President Kim Dae-jung's address to the South Korean people in which he apologised for the North Korean payoff scandal marks the first time he has acknowledged responsibility - but instead of clarifying the issues, he has muddied them, urging that none of the people involved be investigated or prosecuted.
While saying, 'I believe the government has to clarify the truth', Mr Kim did not specify the amount of money sent to North Korea, or say whether it was government money or the Hyundai Group's money, nor did he say what connection, if any, there was between the money and the summit meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong-il in June 2000, which won him a Nobel Peace Prize.
To be fair, Kim Dae-jung at least acknowledged his administration had violated the law - and had assisted the Hyundai Group to violate the law - but he issued an appeal in the name of a higher national interest, which he feels should provide immunity for all concerned.
I have some questions for Kim Dae-jung. Mr Kim, if the precondition to accepting responsibility is that no legal action be taken against you and your top officials, does it not make the acknowledgment of responsibility meaningless? Moreover, are you not shifting responsibility from the government to Hyundai, presenting the situation as one in which your administration merely 'accommodated' Hyundai in its business dealings with North Korea? At no point did you admit that the government provided the money to Hyundai, via the state-owned Korea Development Bank. Nor did you say that the government was merely extending a loan to Hyundai, which it expects to be repaid. In fact, the chief executive of Hyundai Merchant Marine at the time, Kim Choong-shik, has already insisted that the company has no obligation to repay the government. What does this mean, except that Hyundai was merely providing a channel for your government to send funds to Kim Jong-il? Your cover-up - there is no other word for it - bears a remarkable resemblance to the Watergate affair in the US during the presidency of Richard Nixon. President Nixon, at the time, invoked 'executive privilege'; you invoke 'administrative authority', which amounts to pretty much the same.
Mr Nixon's close associates were convicted of perjury. Your chief-of-staff, Park Jie-won, has already admitted lying to a parliamentary panel last October when he denied holding secret meetings with a North Korean official.
Mr Nixon tried to involve the CIA in his cover-up. Your security adviser, Lim Dong-won, has already admitted that, when he was head of the National Intelligence Service, he helped channel funds to North Korea.
Mr Nixon wrapped himself in patriotism as a defence against all critics. You, in your statement, appealed for South Koreans' 'patriotic judgment and understanding' on the payoff scandal, saying 'the destiny of the nation awaits the wise, determined decision of all Koreans'.