The outcome of the March 9 presidential election in South Korea was dramatically symptomatic of the country’s bitter political divide. The principal mission of the new president, elected by a historically narrow margin, is to heal the division through politics of reconciliation so the government can effectively tackle a long list of sticky problems.

It was won by conservative opposition candidate Yoon Suk-yeol, 61, a former prosecutor-general and political neophyte. His victory broke the recent pattern of a power shift between the conservative and progressive camps after two consecutive presidential terms, served by two presidents of either camp. This time, the conservatives returned to power only after one term of a progressive president.

Five years ago, the conservatives suffered a heavy political blow from the resignation of former President Park Geun-hye after he was impeached over a political scandal. Yoon’s election represents a big political comeback.

But it was really a slim victory, by a margin of less than 1 percent of the total number of votes cast. The outcome is not so much a win for Yoon, who has no political experience to speak of, as a public revolt against the progressive administration of President Moon Jae-in, which fueled a sense of unfairness among the people through its partisan politics.

The presidential race left a nasty aftertaste. Both Yoon and ruling liberal Democratic Party candidate Lee Jae-myung were hit by a flurry of scandals involving themselves and their families, causing the election to degenerate into a mudslinging match. The political mood in Seoul has become so extraordinary poisonous and revengeful that it is said the loser would be doomed to go to jail.

Illegal acts should, of course, be investigated and prosecuted. But this does not justify political intervention in the judiciary. The first step toward national unity is to break the cycle of political revenge and vendetta that has harmed the nation so much over the years.

A heap of tough policy challenges face the country’s new leader, including the tidal wave of new COVID-19 cases now battering South Korea. The list also includes hugely inflated real estate prices, which ballooned during the five years of Moon’s government, extremely low birthrates that have seen the total fertility rate stay below 1 for four consecutive years and high unemployment.

Young South Koreans, in particular, are feeling deep anxiety about their future. The new administration has no time to waste on futile political warfare with the opposition camp. It should focus on upgrading the nation’s social infrastructure.

Yoon has made clear that he intends to pursue a policy agenda radically different from that of outgoing President Moon, especially with regard to the issue of Korean reunification and other diplomatic issues. He has pledged to enhance South Korea’s security alliance with the United States and security cooperation among Tokyo, Washington and Seoul. He seems to be intent on placing greater weight on deterrence than on dialogue in responding to the security threat posed by North Korea.

To be sure, cooperation among the three countries is crucial for dealing with challenges posed by Pyongyang. But we are concerned about how Yoon has repeatedly said he will enhance deterrence by giving his country the ability to stage pre-emptive strikes against the North.

He should learn from past experiences that simply taking a hardline stance against the secluded regime achieves nothing but greater tensions.

Yoon has also expressed his intention to work to improve South Korea’s frosty relationship with Japan. He says he will seek a comprehensive solution to pressing issues of a historical nature, such as compensation for former Korean wartime laborers, known as “choyoko” (drafted workers), and former “comfort women” forced to provide sex to wartime Japanese soldiers, as well as pending bilateral economic and security matters.

Since these issues are intertwined, this approach may be effective, to some extent. But the Japanese government is most concerned about the ongoing process of turning the assets of Japanese companies ordered by courts to pay compensation to former Korean wartime laborers into cash.

Yoon should start his efforts to fix the strained bilateral relationship by proclaiming that his administration is opposed to this measure. Then, he should lay the diplomatic groundwork for a fresh round of talks with the Japanese government.

Prime Minister Fumio Kishida’s government, for its part, should show flexibility for renewed dialogue with the new South Korean administration. It should take advantage of the power transfer in South Korea as an opportunity to end the diplomatic rift between the two nations.

--The Asahi Shimbun, Mach 12