Hong Beom-do, a prominent figure in Korean history, served as a general in the Korean Independence Army during Japanese colonization, achieving notable victories, including the ‘Battle of Fengwudong,’ in the fight against Japanese military forces. While he is widely respected for his contributions to the Korean independence movement, his affiliation with the Communist Party of the Soviet Union has stirred controversy regarding his historical legacy. In August, the South Korean Defense Ministry’s decision to remove General Hong’s statue from the Korea Military Academy (KMA) sparked strong opposition, prompting former President Moon Jae-in to condemn the move, urging the preservation of historical figures’ significance and the avoidance of tarnishing Korea's history. This controversy highlights the ongoing debate over how to navigate the legacies of historical figures in modern South Korean society.

General Hong, an undeniable figure in the Korean independence movement, now finds his legacy under scrutiny due to his association with the communist party and his involvement in disarming Korean independence fighters during the ‘Massacre of Svobodny,’ as reported by Joongang Daily. While his contributions are significant, the lingering questions about his ideological background provide ample justification for those advocating the removal of his statue.

However, canceling General Hong’s statue raises several crucial concerns, shedding light on why such a move may be problematic or even unnecessary. First, there are political implications. The decision to place General Hong’s statue in front of the KMA was made during Moon Jae-In’s administration. Removing the statue may be viewed as a political confrontation by the current administration against the former administration’s decisions, potentially fueling divisiveness.

Furthermore, it is essential to avoid hasty generalizations. General Hong’s affiliation with the Communist Party might have been a strategic choice to protect his army rather than a reflection of his personal beliefs. Many experts argue that there is no concrete evidence to establish General Hong's direct involvement in the controversial ‘Massacre of Svobodny.’ Some even suggest that he was deeply troubled by the events after learning about them. In addition, it is critical to remember that the military’s primary focus should be on safeguarding the nation and its people, rather than being influenced by ideological clashes. Perceiving the communist parties as the main enemy may not align with the modern military’s mission. Instead, it is essential to prioritize the country’s security and welfare over political ideologies when making such decisions.

Taking an objective stand point, the decision to relocate General Hong’s statue seems excessive and possibly driven by political motives, resulting in unnecessary ideological and historical disputes during Yoon’s administration. This has drawn significant public attention and strong opposition from organizations representing the descendants of independence activists, such as the Korean Veterans Association. Furthermore, it appears more crucial for the current president to prioritize pressing and extensive issues, such as the radioactive water discharge from Japan. Additionally, there is concern that the General Hong issue might be used to divert attention from larger problems or controversies within the current administration.

The General Hong controversy underscores the complexity of evaluating historical figures and their legacies. These question arises: Is such a re-evaluation of historical figures essential and advantageous? Can we fairly judge individuals from the past through contemporary standards and perspectives? While it is imperative to critically examine our historical narratives and figures, it is equally important to approach this task with a nuanced understanding, recognizing the nuances of history and the challenges of applying modern judgments to the past. In this ongoing debate, we must strike a balance between acknowledging historical wrongs and appreciating historical figures in their full complexity. Prior to achieving a comprehensive understanding and presenting compelling arguments that can sway the Korean public, the removal of Hong's statue should be postponed.