Breaking cartel politics requires new political challengers

Home > Opinion > Columns

Breaking cartel politics requires new political challengers

Published: 10 Feb. 2026, 00:01

Audio report: written by reporters, read by AI

Kang Won-taek

The author is a professor of political science and international relations at Seoul National University.

Korean politics continues to produce developments that would have been difficult to imagine in the past. One of the most striking recent trends is the intensifying internal conflict within both the People Power Party (PPP) and the Democratic Party (DP), even as June local elections approach.

Traditionally, political parties seek to broaden their appeal and minimize internal disputes ahead of elections to project unity. Instead, both parties appear increasingly divided. Negative public opinion and criticism from potential supporters seem to carry little weight in their internal calculations.

Democratic Party leader Jung Chung-rae delivers opening remarks at a Supreme Council meeting at the National Assembly in Yeouido, Seoul, on Feb. 9. Jung recently apologized for causing a political burden to the president over controversy surrounding the recommendation of candidates for a second comprehensive special counsel, but tensions over the issue persist, observers say. [NEWS1]

The PPP has moved openly toward factional confrontation. Former leader Han Dong-hoon was expelled, and disciplinary actions have been taken against his supporters. Despite the party’s approval rating remaining around 20 percent and local elections drawing near, what critics describe as self-destructive behavior has continued.

In seeming contrast, the DP has outwardly pursued expansion through a merger with the Rebuilding Korea Party. Yet the internal disputes surrounding the move reflect dynamics similar to those within its rival. Although the merger is justified in terms of electoral strategy, its primary purpose appears to be internal power consolidation.

People Power Party leader Jang Dong-hyeok, right, speaks with Rep. Bae Hyun-jin, left, during a plenary session of the National Assembly’s February extraordinary session on Feb. 9. The party’s ethics committee has reportedly begun expulsion proceedings against Bae, who is considered aligned with former leader Han Dong-hoon. Floor leader Song Eon-seog is seen at center. [YONHAP]

Such developments would once have been rare. Opposition parties seldom allowed internal divisions to deepen before elections, and major ruling-party conflicts early in a presidential term were unusual. The shift reflects a change in how party politics operates.

For party leaders, the priority is no longer improving overall public support but consolidating control. Securing dominance within the party ensures influence over nominations in future legislative elections. As seen in the DP under President Lee Jae Myung’s leadership, internal rivals can be removed through nomination decisions, strengthening a leader’s position for a presidential bid.

Underlying this strategy is a calculation shaped by political polarization. Even dissatisfied voters may ultimately support their party’s candidate to prevent victory by the opposing camp. In this environment, both parties’ leadership focuses primarily on mobilizing highly committed supporters who actively influence internal decisions. Moderate supporters and undecided voters have become secondary considerations.

This pattern is possible because political competition is constrained by what resembles a cartel structure. At the national level, Korea appears to have a two-party system. At the regional level, however, many areas function effectively as one-party strongholds. The result is an oligopoly nationally and monopolies locally.

In a competitive market, consumers can switch brands when quality declines. But if only one product is available, they have little choice. Political competition operates similarly. Just as cartels harm consumers, limited political competition reduces accountability to voters. For politicians, party nominations become more important than public approval.

Recent scandals linked to nomination-related corruption illustrate the problem. When nomination effectively guarantees election, incentives for misconduct increase. Without changes to this party structure, politics risks becoming disconnected from voters’ concerns.

The current party alignment traces back to the 1990 three-party merger. More than three decades later, Korea remains locked within this political framework despite profound social and economic changes. In contrast, companies such as Samsung Electronics and Apple continue to innovate and develop new technologies because competitors such as Huawei and Xiaomi are constantly challenging their market positions.

Political reform likewise requires the emergence of credible new competitors capable of challenging the existing order. Public sentiment suggests growing fatigue with the current system. In a joint survey conducted late last year by Seoul National University’s Institute for Future Strategy along with the JoongAng Ilbo and the Kyunghyang Shinmun, respondents were asked how many parties would be appropriate for stable governance. The average response was 4.7. DP supporters averaged 4.9, while PPP supporters averaged 4.2. Only 7 percent said two parties were sufficient.

About 15,000 supporters attend a talk concert by former People Power Party leader Han Dong-hoon at Jamsil Indoor Stadium in Songpa District, Seoul, on Feb. 8. The party’s ethics committee has previously expelled Han. [YONHAP]

Breaking cartel politics will ultimately require institutional reform, including changes to an electoral system that favors large regional parties. Before that, however, what is needed is the emergence of political entrepreneurs — new actors with the vision, capacity and determination to build alternative political forces.

Given the current level of dissatisfaction, one might expect reform movements within existing parties or efforts to establish new ones. Yet such signs remain limited. This may reflect the strong incentives for incumbents to protect their positions or the lack of distinctive alternatives within the political class.

Korean politics has become smaller and more insular. If meaningful change does not emerge from within established institutions, new political forces may need to organize outside them. The country’s entrepreneurial spirit, built on a willingness to take risks despite uncertainty, offers a model.

Revitalizing democracy may require that same spirit in politics: a readiness to challenge entrenched structures and attempt something new without fear of failure.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.