President Nam Pyo Suh's recent announcement of his resignation in February 2013 has relieved many KAIST students. However, some argue that the Undergraduate Student Council should be more pro-active even after the President's declaration.

Pro: No Room for the Students
By Geunhong Park

The long standoff concerning President Suh’s resignation finally seems to have come to an end. On October 17, in an emergency press conference, the President admitted that he would “resign in March next year.” This was immediately following a provisional General Student Assembly session, which its members – by an overwhelming majority - voted on “occupying the Presidential office if the President’s resignation was not secured.” On October 25, the situation seemed to progress (or complicate) further with a provisional Board of the Trustees meeting where President Suh issued a “note of resignation” to the press saying he would withdraw from his post by February 23. Tensions nonetheless ran high with President Suh, accusing the head of the Board, Dr. Myung Oh, of “trying to blackmail [him] with claims that President Lee Myung-bak ordered [his] resignation directly.”

If it were possible at all, although the President’s future course of action seems quite clear at this point in time, the situation also seems decidedly convoluted. Relations between the Board of Trustees and the President - amicable enough that they had been able to reach a mutual understanding during the 217th Board Meeting on June 20 (where it was agreed that President Suh’s “course of action [would be] based on his own judgment”) - seemed to have suddenly soured. Meanwhile, two groups have remained steadfast in their opinions, namely the Professors’ Association and the KAIST Student Council: both have repeatedly argued for nothing short of the President’s “immediate resignation.” Yet even these groups currently seem at a loss for what to do now that events have developed thus.

The actions of the Student Council in bringing about the present situation (where President Suh has agreed to actually step down at a specific point in the future) cannot be denied. Its tireless contributions in unifying and collecting student opinion, even during the examination period, are indisputable. However, a post on ARA even accused the Student Council of “failing to take into account popular student anger …and only working towards its own indecisive interests,” and noted that the circumstances already seemed out of the students’ hands with “no announcements from the Council calling for direct student action.”

Many student officials seem to be forgetting that during the tragedies last year, the students themselves brought about change by direct action. Significantly, the Undergraduate Student Council at the time played an especially important role in coherently organizing the students during the crisis. With the first ever Emergency Student Assembly in history, students voted on agendas such as the establishment of a University Council and even (quite revolutionary for the time) the President’s resignation. Extensive press coverage of the events on campus only strengthened the student’s influence over events. Only out of this turmoil was the Emergency Innovation Committee (EIC) – appointed to lead KAIST out of the crisis with representatives from the Board of Trustees, the school administration, the Student Council, and the Association of Professors – finally being able to come to fruition. Sure enough, the EIC established directives in line with what students had democratically called for during the Emergency Assembly.

The point in invoking this example from recent history is not only to highlight how far current events are from direct student control, but also to show how past political changes that were proposed to increase the influence of the students seem to be all but forgotten. For the University Council, student participation in the selection of President and trustees and et cetera all seem to have been pushed aside in the face of simply ousting the current President. This is clearly not enough. As President Suh has clearly said, he is looking for a successor who would continue his policies. If students do not intervene, there is no guarantee that the next person in line will be any more accommodating.

Whatever the intentions of the current Student Council are, it does seem self-evident that the events are spinning out of the students’ control. Indeed, many students seem dissatisfied with the present situation - President Suh’s “immediate” resignation has not been secured, nor has KAIST’s decision-making system become more democratic. Such lasting changes are only possible if and only if the Student Council drops its disinterest.

Con: The Most Pragmatic and Realistic Action Was Taken
By Seung Hyun Suh

A new semester has begun, but the long-held student opposition towards President Nam Pyo Suh has not ended as easily. Starting with a concert-like protest, titled “Anyway Goodnight Club,” various forms of online and offline oppositions and debates on the resignation of President Suh have been taking place.

Luckily for those who oppose his policies and attitude, President Suh officially announced his resignation from February 23 of next year in the Board of Trustees meeting. The prolonged dispute among KAIST students about the resignation issue seemed to finally reach an end. However, some people are still not satisfied. More specifically, they are not happy with the announcement and the reaction taken by the 26th Undergraduate Student Council regarding the issue. Recently on ARA, the online KAIST student community, a student bluntly criticized the Student Council for not carrying out the plan to occupy the presidential office; a plan intended if President Suh refused to resign at the time the plan was proposed. The student claimed that the Student Council is currently taking an ambiguous position and responding passively to the urgent issue. According to the post, the Student Council is not reflecting the opinion of the majority of KAIST students faithfully enough. Comments on the post show that many people agree with the student.

So, was the student’s claim posted on ARA really true? Let us see the bigger picture. Is the Student Council really taking an ambiguous position and passive action towards the issue? Is the occupation of the presidential office still really necessary?

Contrary to the post, the Student Council’s official statement regarding this issue in fact showed their firm position. The Student Council first substantiated its claim that the resignation plan announced this time had almost no possibility of being reversed. Also, the Student Council described its alternative plan in the case of such reversal. The statement clearly showed that the Student Council was sticking to its old determined position regarding the resignation issue.

Furthermore, the statement proved that the Student Council actually had taken active, even aggressive, responses towards the university, such as the threat to occupy the presidential office. Also, the Student Council demanded of President Suh for an official apology to the students regarding the many controversies he had brought, not only regarding the university policies, but also the morality he had as a university president.

The current Student Council is looking beyond the president’s resignation issue. According to the announcement, the Student Council is in the process of making amendments to the current Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology Act so that they can establish a democratic decision-making structure within the campus. Also, the Student Council officially delivered its plans to participate in the process of nominating the next president.

Take a closer look at the Student Council’s statement. There is plenty of evidence supporting that the Student Council has been taking active responses to current university issues. Dismissing the Council as a lame duck administration is nonsense.

Now let us see the situation from a different perspective. Is occupying the presidential office really necessary at this point? The plan was to be executed only if President Suh refused to resign. The date was postponed, but after all, President Suh will resign next year. Strictly speaking, the Student Council currently has no justifiable reasons to execute such plan.

At this moment, we really need to question ourselves: is there a more rational and realistic decision? The university, including the Student Council and the Board of Trustees, has to resolve many issues derived from the long-held feud. The nomination of the next president will be a long procedure. Resignation should be the stepping-stone for making a better KAIST. We should be careful in every step we take from now on. Now keeping everything discussed in mind, ask yourself again: is the Student Council really taking ambiguous position and passive action towards the issue? 

Copyright © The KAIST Herald Unauthorized reproduction, redistribution prohibited