolution and is not merely a military force protecting borders but an organization safeguarding the regime itself. In the current conflict, the Revolutionary Guard has played a crucial role in missile operations, drone attacks, information warfare, and managing pro-Iran networks abroad. While the U.S. is accustomed to confronting regular armies, it struggles to engage with the unique structure of the Revolutionary Guard.Irans nuclear development must also be understood in this context. While the West views it solely as a nuclear weapons issue, Iranians see it differently. Nuclear technology is not just an energy source; it symbolizes national pride and technological sovereignty. Interestingly, Irans nuclear program began not after the revolution but during the pro-American Pahlavi dynasty, when the U.S. actually supported Irans nuclear development. However, after the revolution, nuclear development took on new significance. It became a national will to secure independent scientific and technological capabilities despite foreign pressures. As U.S. sanctions intensified, nuclear technology gained even more symbolic meaning within Iranian society. When the nuclear agreement was reached in 2015, Iran viewed it not as a concession of rights but as an acknowledgment of its rights, and the subsequent U.S. withdrawal from the agreement reinforced the perception that ultimately, we can only rely on ourselves for protection.Ultimately, the biggest difference between the U.S. and Iran lies in their sense of time. The U.S. thinks in four-year election cycles and worries about quarterly economic indicators. Iran, however, remembers the Sassanid dynasty, the Safavid dynasty, Karbala, and the Khomeini Revolution. Events from 680 A.D. influence todays politics, and a dynasty from 500 years ago is part of todays national identity. What the U.S. fails to grasp is this long sense of time. While the U.S. focused on the present, Iran looked to history; while the U.S. calculated military power, Iran calculated civilization.Although the 106-day war has ended, the U.S. now faces the task of studying Iran anew. Iran is not merely an oil state, a theocratic state, or an anti-American state. It is a nation that remembers the flame of Zoroaster, the martyrdom of Karbala, and the will for independence forged by the Khomeini Revolution. While the U.S. saw nuclear facilities, Iran saw civilization. While the U.S. calculated sanctions, Iran calculated generations. While the U.S. trusted military power, Iran trusted history and belief. And that difference was the essence of this war.However, history is not completed by the past alone. For a civilization to survive, it must create a future. Now that the war has ended, Iran faces another monumental challenge: to create prosperity beyond mere survival and to achieve reconstruction beyond resistance. It is at this juncture that the country of South Korea begins to hold new significance. A new narrative is beginning, connecting post-war recovery, the new Silk Road, Tehran Road, the AI revolution, and the spirit of Hongik Ingan.* This article has been translated by AI. June 15, 2026 15:24 -
Public Discontent Reflected in Recent Polls: A Call for Political Responsibility Recent public opinion survey results have sent shockwaves through the political landscape. The ruling People Power Party (PPP) recorded a support rate of 44.3%, while the Democratic Party (DP) stood at 38.0%. This marks the first time since the inauguration of President Lee Jae-myung that the PPP has surpassed the DP by a margin outside the margin of error. President Lees approval rating has also dropped to 51.5%, marking a decline for four consecutive weeks and nearly a 9 percentage point drop over the past month. The significance of these numbers lies not just in the figures themselves but in their implications. This shift in public sentiment reflects widespread disappointment and dissatisfaction with the political arena rather than a mere increase in support for a specific party. The controversy surrounding the Election Commissions handling of the June 3 local elections has left a profound impact on the public. Issues such as a shortage of ballots and vote counting errors are unacceptable in a democratic society. Elections are the cornerstone of democracy, and any erosion of trust in the electoral process inevitably undermines confidence in politics as a whole. Compounding these issues are the burdens of high inflation, soaring exchange rates, and an economic slowdown. The economic situation felt by the public is far from favorable. Small business owners are reaching their limits, and young people are struggling with employment and housing challenges. Citizens expect political leaders to address these pressing issues, yet the reality is filled with blame-shifting and political strife. Following the local elections, the DP has been engulfed in internal accountability discussions. Even within the party, calls for leadership accountability have surfaced. The controversies surrounding Representative Jeong Cheong-rae and factional conflicts reflect the instability of the ruling party. The focus on internal power struggles rather than a sober evaluation of the election results and necessary reforms is concerning. The PPP must also avoid misreading the situation. Following the rise in support, the party has quickly escalated its confrontational stance against the opposition, forming a special committee to prevent trial cancellations and discussing the possibility of impeachment. While opposition oversight is necessary, much of the support sent to the PPP by the public is a reflection of dissatisfaction with the DPs governance and the Election Commissions issues. Interpreting this as a comprehensive victory for the ruling party would be a misreading of public sentiment. One crucial aspect that the political sphere is overlooking is that this public opinion survey serves as a warning to the ruling party while also expressing expectations for the opposition. The public is not seeking a victory for one side but rather a return to normalcy in politics. Accountability for electoral failures is essential, as is the recovery of livelihoods. However, the focus of all discussions must center on the citizens. President Lee Jae-myung recently stated, We must speak the language of responsibility rather than the language of conviction, and our focus should be on the entire nation, not just our factions. This is a message that the entire political landscape must heed. When politics becomes trapped in factional logic, the public disappears, leaving only the support base. The ruling party must remember its responsibility for governance, while the opposition must not forget its duty to propose alternatives. The reversal in support ratings just one year into the administration serves as a warning from the public to the political sphere. If both parties consume this as merely fuel for further political strife, the alienation of the public will only accelerate. The public desires a politics that works rather than one that fights. They seek accountable governance rather than a politics of blame. What is needed now is neither the cheers of the victors nor the excuses of the defeated, but an acknowledgment of what has gone wrong and a demonstration of what will be changed. That is the foundation, the principle, and the common sense. June 15, 2026 14:30 -
End of 106-Day War Marks New Era in the Middle East June 15, 2026, is likely to be recorded as a turning point in modern Middle Eastern history. On this day, President Donald Trump announced that negotiations for peace between the United States and Iran had reached a final agreement, which was officially confirmed by the Iranian government and the mediating country, Pakistan. The two sides are set to sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for peace in Switzerland on June 19. The war, which began on February 28 with large-scale airstrikes by the U.S. and Israel on Iranian nuclear and military facilities, has effectively come to an end after 106 days.The duration of 106 days can be seen as both short and long. However, it encapsulated decades of hostility between the U.S. and Iran, Israels security concerns, sectarian conflicts in the Middle East, the international energy order, and U.S.-China power competition. This war was not merely a military conflict involving missiles and drones; it represented a geopolitical clash of the core contradictions of 21st-century international politics.While the fighting has ceased, history is just beginning. The true winners and losers of this war will be determined by the order established in the aftermath of the gunfire.◆ How the War Started and Ended in 106 DaysThe immediate trigger for this war was the preemptive strikes by the U.S. and Israel. Both nations assessed that Iran was nearing the point of acquiring nuclear weapons. Reports from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and analyses from Western intelligence agencies indicated that Iran had amassed a significant amount of enriched uranium.From Israels perspective, there were few options. The moment Iran obtained nuclear weapons, the strategic balance in the Middle East would be completely disrupted. Israel has survived surrounded by hostile nations since its founding, making Irans nuclear armament not just a security issue but a matter of national survival.The U.S. also concluded that it could no longer tolerate Irans nuclear development. The Trump administration maintained a firm stance of never allowing Iran to acquire nuclear weapons since taking office. Consequently, at the end of February, the U.S. and Israel launched extensive airstrikes.However, contrary to expectations, Iran did not collapse. Instead of engaging in direct confrontation, Iran opted for asymmetric warfare. It employed long-range missiles, drones, maritime blockades, and indirect attacks through Iran-aligned armed groups. Hezbollah in Lebanon, Houthi rebels in Yemen, pro-Iran forces in Syria, and Shiite militias in Iraq quickly expanded the front lines throughout the Middle East.The world grew tense. Particularly, the Strait of Hormuz was effectively paralyzed, causing international oil prices to surge and financial markets to become unstable. The strait, through which over 20% of the worlds oil trade passes, sent shockwaves throughout the Asian economy.As time passed, the U.S., Iran, and Israel began to recognize the limits of the war. The U.S. could not topple the Iranian regime, Iran could not expel the U.S. from the Middle East, and Israel could not secure complete safety.Ultimately, the three nations acknowledged that the costs of continuing the war far exceeded the costs of seeking peace.◆ Netanyahus Calculations: Between Victory and BurdenTo understand this war, one cannot overlook Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.Netanyahu has maintained the most hardline stance against Iran in history. For decades, he has argued that Irans nuclear armament could lead to a second Holocaust.In this war, Netanyahu achieved some of his objectives. Many Iranian nuclear facilities were struck, and Irans military infrastructure suffered significant losses. Pro-Iran groups across the Middle East also sustained considerable damage.However, it was not a complete victory.Israel incurred enormous military expenses, and tourism and investment were adversely affected. Most importantly, the public began to feel fatigue from the endless war. What the Israeli people desire is not perpetual conflict but a stable daily life.Ultimately, Netanyahu chose to confront reality. He adjusted his position to accept an agreement that would involve Irans abandonment of nuclear weapons and an international monitoring system. He found a balance between ideals and reality.Trumps True Target: Not Iran, But ChinaThe key to understanding this peace agreement lies with China. While the conflict appeared to be between the U.S. and Iran, American strategists had China in mind.Today, the focus of U.S. national strategy is not the Middle East but the Indo-Pacific. The primary concern for the U.S. is not Iran but the rise of China. The U.S.-China competition spans nearly all strategic industries, including artificial intelligence, semiconductors, quantum technology, space industry, electric vehicles, and rare earth supply chains.For President Trump, a prolonged war in the Middle East is a strategic nightmare. If military power, diplomacy, and finances are tied up in the Middle East, the U.S. cannot concentrate on countering China.Thus, this peace agreement can be viewed not merely as a treaty but as a strategic realignment for the U.S. It aims to resolve some Middle Eastern issues and shift the focus toward the Indo-Pacific.The U.S. has now entered an era where semiconductors are considered more important than oil. Trumps decision to pursue peace symbolizes this shift.◆ What China and Russia Stand to GainInterestingly, China and Russia remained quieter than expected during this war.China publicly called for peace but played a crucial role in supporting Irans economy. It remains a major importer of Iranian oil.Chinas goal was clear: it hoped the U.S. would remain bogged down in the Middle East. The longer the U.S. expended its energy there, the more strategic space China could secure in East Asia.Russia felt similarly. Burdened by the war in Ukraine, Russia did not view the U.S. diverting its attention to the Middle East negatively.However, if the war prolonged, the instability in the international oil market could become excessive. Ultimately, both China and Russia also desired a resolution to the conflict.◆ Understanding Iran and the Persian SpiritThe West often views Iran as merely a theocratic state. However, this perspective fails to grasp the complexity of Iran.Iran is not just a nation; it is the heir to Persian civilization. Since the establishment of the Achaemenid Empire by Cyrus the Great in the 6th century BC, Persia has created one of the greatest civilizations in human history. Cyrus, who liberated the Jews from Babylonian captivity, is still regarded today as a symbol of tolerance and inclusivity.The Persians possess a strong sense of pride and historical consciousness. They distinguish themselves from the Arab world, with different languages, cultures, and historical identities.The reason Iran was able to endure throughout this war was not solely due to military strength but also this civilizational pride.Iran is a nation that chooses to endure suffering rather than admit defeat. It has developed a unique spirit of resilience and resistance through thousands of years of foreign invasions.Thus, the U.S. ultimately abandoned its goal of toppling the Iranian regime, reaffirming that Iran is not a country that can be easily subdued despite military pressure.◆ Impact on the South Korean Economy and Energy MarketSouth Korea is likely to be one of the direct beneficiaries of this peace agreement.As South Korea imports most of its energy, any disruption in the stable supply of oil and LNG from the Middle East would immediately impact its economy.Particularly, the refining, petrochemical, steel, shipbuilding, and automotive industries are closely linked to international oil prices. If the Strait of Hormuz normalizes, logistics costs are likely to stabilize, reducing energy cost burdens.Above all, the uncertainty in financial markets will decrease, aiding in currency stability.The semiconductor industry may also benefit positively. Stable energy prices can lead to a recovery in manufacturing competitiveness.South Koreas economy is affected by even a $10 fluctuation in oil prices, impacting the entire import-export structure. In this regard, this peace agreement is not just a diplomatic development but a significant variable for the South Korean economy.◆ The Future of the Middle EastIf this agreement is successfully implemented, the Middle East could enter a new era.First, the relationship between Saudi Arabia and Iran may stabilize further. Second, normalization of relations between Israel and the Arab world could be pursued again. Third, economic development projects in the Middle East could gain momentum. Fourth, the competition between Chinas Belt and Road Initiative and the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) could enter a new phase. Fifth, the Middle East may transform from a land of war into a land of investment and technology.Of course, numerous obstacles remain before these prospects can become reality, including issues of nuclear verification, sanctions relief, Hezbollah and Houthi rebel concerns, and domestic political issues in Israel.However, for now, the gunfire has ceased.Peace is more challenging than war.Humanity has experienced too much war: World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, the Iraq War, the Ukraine War, and now this war with Iran. History has continuously shown humanitys destructive instincts.However, it is peace, not war, that has advanced civilization.War destroys cities, while peace builds them. War kills people, while peace saves them. War breeds hatred, while peace creates a future.This 106-day war has left many lessons. The U.S. learned that it cannot change the Middle East solely through force, Iran realized that resistance alone cannot lead to prosperity, and Israel understood that military power alone cannot guarantee eternal safety.Ultimately, all three nations returned to the negotiation table.That is the essence of international politics. War begins when negotiations fail, and negotiations resume when war fails.The signing ceremony scheduled for June 19, 2026, in Switzerland is not just a diplomatic event. It marks the end of a 106-day war and the starting line for a new order in the Middle East.History is now turning another page in the Middle East. Whether that page will be one of peace or another chapter of conflict remains uncertain. However, one thing is clear.The sounds of gunfire and bombing that echoed for 106 days are coming to a halt.And humanity is once again presented with the opportunity to choose peace over war. Seizing that opportunity is now the most important task for the U.S., Iran, Israel, and the international community. June 15, 2026 14:21 -
ASIA INSIGHT: End of 106-day war and beginning of new Middle East How US-Iran End of War Changes World Order June 15, 2026 is highly likely to be recorded as a turning point in modern Middle Eastern history. On this day, US President Donald Trump announced that negotiations to end the war between the United States and Iran had reached a final settlement, which was officially confirmed by the Iranian government and the mediating nation, Pakistan. Both sides are scheduled to sign a memorandum of understanding on the end of the war in Switzerland on the 19th. The war, which lasted for 106 days since the United States and Israel launched massive airstrikes on Iranian nuclear and military facilities on February 28, has effectively come to an end. A period of 106 days can be seen as either short or long. However, those 106 days were a time when decades of hostile relations between the US and Iran, Israel's security anxieties, sectarian conflicts in the Middle East, the international energy order, and the hegemonic rivalry between the US and China all collided at once. This war was not simply a military clash involving exchanges of missiles and drones, but a geopolitical collision condensing the core contradictions of 21st-century international politics. The war is over, but history begins now. The true winners and losers of this war will be determined by what kind of order is established in the place where the gunfire has ceased. 106 Days of War, How It Started and How It Ended The direct trigger for this war was a preemptive strike by the US and Israel. The US and Israel determined that Iran had practically reached the stage right before possessing nuclear weapons. Reports from the International Atomic Energy Agency and analyses by Western intelligence agencies assessed that Iran had secured a significant level of highly enriched uranium. From Israel's perspective, there were not many options. The moment Iran acquired nuclear weapons, the strategic balance in the Middle East would completely collapse. Since its founding, Israel has survived while constantly surrounded by hostile nations. Therefore, Iran's nuclear armament was not merely a security issue but a matter of national survival. The US also decided that it could no longer neglect Iran's nuclear development. Since taking office, the Trump administration maintained the position that it would absolutely not tolerate Iran's nuclear armament. Ultimately, at the end of February, the US and Israel carried out massive airstrikes. However, contrary to expectations, Iran did not collapse. Iran chose asymmetric warfare instead of direct frontal combat. Long-range missiles, drones, naval blockades, and proxy attacks utilizing pro-Iranian armed groups followed. With Hezbollah in Lebanon, Houthi rebels in Yemen, pro-Iranian factions in Syria, and Shiite militias in Iraq all mobilizing, the front lines instantly expanded across the entire Middle East. The world grew tense. In particular, as the Strait of Hormuz was virtually paralyzed, international oil prices skyrocketed and financial markets were engulfed in anxiety. When the strait, through which more than 20 percent of the world's crude oil cargo passes, was shaken, the entire Asian economic bloc suffered a shock. But as time passed, the US, Iran, and Israel all began to realize the limitations of war. The US failed to topple the Iranian regime, and Iran failed to drive the US out of the Middle East. Israel also failed to secure complete security. Eventually, all three countries came to acknowledge the reality that the cost of continuing the war had become far greater than the cost of seeking peace. Netanyahu's Calculation, Between Victory and Burden To understand this war, one cannot leave out Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu is a leader who has maintained the most hardline anti-Iran stance in history. For decades, he has argued that Iranian nuclear armament could bring about a second Holocaust. In fact, Netanyahu achieved his goals to some extent in this war. Many of Iran's nuclear facilities were hit, and its military infrastructure also suffered heavy losses. Pro-Iranian proxy groups across the Middle East took significant damage as well. However, it was not a complete victory. Israel spent massive amounts on military expenditures, while tourism and investment shrank. Above all, the public began to feel fatigued by the endless war. What Israeli citizens want is not eternal war but stable daily lives. Netanyahu ultimately chose reality. He adjusted his position to accept an agreement predicated on the abandonment of nuclear weapons and an international monitoring system. He found a balance between ideals and reality. Trump's Real Target is Not Iran but China The key to understanding this end of war is China. On the surface, it appears to be a war between the US and Iran, but China was on the minds of US strategists. Today, the center of US national strategy is not the Middle East but the Indo-Pacific. What the US fears most is not Iran but the rise of China. US-China competition is unfolding in almost every strategic industry, including artificial intelligence, semiconductors, quantum technology, the space industry, electric vehicles, and rare earth supply chains. From President Trump's perspective, a prolonged Middle East war is a strategic nightmare. If military power, diplomatic efforts, and finances are tied up in the Middle East, the US cannot focus on keeping China in check. Therefore, this end of war can be seen not merely as a peace agreement but as a strategic redeployment for the US. It aims to settle Middle Eastern issues to some extent and shift the center of gravity to the Indo-Pacific. The US has now entered an era where it considers semiconductors more important than oil. Trump's decision to end the war is a symbolic scene of such changing times. What China and Russia Gained An interesting point is that China and Russia were quieter than expected during this war. China publicly called for peace but in reality played an important role as a pillar supporting the Iranian economy. China remains a major importer of Iranian crude oil. China's goal was clear. It wanted the US to be tied down in the Middle East for a long time. The more the US exhausts its power in the Middle East, the more China can secure strategic space in East Asia. The same went for Russia. Burdened by the war in Ukraine, Russia never viewed the diversion of US attention to the Middle East as a bad thing. However, if the war were to be prolonged, the instability of the international crude oil market could grow excessively large. Eventually, China and Russia also came to want an end to the war at a certain level. Country Named Iran and Temperament of Persians Western nations often view Iran simply as a theocracy. However, that is a perspective that fails to understand Iran properly. Iran is not just a simple country. Iran is the successor to Persian civilization. Persia achieved one of the greatest civilizations in human history since the Achaemenid Empire founded by Cyrus the Great in the 6th century BC. Cyrus the Great, who liberated Jewish people from their Babylonian captivity, is still regarded today as a symbol of tolerance and inclusion. Persians possess strong pride and historical consciousness. They distinguish themselves from the Arab world. Their language is different, their culture is different, and their historical identity is different. The reason Iran was able to hold out until the end in this war was also not simply due to military power but because of this civilizational pride. Iran is a country that chooses to endure pain rather than admit defeat. It has a unique spirit of patience and resistance formed through experiencing foreign invasions over thousands of years. That is why the US ultimately abandoned its goal of collapsing the Iranian regime. It reaffirmed the fact that the country named Iran is not one that can be easily brought to its knees, even if it can be pressured militarily. Impact on Korean Economy and Energy Market South Korea is highly likely to become one of the direct beneficiaries of this end of war. South Korea imports most of its energy. If crude oil and liquefied natural gas are not stably supplied from the Middle East, the South Korean economy will receive an immediate shock. In particular, oil refining, petrochemicals, steel, shipbuilding, and automobile industries are closely linked to international oil prices. If the Strait of Hormuz is normalized, logistics costs will stabilize and the burden of energy costs is highly likely to decrease. Above all, uncertainty in the financial market will decrease. It will also help stabilize exchange rates. It could also have a positive impact on the semiconductor industry. This is because the stabilization of energy prices leads to the recovery of manufacturing competitiveness. The South Korean economy is affected across its entire import and export structure even if crude oil prices move by just 10 dollars. In that regard, this end of war is not merely diplomatic news but a crucial variable for the South Korean economy. Where Middle East is Heading If this agreement is successfully implemented, the Middle East could enter a new era. First, relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran have the potential to become more stable. Second, the normalization of relations between Israel and the Arab world could be pursued again. Third, Middle Eastern economic development projects could begin in earnest. Fourth, the competition between China's Belt and Road Initiative and the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor could also enter a new phase. Fifth, the Middle East gains the potential to transform from a land of war into a land of investment and technology. Of course, numerous obstacles remain before such prospects become reality. Issues regarding nuclear verification, the lifting of sanctions, Hezbollah and Houthi rebels, and Israel's domestic politics still exist. But at least for now, the gunfire has stopped. Peace is Harder Than War Humanity has experienced too many wars. From World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, the Iraq War, the Ukraine War, to this Iran War. History has constantly demonstrated the destructive instinct of human beings. However, what advanced civilization was not war but peace. War destroys cities, but peace builds them. War kills people, but peace saves them. War fosters hatred, but peace creates the future. This 106-day war left many lessons. The US learned that it cannot change the Middle East through power alone, and Iran learned that it cannot achieve prosperity through resistance alone. Israel learned that it cannot be guaranteed eternal safety through military force alone. Eventually, all three nations returned to the negotiation table. That is the essence of international politics. War begins when negotiations fail, and negotiations resume when war fails. The signing ceremony scheduled in Switzerland on June 19, 2026, is not a simple diplomatic event. It marks the conclusion of the war that lasted 106 days and the starting line for a new Middle Eastern order. History is turning another page in the Middle East right now. Whether that page will become a chapter of peace or the prelude to another conflict remains unknown. But one thing is clear. The sounds of gunfire and bombing that echoed for 106 days are coming to a halt. And humanity is once again gaining the opportunity to choose peace over war. Seizing that opportunity is now the most important task given to the US, Iran, Israel, and the entire international community. June 15, 2026 14:08 -
China's State Media Comments on US-Iran Peace Agreement, Cautions on Israel's Role On June 15, Chinas state media commented on the progress of peace negotiations between the US and Iran, stating that the world has taken notice of Irans remarkable resilience and warned that Israel could emerge as a significant variable in the Middle East situation. In a commentary on the social media account of the state-run Xinhua News Agency, Newtanqin, it was noted, This war has dragged on for a long time and caused many casualties, but both the US and Iran will claim victory. It added, In modern international politics, there are no absolute winners or losers, only face-saving measures. Newtanqin explained that President Donald Trump would highlight Irans commitment to permanently abandon nuclear weapons as a major achievement, while Iran would assert its victory by maintaining control over the Strait of Hormuz despite pressure from superpowers and the US agreeing to lift asset freezes. Conversely, Israel was described as being in a complex emotional state and could potentially become another significant variable. The commentary pointed out that while Israel attempted to leverage instability in the Middle East to gain a strategic advantage, it ultimately failed to achieve its objectives. Newtanqin characterized the US-Iran peace agreement as a significant boon for a world fraught with uncertainty. It noted that the peace process was fraught with challenges, stating, Peace is not a gift that comes easily; it is the result of parties that can no longer sustain war choosing to restrain their desires, cease conflicts, and minimize losses. The commentary further suggested that the recent developments serve as a textbook example revealing the illusion of military hegemony, asserting that while hegemony can instigate wars and chaos, it cannot control situations or resolve disputes. Newtanqin criticized the assumption that military attacks could subdue a major power like Iran, stating, Ultimately, they found themselves trapped in the quagmire of war, exposing their weaknesses and left with no choice but to opt for a ceasefire and compromise. It emphasized that although Iran has paid a heavy price, the situation has led the world to reassess its view of Iran. The media noted, Iran withstood attacks from two military powers (the US and Israel) and, by not backing down, managed to extract concessions from its adversaries, adding that some aspects of the agreement were previously unimaginable for Iran. It concluded that while great powers can exert pressure and torment, they cannot completely subdue a nation determined to maintain its bottom line. On June 14, the US and Iran announced they would officially sign a memorandum of understanding for the immediate and permanent cessation of military operations between the two nations. This comes 106 days after the US and Israel initiated the conflict with airstrikes on Iran on February 28. The two countries are set to hold an official signing ceremony in Switzerland on June 19. June 15, 2026 11:06 -
Addressing the Housing Crisis: The MZ Generation's Struggles [Addressing the Housing Crisis: The MZ Generations Struggles] Special Column ② Jung Jae-hwan, Head of the Comprehensive Editorial Department & Deputy Director Delaying Births and Pushing for Home Ownership A woman in her early 30s, married for four years, exemplifies the MZ generation. While her parents hope to see her raise a beautiful child and build a harmonious family, her priorities differ. Her primary goal is not childbirth, travel, or a leisurely lifestyle, but rather securing her own home. Having won a lottery for an apartment a few years ago, she is set to move in next year, but gathering the necessary funds for the down payment and final payment is proving challenging. Plans for childbirth have naturally been postponed. To save on living expenses, she and her husband both work, opting to run in their neighborhood instead of going to the gym. They often rely on her parents for side dishes. To save on rent, they plan to move into an old, inexpensive government housing unit for the remaining year. Once I have my own home, I want to think about having kids and live a normal life while paying off my debts, she says, reflecting the reality faced by many young people today. Their struggles are not due to laziness or unrealistic expectations; rather, they are working diligently. They do not expect favors or privileges from the established powers. They simply desire a society where hard work is rewarded according to one’s principles. However, reality often betrays those expectations. The Call for Fairness in Society Recent statistics show that nearly half of apartment purchases in Seoul are made by individuals under 30, highlighting the urgency felt by the youth. Unlike the ultra-low interest rates of the past, the current environment features stricter lending regulations and higher rates. Nevertheless, young people are selling stocks and cryptocurrencies to take out first-time homebuyer loans, driven by the fear that missing this opportunity could mean never owning a home. The Bank of Korea recently reported that rising real estate prices are exacerbating wealth inequality and diminishing opportunities for young people to build assets. Even with hard work and decent incomes, surpassing the wealth accumulated by previous generations is becoming increasingly difficult. This is a key reason why many young people are delaying marriage and childbirth. However, the challenges facing the MZ generation extend beyond housing prices. Their true anger stems from a belief that the societal systems they rely on are failing to function properly. When the belief that hard work leads to rewards is shaken, and the assurance of fair competition crumbles, frustration turns to anger. During the June 3 local elections, incidents of ballot shortages in areas like Songpa, Seoul, amplified this distrust. Elections are the cornerstone of democracy, representing the most fundamental process for citizens to express their will, and must be conducted with accuracy and fairness. The fact that voters had to wait long hours only to find a lack of ballots was shocking to many. Young people did not view this issue as a mere administrative error. For those who took time out of their busy schedules to vote, the ballot shortage felt like a message saying, Your vote doesn’t matter. Many young voters gathered in the Olympic Park area in Jamsil identified themselves not as supporters of any specific party or political faction, but simply as voters. Their demands were not for a grand revolution but for the basic principles of popular sovereignty and voting rights in a democracy. The Impact of Election Irregularities on Trust This is a crucial point for the older generation to consider. Today’s 2030 generation is the most educated and information-savvy in South Koreas history. They are also the most sensitive to fairness. They demand equitable rules in every aspect, from education and employment to promotions and investments. As a result, they have a strong aversion to privileges and unfair practices. To this generation, the real estate market no longer appears to be a level playing field. Parental wealth determines the starting line, and rising home prices seem to dictate wealth based on asset ownership rather than effort. Witnessing confusion in the electoral process, a core democratic procedure, only heightens their sense of deprivation, which is likely more profound than the older generation realizes. The recent protests by young people cannot be interpreted solely as political actions. Underlying these demonstrations are accumulated feelings of loss and distrust. There is frustration over having to delay childbirth to buy a home and the reality of taking out loans against their futures. There is also a sense of powerlessness in the difficulty of social mobility despite hard work, and a feeling of alienation when their voices are not adequately heard in politics. Of course, some voices of concern have emerged. There are warnings that interpreting the ballot shortage too politically or spreading unverified claims could exacerbate social conflict. This is a valid perspective that deserves attention. However, this does not mean that we should ignore the anger of young people. It is crucial to understand why they are angry and why they have taken to the streets. Criticizing only the symptoms without addressing the root causes will not solve the problem. What is needed now is a serious acknowledgment of the warning signals they are sending, rather than framing their voices through a lens of political advantage or disadvantage. The 40 to 60 age group must not view this issue as someone elses problem. Todays youth will be the backbone of South Koreas future. If they abandon marriage, delay childbirth, and lose trust in politics, the entire society will ultimately pay the price. The despair of the youth is, in essence, the despair of the nation. The Need for Policy Changes to Support Youth Now, it is time for the political sphere to respond. Above all, a thorough investigation into the ballot shortage during the June 3 local elections and measures to prevent recurrence are essential. The integrity and trustworthiness of elections are the lifeblood of democracy. No doubts, however minor, should be left unaddressed. Clear explanations and responsible actions must follow. Simultaneously, there is a need for a policy shift to expand opportunities for young people to build assets. Simple cash support or one-time measures will not suffice. We must restore the housing ladder, create quality jobs, and restore hope that hard work can lead to a better future. What my daughter wants is not a privilege. Many in the 2030 generation share this desire. They seek hope that they can secure a home, confidence that they can have children without worrying about the future, and trust that their votes will be fully respected. These are the minimum rights that every citizen in a democratic society should enjoy. Addressing the tears of the MZ generation is not just about comforting a few young people; it is about safeguarding the future of South Korea. It is now the turn of the older generation and the political sphere to respond. We must restore the belief in the value of hard work and fair rules for the youth. This is the most pressing task our society must undertake today. June 15, 2026 10:39 -
The Dignity of the National Assembly When asked if the terms National Assembly and dignity go together in our country, how many would answer affirmatively? The National Assembly, comprised of 300 representatives of South Koreas 51.6 million citizens, must embody dignity as it determines the nations direction. There have indeed been moments when the National Assembly has demonstrated its dignity. Even within the context of the 22nd National Assembly, there were notable instances. The night of the December 3 emergency martial law was a prime example of a dignified assembly. A significant moment occurred when Han Dong-hoon, the leader of the People Power Party, was allowed into the main assembly hall, despite not being a sitting member at the time. In a chaotic situation, opening the doors of the assembly hall—accessible only to lawmakers—for a colleague who might be arrested showcased a relinquishing of privilege and a display of dignity. Members of the National Assembly who climbed over the walls to demand the lifting of martial law, along with then-Speaker Woo Won-sik, who patiently ensured procedural legitimacy during a critical time, upheld the dignity of South Koreas democracy that night. Similarly, the efforts of lawmaker Kim Ye-ji, who engaged in an unlimited debate for 17 hours and 35 minutes while using Braille to record her opposition to a government investigation pushed by the ruling party, exemplified the dignity of a representative standing in the assembly. Her struggle to document dissent against the majoritys agenda highlighted the role of lawmakers as representatives of the people. However, it is regrettable that the 22nd National Assembly did not consistently maintain its dignity. There have been instances where members have disrespected their colleagues, undermining the assemblys integrity. A notable incident occurred in April when members of the Democratic Party disregarded lawmaker Kim Guns speech during a session, opting instead to take a commemorative photograph. Regardless of the discomfort with a colleagues remarks, lawmakers must listen to one another, as they all represent the public. Listening to others during official meetings and refraining from interruptions is a lesson even elementary school students understand. Yet, members of the National Assembly have resorted to jeering and shouting down colleagues, even taking photographs with their backs turned to a speaking member. Such behavior, which would be unacceptable in a classroom, tarnishes not only the assemblys dignity but also the respect owed to the public. It is also concerning that committee chairs frequently order members to leave. In committees where discussions and deliberations are essential for sound legislation, expelling a member is akin to dismissing the citizens they represent. Whether from the ruling party or the opposition, all lawmakers represent the public. Suppressing them through position and authority is not dignified politics. On June 5, the new leadership of the National Assembly was elected, marking the official preparation for the second half of the 22nd National Assembly. This upcoming session faces numerous pressing issues, including the allocation of committee positions among negotiating groups and investigations into the Central Election Management Commissions failures during the June 3 local elections. While there is a general consensus between the ruling and opposition parties regarding the need for investigations, concerns remain about differing agendas. It is crucial for the assembly to demonstrate its dignity by prioritizing the publics interests over party politics in addressing this unprecedented infringement on citizens voting rights. The Standard Korean Dictionary defines politics as the act of governing a country. While the pursuit of power to govern is included in a broad definition of politics, the essence of politics lies in effectively managing the state to fulfill its obligations. With the elections concluded, it is hoped that political time will now commence. As a citizen rather than a reporter, I still believe that the National Assembly is a place that upholds the dignity of our nation.* This article has been translated by AI. June 15, 2026 06:06 -
Reinventing South Korea: The AI Revolution as a Last Golden Opportunity History does not offer the same opportunities to every nation. Some remain on the periphery for centuries, while others miss critical chances and decline. Conversely, some countries seize pivotal moments to rise to the center of world history. South Korea belongs to the latter group. After its liberation in 1945, South Korea emerged from the devastation of the Korean War in the 1950s, overcoming poverty through industrialization in the 1960s and 1970s. By the 1980s and 1990s, it had reached the threshold of developed nation status through democratization and globalization. Since the 2000s, South Korea has grown into a technology powerhouse, drawing global attention with its advancements in semiconductors and information and communication technology (ICT). Now, South Korea stands at another historical crossroads. The local elections have concluded, and the administration of Lee Jae-myung is preparing for its second term. A change in the Prime Minister is being pursued, and both ruling and opposition parties are discussing a reshuffle of their leadership structures. While political changes are underway, a more significant transformation is occurring on the global stage. The United States and China are betting their national futures on the competition for artificial intelligence (AI) supremacy. The AI revolution, led by companies like NVIDIA, is shaking up industrial structures, with semiconductors, data centers, and power grids becoming new benchmarks for national competitiveness. Low birth rates and an aging population are straining economic and welfare systems, while the global order is undergoing massive changes characterized by supply chain restructuring and technological blockades. South Korea is at the center of the most significant structural changes since its industrialization. The world is currently experiencing the most significant civilizational shift since the Industrial Revolution. AI is not merely a new technology; it represents a new industrial order and a new operating system for civilization. Just as the steam engine sparked the Industrial Revolution, electricity ushered in the mass production era, and the internet led to the information revolution, AI is reshaping intellectual labor and the very fabric of societal governance. The criteria for national competitiveness are also changing. In the past, territory, population, and resources were paramount. Later, manufacturing, finance, and information technology defined national strength. Now, AI, data, semiconductors, energy, and the talent to utilize these resources will determine a nations future. This shift presents both a crisis and an opportunity for South Korea. The essence of the AI revolution is the semiconductor revolution. Today, the global AI industry operates on NVIDIAs GPUs and the memory semiconductors produced by Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix. Notably, high-bandwidth memory (HBM), a critical component of AI servers, has emerged as a strategic asset that determines AI performance. If AI is the brain, memory is its memory; just as a brain cannot exist without memory, AI cannot function without it. South Korea is at the heart of the global memory semiconductor market. While the U.S. leads in AI platforms, it relies on South Korea for advanced memory technology. China is pushing for AI self-sufficiency but still faces limitations in the advanced memory sector. Europe is ahead in discussions on AI regulation and ethics but lacks production capacity. Thus, South Korea occupies a central position in the key supply chains of the AI era. The recent rise in the KOSPI index is no coincidence. Global capital is beginning to reassess Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix not merely as semiconductor companies but as essential infrastructure firms for the AI era. The term Korea Discount was once common, but the global market is now recognizing South Koreas strategic value. However, it is crucial not to fall into the trap of thinking that semiconductors alone will secure the future. AI data centers consume vast amounts of electricity. As the AI industry grows, the importance of power grids and the energy sector will only increase. Robotics, autonomous driving, biotechnology, defense, smart cities, and manufacturing innovations will ultimately operate within the AI ecosystem. South Korea must transition from a semiconductor powerhouse to an AI powerhouse, and from an AI powerhouse to a physical AI powerhouse. It should lead the manufacturing sectors AI transformation by combining its world-class manufacturing competitiveness with AI. This will be a central task for South Koreas industrial strategy over the next decade. The industrial landscape must be reshaped. The same applies to politics. The essence of politics is not power; power is merely a means for the people. Following the local elections, both ruling and opposition parties face demands for change. Both the victorious and the defeated have heard the publics warning. Citizens desire solutions to problems rather than political strife and seek governance capabilities over partisan logic. What South Korean politics must do is not to undermine opponents but to design the nations future. National competitiveness in the AI era cannot be built solely by businesses; government, the National Assembly, and local governments must work together. The political landscape must be restructured. Education is an even more fundamental issue. South Korea has grown through the power of education. Its world-class educational fervor has been a driving force behind industrialization, democratization, and informatization. However, success formulas are not eternal. The education system has produced individuals who can quickly find answers, but AI can find answers much faster than humans. Generative AI can summarize papers, write code, and analyze complex documents. Competitiveness in the AI era lies not in finding answers but in the ability to define problems, design new solutions, and possess insights and creativity unique to humans. Education must shift from answer-oriented to solution-oriented, from rote memorization to creative thinking, and from competition-based to problem-solving-focused. Educational reform in the AI era is not a choice but a matter of survival. The educational landscape must be redefined. The demographic issue is even more urgent. South Korea is becoming the fastest-aging country in the world. While the total fertility rate has rebounded, it remains among the lowest globally. Japan experienced low birth rates and aging before South Korea and invested vast budgets for decades but did not achieve the expected results. The lesson from Japans experience is clear: birth rates respond to living conditions. The reasons young people delay marriage and childbirth are not solely financial; they also include job availability, housing, education costs, and labor conditions. In a country where young people cannot envision a future, a rebound in birth rates is unlikely. What is needed now is not just pro-natalist policies but a societal structure that allows youth to have hope. The issue of population decline is related; administrative, educational, and welfare systems designed for a growing population must be restructured to fit a declining one. The demographic landscape must be reshaped. Energy is also a critical variable that will determine the nations future. AI data centers and semiconductor factories consume enormous amounts of electricity. To become an AI powerhouse, South Korea must also become an energy powerhouse. A long-term national energy strategy must be redesigned to include nuclear power, renewable energy, transmission and distribution networks, and energy storage systems. AI cannot exist without energy. Ultimately, South Korea faces a singular challenge: to reshape the industrial landscape, political landscape, educational landscape, demographic landscape, and energy landscape. This is not merely a matter of policy adjustment; it requires a comprehensive redesign of the national system. The true challenge for the second term of the Lee Jae-myung administration and the new Prime Ministers regime lies here. A country that allows policies to waver with each change of administration and alters its national vision with each change of ministry cannot lead in the AI era. What is needed now is not a five-year national agenda but a grand national strategy that looks ahead 20, 30, or even 50 years. Industrialization saved South Korea from poverty, and democratization transformed it into a developed nation. Now, the national transformation in the AI era is becoming a task that will determine the next century for South Korea. History does not grant opportunities to every nation. However, South Korea is facing yet another chance. The next five years will not merely determine the success or failure of any administration; they will shape the nations destiny for the next 50 years. What is needed now is not political strife but design. It is time to reshape South Koreas future.* This article has been translated by AI. June 14, 2026 15:48 -
Spiritual Asia (10): Zoroaster and the moral questions of the AI Age This is the tenth installment of AJP's Spiritual Asia series exploring the religious traditions, philosophical ideas and moral foundations that have shaped Asia's civilizations. This chapter turns to Zoroastrianism, one of the world's oldest living faiths, and examines how its teachings on truth, free will and moral responsibility continue to resonate in an age increasingly shaped by artificial intelligence. Humanity is once again asking where civilization is headed. Artificial intelligence can now understand language, generate knowledge, imitate human reasoning and increasingly perform tasks once reserved for human judgment. Yet while technology advances at extraordinary speed, human wisdom does not necessarily advance with it. Economies have expanded, but communities have weakened. Information has become abundant, yet truth often seems more elusive. Wars continue to rage across continents, while hatred, disinformation and polarization spread effortlessly through digital networks. The challenge confronting humanity today is not merely technological. It is moral. What is good? What is evil? Why should human beings choose truth over falsehood, justice over power and responsibility over convenience? To follow these questions to their historical roots is to encounter one of the most influential figures in the spiritual history of humanity: Zoroaster, known in ancient Persia as Zarathustra. Today, Zoroastrianism is a relatively small religion. Yet its influence on world civilization far exceeds its numbers. Many of the moral concepts that later became central to Judaism, Christianity and Islam — including the struggle between good and evil, free moral choice, divine judgment, heaven and hell, salvation and the ultimate triumph of truth — were profoundly shaped by ideas first articulated within the Zoroastrian tradition. Long before the rise of the great monotheistic religions, Zoroaster sought to answer one of humanity's most enduring questions: How should human beings live? At the center of his teaching stood Ahura Mazda, the "Wise Lord," the source of truth, wisdom and cosmic order. Human beings, Zoroaster taught, are not passive creatures carried by destiny. They possess freedom. They can choose between truth and falsehood, justice and corruption, compassion and cruelty. And because they are free, they are responsible. This was a revolutionary idea. The world, in Zoroaster's vision, was not governed solely by divine decree or blind fate. Human beings themselves became participants in a moral struggle. Every choice mattered. Every action carried consequences. The popular description of Zoroastrianism as a "religion of fire" captures only part of the story. \ Zoroastrians do not worship fire itself. Fire serves as a symbol of purity, truth and divine illumination. It dispels darkness, reveals what is hidden and consumes what is false. For that reason, Zoroastrianism may be more accurately understood as a religion of light. Its ethical teaching can be distilled into three simple principles: Good Thoughts, Good Words and Good Deeds. The simplicity is deceptive. These principles form not merely a religious code but a philosophy of civilization. Distorted thinking eventually produces distorted speech. Distorted speech leads to destructive actions. In time, institutions weaken, trust erodes and societies descend into confusion. Few teachings seem more relevant in the age of artificial intelligence. AI systems can generate words, images and decisions on a scale never before imagined. Yet they remain dependent upon the values of those who design and use them. Technology can amplify human intentions, but it cannot determine whether those intentions are moral. Algorithms can calculate probabilities. They cannot define virtue. Machines can process information. They cannot provide wisdom. The influence of Zoroastrianism extended beyond religion and into the realm of politics. Perhaps no figure embodied its ideals more clearly than Cyrus the Great, founder of the Achaemenid Persian Empire and one of history's most admired rulers. After conquering Babylon in the sixth century BCE, Cyrus did not seek to erase the identities of conquered peoples. Instead, he permitted them to preserve their traditions and religious practices. Most famously, he allowed exiled Jews in Babylon to return to Jerusalem and rebuild their Temple. For this reason, Cyrus occupies a unique place in Jewish history. He is remembered not as a conqueror but as a liberator and is one of the few non-Jewish rulers mentioned favorably in the Hebrew Bible. The encounter between Persian and Jewish civilizations would leave a lasting mark on the development of religious thought throughout the Middle East and, ultimately, on the spiritual traditions of much of the world. History often demonstrates that acts of tolerance can reshape civilizations more profoundly than acts of conquest. Although Zoroastrianism declined following the spread of Islam, its followers did not disappear. Many migrated to India, where they became known as the Parsis. Despite their small numbers, the Parsis exerted extraordinary influence on modern India. Among them was Jamsetji Nusserwanji Tata, founder of the Tata Group, one of the country's most important industrial enterprises. The story of the Parsis demonstrates how a religious minority can preserve its spiritual identity while contributing profoundly to education, philanthropy, science and economic development. The influence of Zoroaster also extended into philosophy and literature. In the nineteenth century, the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche chose Zarathustra as the symbolic protagonist of Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Nietzsche's figure was not the historical prophet. Yet the choice itself was revealing. More than two millennia after his death, Zoroaster remained a powerful symbol through which modern thinkers sought to explore morality, freedom and the future of humanity. Today, the number of Zoroastrians worldwide is small. Yet the religion's legacy cannot be measured by demographics alone. Its ideas continue to echo through many of the world's major religious traditions. Even modern popular culture bears traces of its influence. Freddie Mercury, the legendary lead singer of Queen, was born into a Parsi family rooted in the Zoroastrian faith. Yet the enduring significance of Zoroaster lies not in historical influence but in the questions he posed. The AI age grants humanity unprecedented power. It enables individuals and societies to reshape economies, cultures and even human knowledge itself. But power alone does not provide direction. The fundamental challenge facing humanity remains the same as it was three millennia ago: how to use freedom wisely. Zoroaster's answer was remarkably simple. Good Thoughts. Good Words. Good Deeds. In an era increasingly shaped by artificial intelligence, these ancient principles may sound modest. Yet they remind us that civilization ultimately depends not on technological sophistication but on moral clarity. The followers of Zoroaster did not worship fire. They sought the light that fire represented — the light of truth. And perhaps that is the lesson ancient Persia still offers the modern world. As machines become more intelligent, the question that matters most is not whether technology can think like humans. It is whether humans can continue to think, speak and act with wisdom. More than 3,000 years after Zoroaster first posed the challenge, humanity is still searching for the answer. *The author is a senior columnist of AJP. June 14, 2026 12:09 -
President Lee Jae-myung Urges Ruling Party to Focus on Responsibility During his visit to Italy, President Lee Jae-myung delivered a significant message to the Democratic Party of Korea. The ruling partys passion should be directed not just towards our faction but towards the entire nation, he stated, emphasizing that the ruling party must focus more on the language of responsibility than on the language of conviction. This is not mere political rhetoric; it is a principle that the government and ruling party must heed as they enter their second term. Following the recent local elections, President Lee described the Democratic Partys results as a warning from the people. He stressed that the ruling party must serve as a vessel for inclusion and unity. His recent remarks echo this sentiment, serving as a reminder not to become complacent in power but to maintain a sense of responsibility and balance as the governing force. Politics does not end with winning elections. Election victories are merely the starting point. While criticism and oversight may take precedence when in opposition, the dynamics change once in power. Citizens demand solutions over criticism and results over claims. The value of the ruling party is assessed not by what it proclaims but by what it resolves. The political philosophy of German sociologist Max Weber, which President Lee referenced, aligns with this idea. Weber identified passion, responsibility, and a sense of balance as essential qualities for politicians. He warned that having conviction without responsibility can lead to dogmatism, while unrealistic idealism can devolve into demagoguery. Conversely, losing sight of ideals can reduce politics to a mere tool for maintaining power. Notably, President Lee remarked that if victory is achieved not through conquest but through competition, then inclusivity and openness are essential. In a democratic society, winning an election does not grant the right to exclude opponents but imposes the duty to represent all citizens. This is a fundamental principle of democracy. Within the Democratic Party, competition for leadership is intensifying ahead of the party convention in August. A rivalry is forming between Representative Jeong Cheong-rae and Prime Minister Kim Min-seok, raising concerns about factional conflicts. While competition within the party is not inherently problematic, as diverse opinions and competition are natural in a democratic party, the direction of that competition is crucial. If it appears to be a struggle for power rather than a competition for policies benefiting the public, trust from the citizens will quickly erode. The recent local elections brought victories for the Democratic Party but also served as a warning. In some regions, the party received lower-than-expected results, and citizens are demanding greater accountability and performance from the ruling party. This is likely why President Lee characterized the election results as an incomplete victory. The ruling party is different from the opposition. The opposition can validate its existence through criticism, but the ruling party is evaluated based on results. If the oppositions language is one of attack, the ruling partys language must be one of responsibility. If the oppositions weapon is criticism, the ruling partys weapon must be results. President Lees message is not solely directed at the Democratic Party; it is a principle of democracy that all ruling entities should reflect upon. Power is not an end in itself but a means. The reason citizens entrust power is not for the victory of a particular faction but to improve their lives. If the ruling party genuinely seeks to earn the trust of the people, it must focus on the language of responsibility rather than the language of conviction. This is the attitude required of a governing force that represents all citizens and the most fundamental duty demanded by democracy. June 14, 2026 10:54 -
The Importance of Zoroastrianism: A Religion of Fire and Light Today, the world is once again questioning the direction of civilization. Artificial intelligence (AI) is beginning to understand human language, mimic human thought, and replace human labor and judgment. While technology is advancing rapidly, the human mind does not necessarily keep pace. The economy has grown, but communities have weakened; information is abundant, yet truth has become harder to find. Wars and conflicts continue around the globe, and hatred and division are spreading across borders. Humanity finds itself facing the oldest questions once more: What is good? What is evil? Why must humans pursue justice?Tracing the roots of these questions leads us to an ancient Persian prophet: Zoroaster, also known as Zarathustra. Today, Zoroastrianism is considered a minority religion in terms of size, but it is far from insignificant in the context of human civilization. It is one of the spiritual origins that must be understood to grasp Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, and it serves as a crucial starting point for key concepts in the history of religion, such as good and evil, heaven and hell, final judgment, and salvation.Zoroaster emerged during a time dominated by polytheism, seeking to present a path of ultimate truth for humanity to follow. He introduced Ahura Mazda as the being that creates and maintains order in the universe. Ahura Mazda means Lord of Wisdom. He is the source of goodness and truth, and the force that sustains the order of the universe. Zoroaster taught that humans can only live rightly by following the path of truth he presented.People often refer to Zoroastrianism as the religion of fire. However, this description is only partially accurate. What Zoroastrianism worships is not fire itself; rather, fire is a medium that symbolizes truth, purity, and divine light. Fire dispels darkness, burns away falsehood, and sacrifices itself to illuminate the world. Zoroastrianism finds the symbol of truth in this very property. Therefore, it is more accurate to call Zoroastrianism a religion of light rather than a religion of fire.One of the most significant features of Zoroastrianism is its direct engagement with the problem of good and evil. Zoroaster understood the world through the opposition between Ahura Mazda, the principle of goodness and truth, and Angra Mainyu, the symbol of falsehood and destruction. However, he did not view humans as mere beings dragged along by fate. He believed that humans are free beings capable of choosing good or evil and must take responsibility for their choices. In this regard, Zoroastrianism marks a crucial turning point in the history of human religion.Zoroastrianism presents three principles of life to humanity: good thoughts, good words, and good deeds. These are not merely religious precepts but the most fundamental ethics for maintaining civilization. When thoughts are distorted, words become distorted, and when words are distorted, actions become distorted. Ultimately, society as a whole falls into chaos. This teaching is especially urgent in the age of AI.Zoroastrianism later emerged on the grand stage of world history alongside the Persian Empire. Notably, Cyrus II, known as Cyrus the Great, is regarded as one of the greatest rulers in human history. He established the Achaemenid Empire, creating the largest empire of the ancient world, while practicing religious tolerance and cultural inclusivity. Even after conquering Babylon, he respected the faith and traditions of the conquered peoples, allowing the Jews, who suffered during the Babylonian captivity, to return and rebuild their temple. As a result, the Jewish people remember him not merely as a conqueror but as a liberator. His name is even mentioned directly in the Old Testament, highlighting his special status. Cyrus the Great exemplifies how the spirit of Zoroastrianism was manifested in politics and governance throughout history.This event later became a decisive moment in the historical encounter between Judaism and Zoroastrianism, creating a significant flow of civilization that would influence Christianity and Islam. The history of world religions shows that sometimes, a single persons tolerance can bring about greater change than war.At one time, Zoroastrianism was one of the worlds largest religions. However, following the spread of Islam, many followers migrated to India. Today, the Parsi community in India is descended from these followers. Although small in size, this community has made significant contributions to modern Indias economic and industrial development.A prime example is the Tata Group, one of Indias largest conglomerates, founded by Jamsetji Tata, who was of Parsi descent. The Tata Group has grown into a symbolic enterprise that has led Indias industrialization, spanning steel, automobiles, aviation, information technology, energy, and hospitality. Even today, members of the Tata family, including Ratan Tata, are held in high regard in Indian society. This illustrates how the Zoroastrian community has contributed significantly to the development of modern India through education, industry, and social contributions, rather than merely maintaining their faith.The influence of Zoroaster extends beyond religion into the realms of philosophy and literature. In the 19th century, German philosopher Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche featured Zarathustra as the protagonist in his seminal work, Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Although the Zarathustra Nietzsche referred to is not the historical Zoroaster, the choice to use the ancient Persian prophet as a philosophical symbol is significant. Nietzsche argued that humans must transcend existing value systems to create new values, selecting Zoroaster as a symbolic figure to pose such questions. This demonstrates that Zoroaster has become a monumental symbol in the history of human thought, beyond merely being a religious founder.Today, the number of Zoroastrians is small. However, their influence cannot be measured by numbers. The concepts of the struggle between good and evil, human free will, final judgment, heaven and hell, salvation, and messianism have left deep marks on the subsequent history of world religions. And that spirit remains alive today. The protagonist of the film Bohemian Rhapsody, Freddie Mercury, was also a member of an Indian Zoroastrian family.The age of AI provides humanity with tremendous capabilities. However, technology does not offer direction. What humans still need is the wisdom to discern what is good and what is evil. Zoroaster taught humanity about good thoughts, good words, and good deeds 3,000 years ago, and that teaching remains relevant today.Zoroastrianism is often known as the religion of fire, but it is more accurately described as a religion of light. What they worshipped was not fire, but the light of truth. In an era overflowing with falsehood, hatred, greed, and division, that light becomes even more precious. The small flame that began in ancient Persia continues to pose the same questions to humanity today, across 3,000 years.What thoughts are you having? What words are you speaking? And what actions are you taking?The future of human civilization may well be contained in the answers to those simple questions. June 14, 2026 09:42 -
Why Seoul Chose Oh Se-hoon Again: A Focus on Individuals Over Parties I voted for the Democratic Party for the district chief, but for mayor, I chose Oh Se-hoon. This statement from a man in his 40s, encountered near Sillim Station in Gwanak District, encapsulates the essence of the recent Seoul mayoral election. He expressed skepticism about politics, saying, I honestly don’t trust it much, but I feel that Seoul has become a bit more comfortable during my commute. This indicates that he judged the mayoral candidate by different criteria than his political leanings. A woman in her 50s, a self-employed individual from Nowon District, echoed similar sentiments. Even if I don’t like the party, I need to choose a capable mayor. I had hopes that the atmosphere in the neighborhood could change. The key factor behind Oh Se-hoon’s victory in this election is surprisingly simple: cross-voting. Voters who chose Democratic Party candidates for district chief also cast their ballots for Oh Se-hoon for mayor across various areas. However, political analysts suggest a clearer interpretation. They argue that cross-voting was merely a result, with deeper causes at play. At the center of this was the individual, Oh Se-hoon. Thus, this election was less about the victory of the People Power Party and more about the triumph of Oh Se-hoon’s personal brand. Seoul citizens evaluated the mayoral race using different criteria, prioritizing who could effectively manage the city and who had made tangible improvements in their lives over party loyalty or ideology. Notably, Seoul’s election results diverged sharply from national trends. While candidates from the People Power Party faced defeats in Busan, Ulsan, Gangwon, and Chungnam, Seoul stood apart by choosing Oh Se-hoon over party affiliation. A member of Oh Se-hoon’s campaign team stated, It’s important to note that this election was about Oh Se-hoon as an individual, not just as a candidate from the People Power Party. This is a classic example of separating party support from mayoral evaluation. The numbers from the election further illustrate this point. Cross-voting in northern and southwestern districts, including Jungnang, Seongbuk, Gangbuk, Nowon, and Eunpyeong, shifted the election dynamics. In these areas, Oh Se-hoon received 106,125 more votes than the People Power Party’s district chief candidates. Given that the final vote difference between Oh Se-hoon and his opponent Jeong Won-oh was about 60,000 votes, it is fair to say that cross-voting in these regions determined the election outcome. In particular, Oh Se-hoon garnered 27,031 more votes than the People Power Party’s district chief candidate in Gwanak District, along with significant margins in Nowon (15,840 votes), Gangseo (15,259 votes), Seongbuk (14,811 votes), and Jungnang (14,256 votes). This phenomenon cannot be simply explained as a shift among moderate voters. It suggests that some Democratic Party-leaning voters made an exception for Oh Se-hoon in the mayoral race. In other words, the sentiment in Seoul was that while the party may be Democratic, the mayor should be Oh Se-hoon. Why did this happen? Political insiders cite the Oh Se-hoon persona as the primary reason. During this election, Oh Se-hoon did not confine himself to the People Power Party label. Instead, he adopted a strategy that maintained a certain distance from central politics. Throughout the campaign, Oh Se-hoon publicly clashed with party leadership multiple times. He effectively led the message of severing ties with former President Yoon Suk-yeol and did not shy away from criticizing the leadership. His intention was clear: to frame the mayoral election as an evaluation of city administration rather than an extension of central politics. Political analysts noted, Oh Se-hoon was a candidate from the People Power Party, but his supporters did not campaign in the typical People Power Party manner. Indeed, while the narrative of judging the People Power Party was strong nationwide, Oh Se-hoon managed to remain relatively free from that framework. His so-called decoupling strategy—separating himself from government and ruling party risks—was seen as successful in expanding his appeal to moderate voters. Another member of Oh Se-hoon’s campaign team remarked, While the national sentiment was about judging parties, Seoul was an exception. Seoul citizens evaluated Oh Se-hoon from the perspective of selecting a city manager rather than a party candidate. However, his policy effectiveness should not be overlooked. The key factor was not just the policies themselves but the trust in Oh Se-hoon as the one executing them. Lifestyle policies such as the Climate Companion Card, Seoul Run, Wrist Doctor 9988, Youth Employment Academy, Safe Help Me, and Seoul Outdoor Library clearly influenced voter sentiment. Yet, voters chose not just based on a list of policies but on their trust in Administrator Oh Se-hoon who consistently implemented them. Seoul City spokesperson Lee Min-kyung stated, Seoul citizens are more sensitive to policies they use daily than to grand political slogans. Policies like the Climate Companion Card, which citizens repeatedly experience, significantly contributed to the trust in Mayor Oh. Another notable feature of this election was its generational appeal. There was significant expansion among demographics traditionally seen as weak for conservative parties, particularly women in their 20s and 30s and individuals in their 40s and 50s. Notably, while these groups have historically leaned Democratic, they voted based on practical effectiveness rather than party affinity in this election. This change cannot be easily explained as a mere consolidation of conservative support. Some in the political sphere interpret this Seoul mayoral election as a symbolic moment showcasing the limitations of fandom politics. They argue that strong support bases alone could not capture the sentiment of Seoul voters. While the Democratic Party, centered around President Lee Jae-myung, relied on mobilizing strong support and political loyalty, Oh Se-hoon focused on lifestyle policies and urban administrative achievements to attract moderates. A ruling party official commented, This Seoul mayoral election can be seen as a victory for effectiveness over fandom. It marks a shift in importance from who can rally support to who has actually changed citizens lives. The changes in northern and southwestern Seoul are particularly symbolic. The Era of Northern Seoul and Southwestern Seoul Revitalization initiatives, which Oh Se-hoon promoted as key brands for his administration, have taken on greater significance than mere development promises. They instilled hope in residents who have long felt relative deprivation that this time, things can really change. Plans for a 16 trillion won investment in northern Seoul, along with transportation network restructuring and development projects in Chang-dong and Dobong, were proposed. Similarly, southwestern Seoul is set to see innovation in the G-Valley and the creation of an industrial belt linked to Magok, along with expanded rail networks. Crucially, residents perceived these initiatives not as mere electoral promises but as feasible projects. Unlike past development pledges that remained at the declarative level, Oh Se-hoon has established a reputation as someone who can actually implement these plans. This Seoul mayoral election ultimately raises a fundamental question: Why did Seoul citizens choose Oh Se-hoon again? The answer may be simple: it was about the person, not the party. The prevailing analysis suggests that Seoul sentiment is no longer swayed solely by grand ideologies and partisan slogans. Voters cast their ballots based on who has genuinely improved their lives and who has the capability to fulfill promises. Seoul has always been a trendsetter. Shifts in moderate voter behavior, generational divides, and changes in the political landscape often begin in Seoul. In this regard, this election carries implications that extend beyond a mere local election. It suggests that practical politics, trust in individuals over party loyalty, and administrative effectiveness may become the new standards in South Korean politics. June 14, 2026 09:03 -
Rep. Song Seok-jun: 'Restoring Normalcy is the Challenge for South Korean Politics' South Korean politics is under scrutiny. Following a state of emergency, presidential impeachment, early elections, and a change in government, the political landscape remains turbulent. Even after local elections, tensions between the ruling and opposition parties persist, and conflicts surrounding the National Assembly, government, and judiciary continue. Citizens feel that politics is exacerbating conflicts rather than resolving issues. What direction should politics take? Why is conservative politics facing a crisis, and can it recover? Are the separation of powers and the rule of law functioning properly? Rep. Song Seok-jun of the People Power Party presents the concept of restoring normalcy in response to these questions. With 25 years of experience in policy-making and implementation at the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, he diagnoses the greatest challenge for South Korean politics as the recovery of normalcy. He believes that for South Korea to leap forward again, politics must respect the people, power must exercise self-restraint, and laws and institutions must fulfill their roles. He describes himself as a progressive rightist, indicating the need for politics that embraces change and innovation while upholding the identity of South Korea as a liberal democracy and market economy. Aju Economy and ABC Broadcasting met with Rep. Song to discuss the crisis in South Korean politics, the future of conservative politics, and the direction the country should take. I entered politics to restore normalcy- Can you share the background of your entry into politics?I originally worked in the executive branch. For 25 years, I was involved in policy-making and implementation. At some point, I felt that the order of the world was changing. Rep. Song explained that he transitioned from a bureaucratic career to politics to seize new opportunities for South Korea.When I started politics, I was determined to make South Korea a central country in the world through coexistence, harmony, and restoring normalcy. I saw that there were clear opportunities arising for South Korea during the reorganization of the global order. However, I believed that the abnormalities remaining in our society were blocking those opportunities. He noted that he stepped down from his central government position for the same reason.The executive branch is where predetermined goals are executed. However, changing the direction of the country is the role of politics. That’s why I decided to enter the political arena. Is South Korean politics moving towards normalcy?- How do you evaluate South Korean politics today?Rep. Song paused for a moment before responding.Honestly, it’s disappointing. He diagnosed that while South Korea has become a globally recognized nation, its politics are regressing.In terms of culture and economy, South Korea has already become a leading country in the world. Nobel laureates in economics have praised South Koreas systems and growth processes. However, I worry that politics is undermining the systems that have been painstakingly refined over time. - What concerns you the most?Checks and balances. He cited labor policies and the judicial system as examples.In labor relations, the rights of workers and entrepreneurial spirit must be balanced. However, recently, that balance has been disrupted. The environment for companies to invest boldly and create jobs is shrinking. Rep. Song emphasized that entrepreneurial spirit must thrive for the economy to grow.Companies are the entities that take risks and invest. If all risks are placed solely on companies, who will invest boldly? Ultimately, the growth engine will inevitably weaken. The balance of the separation of powers is collapsing- There have been many concerns about the separation of powers being shaken recently.I share the same concerns. Rep. Song stated that not only presidential power but also legislative power must be checked.The recent state of emergency has sparked discussions about constitutional amendments. However, merely strengthening emergency procedures will not resolve the issues. - What do you mean?We have seen firsthand how much power a legislative body with a large number of seats can wield in recent years. The impeachment process, budget disputes, and various legislative actions have confirmed that the legislative body can also abuse its power. He argued that checks on the legislative branch are necessary in a presidential system.There are many mechanisms to prevent presidential overreach. However, there are relatively few mechanisms to curb the excesses of a legislative body with a large number of seats. If we are to amend the constitution, this aspect must be discussed as well. The essence of the rule of law is more important than its form- You have also pointed out a crisis in the rule of law.There are formal and substantive aspects of the rule of law. Rep. Song stated that simply passing something by majority vote does not justify everything.Laws that contradict the spirit of the constitution cannot be justified just because they were passed by majority vote. While the form may be in place, it may violate substantive rule of law. He expressed concern over the reality of unconstitutional bills being passed in the National Assembly by majority vote.The National Assembly cannot ignore the spirit of the constitution just because it has a majority. The rule of law is not a matter of numbers but of principles. The most important virtue of a politician is humility- What do you consider the most important value in politics?Humility. Rep. Song identified humility, communication, and responsibility as the most important virtues for politicians.Especially those in power must be even more humble. Just because you have power does not mean you can stand above the people. He expressed regret regarding the Yoon Suk-yeol administration.If we had been a bit more humble, we could have gained more trust from the people. - You also emphasized communication.Ultimately, politics is about people. He stated that communication with the public is important, but so is communication within the party.Listening to the voices of the people is important, but hearing the diverse voices within the party is also crucial. If communication breaks down, the organization will ultimately collapse. Politics is an area of decision, not choice- As an economic bureaucrat, how do you see the difference between politics and policy?Economics is the study of choices, while politics is the realm of decisions. He explained the difference between economics and politics interestingly.Economics seeks the most efficient solutions. It looks for ways to minimize costs and maximize effects. - Is politics different?Politics requires making decisions in situations where there are no clear answers. He likened the role of a politician to that of an entrepreneur.Entrepreneurs also make decisions in uncertain situations. Politics is no different. Even when the future is unclear, you must set a direction. Rep. Song stated, Politics is ultimately the realm of insight.It involves seeing through the past and looking ahead to make decisions; that is the role of a politician. The essence of the crisis in the People Power Party is the gap between public sentiment and party sentiment- What do you see as the essence of the crisis in the People Power Party?The gap between public sentiment and party sentiment. He defined the biggest issue facing the People Power Party as the difference between public expectations and internal party perceptions.The public demands change and innovation. However, the party has not yet reached that level of expectation. Rep. Song emphasized, We must humbly accept the publics criticism.We need to reflect on what we did wrong. Without that process, there can be no innovation. I aspire to be a progressive rightist- You referred to yourself as a progressive rightist.I prefer the term progressive rightist over conservative. He identified liberal democracy and market economy as the core values of South Korea.South Korea has grown based on liberal democracy and market economy. That legitimacy must be preserved. However, he also stated that change and innovation are necessary.We cannot simply maintain the existing order. South Korea must constantly change and innovate. Politics must do the same. He emphasized the need for the expansion of conservative politics.The People Power Party should not become a party that only represents a specific class. It must embrace a broader public. Young people need confidence the most- If you have a message for future generations, what would it be?I want to tell them to have confidence. Rep. Song did not hide his expectations for the MZ generation.Todays youth are more internationally aware and capable than any previous generation. He assessed that South Korea has already moved beyond being a follower and has entered the stage of being a leading nation.We are no longer a country that follows; we are now a country that leads. He urged young people to dream bigger.I hope they do not set limits for themselves. South Korean youth have the capacity to lead the world. Politicians are always on trialAt the end of the interview, Rep. Song spoke about the fate of politicians.Ultimately, politicians are evaluated through elections. He stated that all achievements of politicians culminate in public evaluation.It’s not important for me to say I did well. What matters is whether the public recognizes it. Therefore, he said he approaches politics with the mindset of always being on trial.Politicians must always be chosen. To be re-elected, they must keep the promises made during elections and meet public expectations. Rep. Song concluded by stating, I will not lose sight of the principles of humility, communication, and responsibility.I want to contribute, even in a small way, to restoring normalcy in South Korean politics and regaining the trust of the people. That is why I am in politics. Rep. Song Seok-jun is a three-term lawmaker representing the Icheon constituency. He graduated from Seoul National University with a degree in economics and passed the civil service exam, serving over 25 years as a bureaucrat in the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, the Ministry of Construction and Transportation, and the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. He has worked as a policy planner, director of land information policy, and head of the Seoul Regional Land Management Office, establishing himself as an expert in land, housing, and transportation policy. Elected to the 20th National Assembly in 2016, he has successfully secured three terms and currently serves on the National Assemblys Legislative and Judiciary Committee. He identifies as a progressive rightist based on liberal democracy and market economy and emphasizes humility, communication, and responsibility as core virtues for politicians, presenting the restoration of normalcy as the most important task for South Korean politics.* This article has been translated by AI. June 14, 2026 08:27 -
The Dignity of Leadership in Politics Politics is ultimately about people. No matter how good the system or how sophisticated the institutions, it is people who ultimately decide the direction of the nation. Therefore, significant positions should be entrusted to capable individuals. This is a matter of qualifications for those who lead the country, beyond the question of being progressive or conservative. Currently, our politics seems to be going awry. The economy is struggling, and citizens are facing hardships, yet instead of reassuring the public, politics is making them more anxious. Power is focused on the past rather than discussing the future, and lawmakers are expending more energy on defeating opponents than on presenting a vision. Looking at the current political landscape, it is no wonder the public feels fatigued. The ruling party appears to be concentrating all its efforts on special investigations and securing party leadership. While investigations based on law and principle are necessary, when special investigations become the center of governance and the driving force of politics, the public begins to wonder, Who is taking care of our livelihoods? Politics should fundamentally be a means of reassuring the public. However, it has become overly emotional and superficial. A single statement from the president can shake the entire nation. Thus, the president must be more cautious and serious than anyone else. Yet, recent presidential remarks and actions sometimes give the impression of being impulsive and reliant on political sentiment. There is a significant difference between seizing power and governing a nation. Public politics and governance are fundamentally different issues. What is even more concerning is the direction of politics. Within the ruling party, movements surrounding the next power structure are already detectable. The presence of Jeong Cheong-rae, seen as a symbol of hardline politics, is growing, and power struggles are beginning to emerge. The signal that power takes precedence over livelihoods is exhausting the public. What about the conservatives? Frankly, it is frustrating. What the public desires is not reflected in the ongoing internal conflicts and calculations. Observing the leadership of Representative Jang Dong-hyuk, it seems more about enduring than providing direction. Politicians should be those who offer a path, not merely hold onto their positions. If they fail to make decisions when necessary or to organize when required, the time for politics will cruelly pass them by. To speak more bluntly, conservatives have failed in talent verification. They have faltered in nurturing great individuals by being swayed by momentary popularity, eloquence, fandom, and emotional politics. Those who lead the nation must possess at least a minimum depth of understanding. They should have a perspective on the world, the ability to read history, and an understanding of the essence of humanity and power. A leaders shallow insight ultimately leads to national confusion. Therefore, the first requirement for a leader is sound judgment. Judgment is the ability to discern the essence from a multitude of information, to set a direction in times of crisis, and to make decisions even when faced with criticism. Insight is the depth of that judgment—the ability to read where the era is heading without being swayed by immediate approval ratings or partisan logic. However, this alone is not enough. A leader must also possess inclusiveness and understanding. No matter how exceptional a person may be, they cannot govern a country alone. Politics that embraces only allies while demonizing opponents cannot lead a community. A great leader listens to voices different from their own and can even embrace those who criticize them. Above all, they must know how to utilize people. The art of political maneuvering is the essence of politics. Many political failures stem more from failures in personnel than from policy failures. Advisors who only listen to the leader, sycophants who only read the room, and organizations that lack candid feedback ultimately ruin the leader. Throughout history, many leaders have fallen not to external enemies but to internal incompetence and flattery. This brings us back to Oh Se-hoon. He is not a politician who defines opponents as enemies. He has demonstrated administrative competence and speaks of moderation and pragmatism rather than hardline fandom. Most importantly, he is currently the only one in the political arena who maintains the dignity of a political gentleman. In an era where extreme language and hateful politics have become the norm, his presence is increasingly significant. Of course, he also has challenges ahead. To engage in larger politics, he must broaden his circle of associates. He should surround himself with advisors who can speak candidly and be more daring in appointing capable individuals. A great leader is not completed alone. How one utilizes people becomes the ultimate measure of a politicians skill.* This article has been translated by AI. June 14, 2026 06:03 -
Prosecutors Seek Arrest Warrants for Former Shincheonji Officials Amid Allegations of Political Manipulation The Joint Investigation Team probing allegations of collusion between religion and politics has applied for arrest warrants for former Shincheonji officials accused of forcing party membership. On June 13, the team announced it had requested warrants for three individuals, including former General Secretary Ko Dong-an, who is considered the second-in-command of Shincheonji, and the former secretaries of the Johan and Simon tribes, on charges of violating party laws. This marks the first attempt to secure custody since the team was established on January 6, 2026. The former officials are suspected of coercing members to join the People Power Party to influence the partys presidential and general election primaries from 2021 to 2024. The investigation team reported that Shincheonji encouraged its members to join the People Power Party under initiatives like the Pilates Project, resulting in over 50,000 members registering as party affiliates. Since January, the team has conducted searches at the Shincheonji headquarters and the People Power Partys offices, securing membership lists from both organizations. Following the analysis of seized materials and interviews with related individuals, the team has questioned Ko three times as a suspect since last month. Reports indicate that Ko has largely denied the allegations during these interrogations. If the arrest warrants for Ko and the others are granted, the investigation team is expected to pursue the apprehension of Lee Man-hee, the head of Shincheonji, who is viewed as a central figure in the allegations.* This article has been translated by AI. June 13, 2026 10:42