Real power in North Korea now probably belongs to a coterie of advisers following the death of Kim Jong-il — not his youngest son, Kim Jong-un, an untested man in his 20s who has been anointed the “Great Successor.”
These advisers will decide whether North Korea launches military action against South Korea to strengthen the succession around Kim Jong-un — or seeks a peaceful transition.
Confucian respect for age and the influence of the military means the younger Kim lacks the untrammeled authority of his father or grandfather, North Korean founder Kim Il-sung.
The most powerful adviser is Jang Song-thaek, 65, brother-in-law of Kim Jong-il.
Jang is a survivor of the bloody tradition of purge and political rehabilitation that kept the two elder Kims in power for more than six decades.
“Jang has played a considerable role during Kim Jong-il’s illness of managing the succession problem and even the North’s relations with the US and China,” said Yang Moo-jin of the University of North Korean Studies.
“Jang is in overall charge of the job of making it formal for Kim Jong-un to be the legal and systematic leader by pulling together the party and the military,” he added.
Jong-un is Kim Jong-il’s third known son and was given official titles only last year. He was hailed by state media this week as the “Great Successor” to his father, who died on Saturday of a heart attack.
Jang had the full backing of his brother-in-law, who named him to the National Defense Commission in 2009, the supreme leadership council Kim Jong-il led as head of the military state.
That appointment was part of a flurry of moves Kim Jong-il made following a stroke in 2008, which probably brought home the reality that, unlike his father at his death in 1994, he was unprepared for a trusted son to take over.
The commission has been the pinnacle of power in North Korea and which Kim Jong-il had used to preach his own version of political teaching called “Songun,” or “military first.”
The naming of Jang as a vice chairman of the commission effectively catapulted him to the second most powerful position in the country.
It also put him in line to become caretaker leader of the dynastic state in the event Kim Jong-il was unable to orchestrate a gradual transition of power and the grooming of Jong-un.
Jang, who also holds the humble title of a department chief in the ruling Workers’ Party, disappeared from public view for two years before returning in 2006, widely believed to have been purged and then rehabilitated as part of a power struggle involving backers of Kim Jong-il’s second and third wives.
He is considered a pragmatist who earned Kim Jong-il’s trust because of his understanding of domestic politics and economic policy.
Jang ranked 19th on the list of 232 officials of the funeral committee for Kim, behind his wife and the sister of the dead leader, Kim Kyong-hui. Jong-un heads the group.
As the party’s light industry department chief, Kim Kyong-hui, 65, is the link that ties Jang to the ruling family. She had been the person Kim Jong-il had increasingly turned to in recent years for advice and friendship, analysts in Seoul say.
She is also believed to have had a drinking problem, which had kept her sidelined for months at a time.
However, she was the most active companion of Kim Jong-il during his frequent field guidance trips, according to the North’s state media.
Few observers believe either Jang or his wife would try to push the junior Kim out and grab power for themselves.
“That would kindle a power struggle that will get out of control, and they will know better than to do that,” Yang said.
With the military already very powerful, there appears to be little risk of a coup or the kind of regime change seen in the Arab world this year.
The rising star of the North’s military and its chief of staff, Vice Marshall Ri Yong-ho, is ranked fourth on the list of funeral committee officials, an indication of the power he wields not only in the army, but as Kim Jong-il’s confidante in domestic politics.
Ri, despite being on good terms with Jang, provides an ideal balance to the power of Kim’s brother-in-law.
“Jang was loyal, but he was very powerful, and that could have been a source of anxiety to some degree [to Kim Jong-il],” said Paik Hak-soon, an expert on the North’s powerful structure at the Sejong Institute.
The North’s power elite is formally a three-pronged structure of the military, the Workers’ Party of Korea and the parliament.
The National Defense Commission is the state’s supreme leadership body, which Kim Jong-il headed.
The Workers’ Party of Korea was also headed by Kim Jong-il until his death and a general meeting last year was meant to revive its status as the primary source of power.
Parliament is headed by Kim Yong-nam, a loyal but passive figurehead who analysts say poses no threat to the transition.
They also say it is unclear how the individual interests of the elite will work to drive the state through what is the closet thing to a power vacuum it has known.
One thing is clear — the elite want to survive and know they cannot afford a power struggle.
“The North Korean leadership is united,” said Andrei Lankov of Kookmin University in Seoul.
“They understand that they should hang together in order not to be hanged separately,” he said.
Jang, his wife Kim Kyong-hui and Ri are expected to make sure Jong-un survives as the third generational leader and that North Korea holds together at least through the centenary of Kim Il-sung’s birth next year.
“These people make up a crisis management community,” Cho Min of the Korea Institute for National Unification said.
“They will be ensuring that everyone understands that it is in no one’s interest to try to stand up against Kim Jong-un,” he added.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers