Home > Opinion > Columns

The nomination of Lee Hye-hoon and the logic of 'killing with a borrowed knife'

Published: 09 Jan. 2026, 00:02

Lee Sang-ryeol

The author is a senior editorial writer at the JoongAng Ilbo.

The nomination of Lee Hye-hoon as minister of the Ministry of Planning and Budget raises a fundamental question for Korean society: What kind of person should serve as a Cabinet minister?

President Lee Jae Myung has repeatedly emphasized “unity” as a governing principle. Yet this appointment does not meet the basic conditions for that goal. Lee is not a figure broadly respected within conservative circles, nor was she put forward by them. There was no consultation with the conservative opposition. Unity is undeniably important, but it is not the only value that matters in public appointments.

Lee Hye-hoon, nominee for the inaugural minister of the Ministry of Planning and Budget, answers questions from reporters as she arrives at her confirmation hearing preparation office at the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation headquarters in Jung District, central Seoul, on the morning of Jan. 8. [NEWS1]

Beyond her past activism opposing impeachment, two major issues surround Lee: her personal conduct and the role she is expected to play within the Lee Jae Myung administration.

First is character. Allegations that Lee verbally abused an intern during her time as a lawmaker, including remarks such as “I wish you were dead,” are disturbing to the point of disbelief. The former intern said in a media interview that how a senior figure treats subordinates and shows basic respect for others should be a key criterion for evaluating high-ranking public officials. That assessment is difficult to dispute. The presidential office and the Democratic Party say they will wait for the confirmation hearing to see how the matter unfolds. But what exactly is being tested? How much verbal abuse and workplace bullying is society willing to tolerate from its leaders? If such language is deemed acceptable, that should alarm anyone concerned about public ethics. These concerns are compounded by allegations involving family favoritism and real estate speculation linked to her.

The second issue is Lee’s role in the current administration. She has long been a fierce critic of expansionary fiscal policy under progressive governments and of President Lee Jae Myung’s basic income agenda, branding them as populist. The presidential office has described her as a potential “red team” figure, someone who challenges prevailing views inside government to prevent policy excesses.

That argument only holds if Lee is actually able to put the brakes on expansionary spending. In reality, that seems unlikely. Expansionary fiscal policy is a defining feature of the Lee Jae Myung administration. This year’s budget was increased by more than 8 percent from the previous year. According to the government’s medium-term fiscal plan, continued expansion would push national debt in 2029 to about 1,789 trillion won, more than 515 trillion won higher than in 2025. The debt-to-GDP ratio is projected to rise from 48.1 percent to 58 percent.

It is also difficult to imagine Lee herself acting as a determined fiscal watchdog. She is not known as a specialist in fiscal restructuring, and her sense of mission is open to question. There is a real possibility that she could reverse course, as she has on issues such as martial law and impeachment, and rebrand herself as a champion of expansionary spending. She has already signaled that “fiscal policy must play an active pump-priming role,” remarks she made at a fiscal policy meeting on Jan. 6. The saying that flawed appointees often show greater loyalty to survive does not seem far-fetched in this context.

The fallout from her nomination has been significant. Members of the ruling party have begun to question the president’s principles in making appointments, while hostility from the opposition has only intensified. More troubling is the sense of disillusionment felt by many citizens.

Why President Lee Jae Myung chose Lee Hye-hoon remains a mystery. This has prompted references to the Chinese stratagem known as “killing with a borrowed knife,” using another’s blade to strike an opponent. In this interpretation, Lee is the borrowed knife, and the real target is the conservative camp. In the short term, it may appear effective. Her record has exposed how poorly the conservative establishment vetted its own figures. Lee was elected to the National Assembly three times and lost twice as a member of the parties that preceded the People Power Party. Was such lax screening by a major party acceptable?

The Democratic Party has responded with visible nonchalance. Party leader Jung Chung-rae asked why conservatives remained silent when Lee was nominated multiple times in the past. Those nominations may indeed reflect failures on the conservative side. But they cannot justify placing an unfit candidate in a Cabinet post. That would be a betrayal of public trust.

“Killing with a borrowed knife” is, in the end, a dangerous and cowardly tactic. It is hard to believe that the president would resort to such maneuvering in selecting a minister responsible for the nation’s finances. Korea faces challenges at home and abroad. Personnel decisions matter more than ever, and this nomination, by many measures, falls short.

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.