Heo Eun-ah vs. Lee Jun-seok: A Comprehensive Summary of the Conflict
1. Overview
Conflicts between Representative Heo Eun-ah and Assemblyman Lee Jun-seok have surfaced within the Reform New Party, leading to disruptions in party operations. This dispute has intensified due to issues related to party personnel, amendments to the party’s charter and regulations, differences in leadership authority distribution, and the overall direction of party management. Representative Heo emphasized the independence of her role in managing the party and criticized Lee's interference, while Lee directly challenged Heo’s leadership and decision-making approach.
Throughout this process, the dismissal of the Secretary-General, disagreements over the party’s reform direction, a breakdown in trust among the leadership, and public political clashes have escalated tensions. As a result, the Reform New Party has faced deepening internal divisions, and these fractures within the leadership could significantly impact the party’s electoral strategy in the upcoming elections.
2. The Beginning of the Conflict: Dismissal of the Secretary-General
2.1. Dismissal of Secretary-General Kim Cheol-geun
On December 16, 2024, Representative Heo Eun-ah abruptly dismissed Secretary-General Kim Cheol-geun. Kim was known to be a close confidant of Assemblyman Lee Jun-seok and had played a key role in Lee's leadership when he was the head of the People Power Party.
The reasons given by Heo’s camp for his dismissal were as follows:
- Kim Cheol-geun attempted to expand the powers of the Secretary-General through amendments to the party charter and regulations.
- He engaged in overreach, infringing on the independent authority of the party leader.
- He allegedly made unilateral decisions without consulting Representative Heo in key party decision-making processes.
By dismissing Kim, Heo sought to assert her authority as the party leader.
2.2. Lee Jun-seok’s Rebuttal
Lee Jun-seok immediately opposed Heo’s decision. Through social media, he criticized the dismissal of the Secretary-General, arguing that it exacerbated party instability. He claimed that Heo was running the party in an authoritarian manner.
Lee’s key arguments were:
- Kim Cheol-geun’s dismissal was an arbitrary decision that ignored the party’s democratic procedures.
- Heo’s unilateral personnel changes caused internal divisions.
- Heo lacked experience in party management and displayed weak leadership.
Following this, the conflict between Lee and Heo escalated into a public confrontation.
3. Public Conflict: Social Media Battles and Exposures
3.1. Heo Eun-ah’s Public Press Conference
On January 12, 2025, Representative Heo held a press conference where she claimed that Lee was excessively interfering in party operations to strengthen his own political position. She specifically used the term "shadow politics" to criticize Lee for exerting influence over the party without formally holding a leadership position.
Her key points were:
- Lee had been deeply involved in party management through Kim Cheol-geun.
- Every time Heo attempted independent leadership, Lee's faction resisted strongly.
- Key party decisions were influenced more by Lee’s faction rather than Heo herself.
3.2. Lee Jun-seok’s Counterattack
Lee immediately responded through social media and media interviews, refuting Heo’s claims. He argued that Heo had lost internal leadership and was instead the one instigating conflicts.
His main rebuttals were:
- He revealed that Heo had previously requested a proportional representation nomination while in tears, exposing her alleged personal political ambitions.
- He denied direct interference in party management and claimed that Heo’s side was overreacting regarding Kim’s dismissal.
- He asserted that he had no choice but to intervene in party affairs to maintain direction and push for innovation.
These public accusations further deepened internal divisions, causing supporters of both sides to become increasingly polarized.
4. Internal Leadership Fracture and Heo Eun-ah’s Suspension
4.1. Intervention by Party Leadership
On January 21, 2025, the leadership of the Reform New Party decided to suspend Heo Eun-ah from her duties as party leader. This decision stemmed from concerns over the party’s stability and the increasing lack of confidence in her leadership.
Key decisions made by party leadership:
- Suspension of Heo Eun-ah’s duties as party leader.
- Consideration of establishing an emergency response committee to mediate the internal conflict.
- Discussions on restoring normal party operations.
4.2. Heo Eun-ah’s Resistance
Heo immediately pushed back against the decision, declaring that she would fight against Lee’s "political manipulation." She vowed, "I will resist using Lee’s own methods," and pledged to rectify the party’s unjust measures.
Her key arguments:
- Lee and his close associates were trying to privatize the party, and her decisions were necessary to prevent this.
- Her suspension was an unfair political move and an act of suppression.
- She hinted at legal action and political resistance to reclaim her leadership position.
5. Current Situation and Future Prospects
5.1. Worsening Party Division
With the conflict between Heo and Lee ongoing, the Reform New Party remains deeply divided. This instability has raised uncertainties about whether the party can maintain a unified strategy ahead of the 2025 general elections.
Current status of the Reform New Party:
- Lee’s faction has accepted Heo’s suspension as a settled matter and is seeking a new leadership structure.
- Heo is claiming political victimization and trying to rally support from both inside and outside the party.
- Other key party members are also divided, with some attempting mediation, but no resolution appears imminent.
5.2. The Future of the Reform New Party
If the conflict continues, the Reform New Party is likely to face severe leadership fractures and a loss of credibility, making its electoral strategy highly uncertain.
Possible scenarios:
- Heo attempts to return, prolonging internal chaos.
- Lee consolidates power, leading to backlash from Heo’s allies.
- Failure to resolve the conflict leads to further party fragmentation or decline.
If internal discord is not resolved, the party faces a significant political crisis, which could have broader implications for the political landscape.
6. Who Is More at Fault?
This crisis stems from clashes over party management and authority, making it difficult to assign absolute blame. However, from a strategic perspective, both Heo and Lee made political miscalculations.
6.1. Heo Eun-ah’s Mistakes
- Unilateral personnel changes without sufficient coordination led to internal resistance.
- Failure to mediate conflicts and choosing direct confrontation weakened her leadership.
- Emotionally charged responses (e.g., the "shadow politics" remark) escalated tensions.
- Lack of internal support led to her eventual suspension.
6.2. Lee Jun-seok’s Mistakes
- Excessive interference in party affairs despite not being an official leader.
- Attempting to expand the Secretary-General’s authority to counterbalance Heo’s leadership.
- Using aggressive rhetoric and exposing personal matters, worsening party divisions.
- Provoking internal conflicts via social media rather than resolving them diplomatically.
6.3. Final Judgment
While both sides contributed to the crisis, Lee Jun-seok bears greater responsibility because:
- He undermined the official leadership structure through backdoor influence.
- He attempted to alter party regulations to weaken Heo’s authority.
- He escalated internal conflicts via his signature divisive tactics.
This situation resembles a startup’s downfall due to a founder bypassing the CEO and creating a shadow leadership structure.
However, it remains uncertain whether Heo Eun-ah, with her gentlemanly approach, can effectively counteract these challenges.