KOR- Blatantly attacking President Lee... The weight of his words has disappeared.
- Rhyu's words toward the President have crossed the line... Highly distorted.
- Seems to be experiencing a dilemma over his shrinking consensus and influence.
- Machiavellian politics? The President cannot do everything himself.
- Lee does not want prosecution reform? The separation of investigative and prosecutorial powers is an achievement.
- Extension rather than reconstruction? The President must approach governance with an integrative perspective.
- No reason for political realignment... He seems to have misjudged the situation.
- Intervening in appointments through 'Myeong-pick'? The choice is up to party members and voters.
- Cannot agree with Rhyu's style of "divisiveness"... Most people think differently.
- Jung Chung-rae regrets Pyeongtaek-eul nomination? If you nominate someone, you must take responsibility.
- If Jung Chung-rae had come to campaign in Pyeongtaek-eul even once, we would have won.
■ Broadcast: SBS Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show (FM 103.5 MHz 7:00 AM – 9:00 AM)
■ Date: July 16, 2026 (Thursday)
■ Host: Attorney Kim Tae-hyun
■ Guest: Kang Deuk-gu, Supreme Council Member of the Democratic Party of Korea
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Competition among candidates is intensifying ahead of the party convention. Amid this, writer Rhyu Si-min has made a comeback and poured out sharp criticisms. We will speak with Democratic Party of Korea Supreme Council Member Kang Deuk-gu to hear about the atmosphere within the party. Hello, Representative.
[Kang Deuk-gu]: Hello, I am Kang Deuk-gu.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Representative, yesterday, writer Rhyu Si-min appeared on the 'Maebul Show' and spoke for nearly an hour. Did you watch the whole thing?
[Kang Deuk-gu]: I couldn't watch all of it, but about half of it.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: First of all, how do you view writer Rhyu Si-min's remarks yesterday overall? Were they constructive advice and bitter counsel, along the lines of "our President needs to succeed, and doing this will help"? Or were they more like "let's see if you succeed," carrying a bit of ill will?
[Kang Deuk-gu]: In my view, they could be seen as advice and counsel, but writer Rhyu Si-min is a self-assured intellectual, isn't he? Therefore, I think his message was more along the lines of "the Lee Jae-myung administration is bound to fail if it continues like this."
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Do you agree with writer Rhyu Si-min's overall diagnosis? Yesterday, he said that the administration will inevitably head down a path of failure.
[Kang Deuk-gu]: The Lee Jae-myung administration has now entered its second year. Let me ask the public. Is the Lee Jae-myung administration currently on a path to failure? Is the Lee Jae-myung administration taking an anti-public path? I believe that, in the grand scheme of things, despite the difficulties, it has established itself as a government of popular sovereignty over the past year. It is reforming the politically motivated prosecution, wrapping up the legacy of the Yoon Suk-yeol administration, and moving forward in earnest on the path of reform. It is also producing achievements in its own way. Therefore, I cannot agree with writer Rhyu Si-min's words, and in fact, he is distorting things to a significant extent. Isn't that the case?
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Let's look at them one by one. Regarding prosecution reform, writer Rhyu said yesterday, "The reason prosecution reform has not been achieved for over a year is that the President does not want the complete separation of investigative and prosecutorial powers. He must resolve this responsibly. Instead, he appointed a Minister of Justice and a Prime Minister to handle it. He makes subordinates do the dirty work while taking credit for the good things. This is a Machiavellian way of handling affairs." What do you think?
[Kang Deuk-gu]: Writer Rhyu Si-min is directly and blatantly dissing President Lee Jae-myung.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.
[Kang Deuk-gu]: For example, there is a President and a Prime Minister. The President cannot do everything, which is why the ministerial system exists. Is delegating prosecution-related matters to the Minister of Justice and broader issues to the Prime Minister a way of avoiding responsibility? To work efficiently, the President provides guidelines and direction, while the minister handles the practical work. Isn't that how it works?
[Kim Tae-hyun]: It seems writer Rhyu suspects that once the President actually took office, he lost the will for prosecution reform in order to utilize the prosecution. Listening to his remarks yesterday, he seemed to harbor such doubts.
[Kang Deuk-gu]: Think about it. When we talk about the politically motivated prosecution, the biggest issue and problem was the separation of investigative and prosecutorial powers. That is why the Prosecution Service Office and the Serious Crime Investigative Agency are launching on October 2. Isn't that so? Isn't this an achievement? Regarding how to handle supplementary investigative powers, the Lee Jae-myung administration, in a broad sense through the Prime Minister, maintains the principle of abolishing supplementary investigative powers. However, it asked the National Assembly to deliberate on the specifics and let the party decide. Is this wrong? The party is a pillar of the legislature with legislative authority. Yet, saying he is avoiding unfavorable tasks? I do not think he is someone who lacks even the basic concept of the separation of powers, the role of the President, the role of the Prime Minister, and why government ministries exist.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.
[Kang Deuk-gu]: But writer Rhyu Si-min spoke of an "inevitable path to failure." Then what is the path to success? I would rather ask writer Rhyu Si-min. Until now, we have taken what writer Rhyu said in writing and speech very seriously and heavily. But now, the weight and significance of his words seem to be fading away, and people can no longer relate to them.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Basically, there seems to be resentment regarding that aspect. The President talks about a "structural majority," and his moderate-expanding policies and appointments seem to have received positive evaluations from moderates. However, listening to writer Rhyu Si-min yesterday, he talked about the so-called "extension theory," "redevelopment theory," and "reconstruction theory," and seemed to have a strong aversion to them—specifically, the President's current shift to the right. What is your take on this?
[Kang Deuk-gu]: Rather than the term "shift to the right," I view it as a practical perspective.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes, a practical perspective.
[Kang Deuk-gu]: Think about it. During the last presidential election, even though the election was held under the unprecedented state of martial law and chaos, if you combined the votes of candidate Lee Jae-myung and candidate Kwon Young-guk, and candidate Kim Moon-soo and candidate Lee Jun-seok, the votes for the pan-democratic camp candidates were fewer. Even during President Moon Jae-in's time, if it weren't for the impeachment of Park Geun-hye, we don't know what the election results would have been if it had been held normally.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.
[Kang Deuk-gu]: I think the last presidential election was the same. This is the reality of our political soil. Therefore, from the President's perspective, public opinion is the most important thing to support state affairs. To expand and broaden that base of public opinion, isn't it right to embrace the center from a practical standpoint and move forward together? Is it right to insist on political purism (pure-bloodism)? While opinions may differ on what is right, the moment one becomes President, they have no choice but to run the government with an integrative perspective while adhering to principles.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Regarding that, writer Rhyu said yesterday, "The President seems to be thinking of something to create a structural majority in relation to political realignment, but I don't really know what it is. There seems to be a team actually working under him, but they don't seem to be doing a good job. And ultimately, it will fail." Does the President have any grand plans for political realignment or anything of the sort?
[Kang Deuk-gu]: President Lee Jae-myung runs the political situation under the principle that everything centers on the Democratic Party. For instance, we can form coalitions, alliances, or sometimes integrate, but the center must be the Democratic Party. And the pan-democratic camp must seek directions to move forward together in some form. However, writer Rhyu Si-min's remarks sound as if we are pursuing a political realignment. Is there any reason to undergo a political realignment now? In the local elections, although it wasn't a complete landslide, we received a certain level of trust.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.
[Kang Deuk-gu]: Furthermore, we maintain our position as the largest party in the National Assembly, and if we work a little harder and produce results, we can have hope for the next general election. Therefore, regarding the claim that the President wants to dismantle this structure and create a new one, I think writer Rhyu Si-min has misjudged the situation.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: According to writer Rhyu Si-min, one of the serious missteps by the President was the so-called 'Myeong-pick.' He pointed out that for several positions—such as Seoul mayoral candidate Jung Won-oh, current National Assembly Speaker Cho Jeong-sik, and Gyeonggi gubernatorial candidate Han Jun-ho—almost all of those picked by the President ('Myeong-pick') got the spots. He also noted that for this party convention, the President openly told former party leader Jung Chung-rae not to run for consecutive terms and instead promoted the Prime Minister. He criticized the President's intervention in party appointments. What is your view on this?
[Kang Deuk-gu]: How to view this is a matter of individual judgment, but I believe the President can express his thoughts about people. However, accepting those thoughts is up to the voters and the public. Isn't that so? For example, regarding the Seoul mayor, rather than using the term 'Myeong-pick,' the President saying "he was a competent district office head" could be viewed as a 'Myeong-pick,' but it is just that level of remark. He was merely sharing his feelings and thoughts based on his relationship and connection with candidate Jung, who was a district office head. Isn't that right? The final choice is made by party members and voters. Therefore, I think it is inappropriate to unconditionally label it a 'Myeong-pick.'
[Kim Tae-hyun]: After writer Rhyu Si-min's remarks were reported yesterday, what has been the reaction of Democratic Party lawmakers?
[Kang Deuk-gu]: I haven't asked everyone individually, but regarding writer Rhyu Si-min's recent remarks, as I mentioned earlier, during the Yoon Suk-yeol administration, the weight and influence of his messages were undeniable. And we respected them. However, since the launch of the Lee Jae-myung administration, when it comes to writer Rhyu's messages toward the President and the Democratic Party, although it might be harsh to say their "expiration date has passed," there are surprisingly many who feel they can no longer relate to them at all.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Representative, frankly, do you believe his loyal advice or counsel to the President has crossed the line? That it has crossed a certain boundary?
[Kang Deuk-gu]: I believe it has crossed the line.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: And that it is not just simple advice and counsel? Right?
[Kang Deuk-gu]: I think so. Ultimately, he is making arbitrary judgments. However, in terms of logical basis, facts, and empathy, writer Rhyu Si-min's recent remarks, especially those directed at the President, are significantly detached from reality and distorted to gain sympathy. That is what I can say.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Then why do you think he is doing this? There must be some intention. A sharp person like writer Rhyu Si-min wouldn't just make a mistake; he probably said what he wanted to say, especially in this party convention phase.
[Kang Deuk-gu]: I am someone who has respected and honored writer Rhyu Si-min as a senior of our era. I would like to ask writer Rhyu Si-min why he is doing this.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.
[Kang Deuk-gu]: But there might be something like this. As time goes by, the social consensus and influence of the messages writer Rhyu Si-min sends are gradually decreasing. From an intellectual's perspective, he might be facing a dilemma, wondering, "Why is this happening to me?"
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Could it be related to a power struggle? The President has spent his first year in office talking about a "structural majority," "New Lee Jae-myung," and trying to broaden the camp. Do you think he is doing this out of concern that as "New Lee Jae-myung" and pro-Lee factions expand and new people enter, the vested interests of the original pro-Roh (Roh Moo-hyun) and pro-Moon (Moon Jae-in) factions might disappear?
[Kang Deuk-gu]: But even dividing things into ABC like that...
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Because he talked about redevelopment and reconstruction.
[Kang Deuk-gu]: I cannot agree with writer Rhyu Si-min's divisiveness of "redevelopment," "reconstruction," and "extension," which essentially pits "us" against "them." I joined the Peace Democratic Party during President Kim Dae-jung's time as party president, liked candidate Roh Moo-hyun more than anyone, and did my best to campaign for President Lee Jae-myung and candidate Moon Jae-in. From that perspective, where would someone like me fit in writer Rhyu Si-min's ABC categories? Probably many in political circles would fall into such confusion. Isn't that so?
[Kim Tae-hyun]: I see. Looking at yesterday's reactions, Representative Park Ji-won said, "He caused too deep a wound," Representative Song Jae-bong said, "He is praying for failure," and former Minister Park Hong-geun said, "This is not the language of a comrade." They strongly criticized writer Rhyu's remarks yesterday. Looking at media reports, some seem to believe that writer Rhyu Si-min is looking down on the President.
[Kang Deuk-gu]: Rather than looking down on the President...
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Using language that feels like he is trying to lecture the President, saying, "If you do this, you will fail. You must listen to me to succeed; otherwise, you will fail. I'll watch and see if you do well."
[Kang Deuk-gu]: He does have that dogmatic attitude.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yesterday too? A dogmatic attitude?
[Kang Deuk-gu]: Yes. In a way, that is a consistent trait of writer Rhyu Si-min. However, the Lee Jae-myung I have seen—from his days as a lawyer, mayor, governor, to now performing his duties as President—is a politician who has had far more diverse experiences than we think. He is running the government while confronting various issues. Those experiences have made him more trained than any other leader in terms of problem-solving ability and perspective on the world. I clearly state that he is running the state affairs with a direction for South Korea's reality and future from a practical standpoint, more so than any other leader.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.
[Kang Deuk-gu]: From writer Rhyu Si-min's perspective as a typical intellectual, it might look that way. But I must say that is merely Rhyu's personal view, and the majority of intellectuals do not think that way.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Lastly, writer Rhyu Si-min said yesterday, "My speaking about the President today is a message to the citizens. Ultimately, the citizens will judge, and if the President goes down the wrong path, the citizens will correct him." What do you think this means?
[Kang Deuk-gu]: "Citizens will correct him"...
[Kim Tae-hyun]: That was the gist of his remarks, not the exact wording.
[Kang Deuk-gu]: In short, it is a scary statement. But on the other hand, as I mentioned at the very beginning, there are two most important pillars for the President in running the government. First, the legislature, including the Democratic Party and the pan-ruling coalition, must maintain a majority of seats. Second, the flow of public opinion and the state approval rating must be maintained to a certain level. These two aspects are the most crucial. Therefore, the President always pays attention to the flow of public opinion. For instance, his recent direct communication with the public regarding real estate issues is important not only to gather diverse thoughts and opinions through communication, but also to directly read the flow of public opinion and translate it into policy.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.
[Kang Deuk-gu]: Therefore, while I appreciate writer Rhyu Si-min's concern, I clearly state that our lawmakers, the Blue House, and the President himself consider the thoughts and positions of the public as the absolute first principle in making policy and political judgments, even more so than writer Rhyu does.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: I see. This will be the last question. Former party leader Jung Chung-rae said a few days ago that he regretted nominating a candidate for Pyeongtaek-eul during the last by-elections, saying he shouldn't have done it, which allowed someone else to win by default. What is your take on that?
[Kang Deuk-gu]: Let me make this clear. When nominating for the by-elections, he, as the party leader, said he would take responsibility and do it. There was not a single consultation with the Supreme Council, our top leadership.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.
[Kang Deuk-gu]: And what I find even more incomprehensible is this: he nominated the candidate, saying he would take responsibility. He even served as the head of the candidate's support association. Yet, he did not visit the constituency even once during the campaign period. Normally, when a race is tight, the leadership goes to campaign and asks for support. I believe that if Chairman Jung Chung-rae had come even once at that time, we would have won.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.
[Kang Deuk-gu]: I still want to ask former party leader Jung Chung-rae. If you made the nomination, shouldn't you take responsibility? Isn't that so? Then what was the principle of the nomination? Isn't that the case? On the other hand, I also think about this: if we had established principles on how to form alliances and coalitions among the Rebuilding Korea Party, the Progressive Party, and the Democratic Party during the last by-elections—for example, the Democratic Party for Pyeongtaek and the Rebuilding Korea Party for Busan—the election results would not have turned out like this.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.
[Kang Deuk-gu]: In conclusion, rather than saying he "regrets" it, shouldn't former party leader Jung Chung-rae have first said he "reflects" on it? He should have reflected and apologized to candidate Kim Yong-nam and the citizens of Pyeongtaek, saying, "I am sorry I couldn't visit even once, and I will self-reflect and review the situation." In that sense, I still do not agree with whether it is right for former party leader Jung Chung-rae to run for party leader this time.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: I see. We will stop here. That was Representative Kang Deuk-gu of the Democratic Party of Korea. Thank you.
[Kang Deuk-gu]: Thank you.
The copyright of this interview material belongs to SBS Radio.
When publishing the full text or quoting the interview,
please specify the channel name and the exact program name as follows:
[SBS Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show]
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.
Video News
Video News
Video News
Video News
