Politicians often say one thing and do another. Still people forgive them and forget what they have said and done considering the "profession's characteristics." If some well-known appointed officials do the same, however, the public will have another look at them or think that before long they will jump into politics.

That's what many Koreans think after watching the behavior of U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon while he was here May 25-30.

Upon ending a six-day visit to his home country, Ban asked Koreans to help him "bring 10 years of service as the top U.N. official to a successful conclusion" during the remaining seven months of his tenure.

Secretary-General Ban was asking the political parties and media to leave him alone and not try to drag him into domestic politics. His remarks came at the end of his most politicized itinerary in the nation, however. Upon arrival here, Ban attended a forum of senior journalists, during which he said Korea needs a political leader who could sacrifice himself or herself for national unity.

When Ban emphasized he is the only one maintaining a channel of dialogue with North Korea and boasted that he is as fit as a fiddle despite his age, 73, he was no longer the equivocating, self-effacing diplomat he had long been known to be. Later, Ban met with the political leaders of his home region of Chungcheong and visited key politicians of the ruling party at their political base in the Gyeongsang region, as well as Daegu, the hometown of President Park Geun-hye.

The motivation behind visiting the two provinces ― one the right-wing government's electoral power base and the other that has long held the deciding swing vote in national elections ― was unmistakable for anyone who has witnessed Korean presidential elections.

At a news conference, however, Ban complained that his words and deeds here were blown out of proportion. Yes we media people are notorious for exaggerating and over-interpreting things, but only fools and liars would take what Ban tried to convey as anything but a thinly veiled attempt to make clear his presidential ambition.

Come next Jan. 1, the former U.N. secretary-general will be completely free to play his "role as a Korean citizen," as Ban put it. That may include his candidacy on the ticket of the ruling conservative party, and maybes even the presidency after a successful campaign, even though a U.N. resolution in 1946 strongly recommends that former secretaries-general refrain from taking public jobs in national governments for at least five years after leaving their U.N. jobs. This resolution has no binding power but none of Ban's predecessors have violated it for their personal agendas or any other reasons.

Assessments of Ban's performance as the U.N. secretary-general are mixed at best. The London-based Economist magazine rated Ban as one of the worst secretaries-general. A contributor to the New York Times called him "a powerless observer," "the invisible secretary general" and "a nowhere man," sometimes quoting anonymous sources not very far from Ban.

Koreans might brush aside these scathing denunciations of Ban in Western media as based on racial bias or cultural differences. But it is harder to ignore reports about Ban surrounding himself with Korean staff, including an aide responsible for monitoring the Korean media to know what Koreans think of their compatriot at the top post in the world's largest organization.

Even these reports could have been slanders from his adversaries. Yet I can't help but think had he spent more of his time and energy on tackling global issues in a bolder manner, his reputation and that of his country could have risen higher.

Perhaps the U.N. secretary-general is the most impossible job in the world, as Ban once said. And few other secretaries-general, even the legendary Dag Hammarskjold or Ban's immediate predecessor, the charismatic Kofi Annan, could have solved major armed conflicts gripping the attention of global citizens.

The U.N. secretary-general holds the status of national leader but has no army of his or her own. All she or he can do is to speak out most forcefully, or at least audibly. I don't know what kept Ban from doing so ― the lack of resources or boldness or guts.

Ban might think these accusations are unfair as he has said not much, not explicitly at the least, about his future plans. Then he should not have made moves that could trigger political speculation. Since the U.N. chief showed unusual intimacy with the Korean President in New York and Seoul, rumors have been rampant here about sharing of power, in which Ban becomes president and one of President Park Geun-hye's political proteges gets the prime minister's post. This may not be an impossible scenario if only Ban manages to visit North Korea and meet Kim Jong-un for a major breakthrough in the strained inter-Korean relations.

To do so, however, Ban should be able to go much further than indirectly criticizing the Park administration's unimaginative North Korea policy, remaining content with advising Park to mix sanctions with some humanitarian aid. He should have called for a bolder rapprochement policy. Will he be able to do so in the future, in defiance of hardliners in Washington and Seoul?

It is understandable that Ban, like most of his predecessors, tried not to publicly cross his patrons ― the five permanent members of the Security Council. It was hardly so, however, why the incumbent secretary-general reportedly refrained from standing against even some dictators of small countries.

Can South Koreans expect that Ban will deal with, let alone face down, a more tyrannical and shrewd dictator in North Korea if the occasion arises, then?

If the answer to these questions remains "no" seven months from now, as many here suspect, the former U.N. secretary-general should keep his word: become a Korean citizen ― and not much more.

Choi Sung-jin is The Korea Times senior writer. Contact him at choisj@ktimes.com.