Chun’s Apology Leaves Crisis Unresolved : S. Korean Mood Calmer but Aftermath Could Imperil Stability

South Korean President Roh Tae Woo was left facing an unresolved political crisis Wednesday after his predecessor, Chun Doo Hwan, apologized for authoritarian abuses and withdrew from the capital to a sanctuary near a mountain temple.

Chun’s extraordinary statement Wednesday morning appeared to have succeeded in calming, at least temporarily, the lynch-mob atmosphere that was building over disclosures of widespread corruption and abuse of power during his regime.

“Many people wanted to see Mr. Chun humbled, disgraced and repentant,” said Han Sung Joo, a political science professor at Korea University. “They got what they wanted, and that will break the momentum.”

Questions Unanswered

But Chun’s emotional apology left unanswered many key questions that reflect on the continued stability of the Roh administration, including:

-- Whether Chun would emerge from seclusion to comply with a subpoena intended to force him to testify before the National Assembly panel investigating the 1980 Kwangju uprising.

-- Whether opposition parties would accept Chun’s surrender of nearly $25 million in personal cash, political funds and real estate in lieu of full disclosures of how he raised and disbursed massive amounts of money.

-- Whether Roh would attempt to protect his former mentor and military academy classmate from possible prosecution by issuing a preemptive pardon or negotiating with the opposition for political clemency.

-- Whether the ruling Democratic Justice Party, which Chun founded after grabbing power in 1980 and which Roh now controls, would reorganize to fully dissociate itself from the disgraced dictator.

Speculation of an imminent shake-up in the ruling party was given credence Wednesday when the entire party leadership submitted letters of resignation to Roh. The party issued a statement echoing Chun’s apology and promising to “reform ourselves” to promote democracy.

The president is expected to reject the resignations but take some sort of action to restore confidence in the party within the next several days.

That could mean Roh will announce a new package of objectives for his democratic reform program along the lines of the dramatic statement he made June 29, 1987--when he was head of the ruling party--to defuse massive street demonstrations then raging against Chun’s repressive rule.

A pardon for Chun might be sugarcoated by democratic concessions, such as granting further amnesty for political prisoners or setting a timetable for local elections, political observers said.

Mixed Reviews of Apology

Chun’s apology, broadcast live on nationwide television, received mixed reviews from the South Korean people.

Some viewers admired Chun for his courage and noted that he appeared to be sincere in asking forgiveness for abuses under his rule. But others said they had no sympathy for Chun and resented having their emotions manipulated by maudlin descriptions of childhood poverty.

Chun said he lived in a “mud hut” and that a younger brother died in his arms when medical attention was not available.

“It’s worse than if he had not apologized at all,” said Choi Sam Doo, 30, a Seoul kitchen worker. “It’s not right that he should be allowed to go into hiding, now that all his wrongdoings are being disclosed. He should be punished.”

Park Kwon Sang, who lost his job as editor in chief of the Dong-A Ilbo, the country’s most prestigious daily newspaper, during Chun’s 1980 media purge, said he found it impossible to forgive the “military gangster” who destroyed his career--even though he agreed that a pardon would be best for political stability in South Korea.

“A simple apology will not release him from what he did,” Park said. “He should make his case before the nation and defend himself. In principle I think he should be brought to justice.”

Seized Power

Antagonisms like these could be further aroused as televised hearings on the Kwangju incident resume in the coming days. Chun seized power after troops crushed a 1980 citizens’ uprising in the southwestern city of Kwangju, leaving almost 200 civilians dead by official count, and he has been accused of provoking the incident in order to take over the government.

“Roh will have to make a statement on Chun, whether he goes all the way to a pardon or merely urges his countrymen to be more tolerant,” said Korea University’s Han.

Initial reaction to Chun’s apology by the three major opposition parties, which control a majority of seats in the Assembly, suggested a slight divergence of opinion.

The largest opposition party, headed by Kim Dae Jung, said the apology did not go far enough and that it would still demand that Chun testify. But allied parties adopted a more conciliatory tone, apparently not choosing to force testimony. Still, the opposition was unanimous in calling for a continued investigation into Chun’s seven-year rule.

“I don’t think anybody feels this is going to end the problem right now,” a Western diplomat said. “Emotions are still very raw.”

Chun and his wife took up temporary refuge Wednesday afternoon in a small village near Paekdam Temple in Mt. Sorak National Park, east of Seoul.