North Korea succession - why is it so (apparently) smooth?

[Auntiestablishment]

Can anyone explain the N Korean succession, please?

Kim Jong-Il designates his son Kim Jong-Un to follow him then pops off rather sooner than planned so anointed successor is v young, inexperienced, etc.

Why, then, is it that Kim Jong-Un is being anointed, deferred to, etc? Why is there no coup by generals or power struggle at the top or all the sort of thing one might "expect" to see in the circumstances? I get that the N Korean regime is very repressive, etc, but would this apply right up to those people at the very top who do have contact with the outside world, power from their position in the army, etc?

Brain washed populace, they are told that the outside world has it even worse than them (materially). The generals know better but the status quo suits them (they retain power in the community that matters most to them, and the community status thing is vital). Lots of collusion at the top. Only those at the very top have a clue about outside world, really, and they have a moral view that their society is still better, happier & more morally upright, in spite of its poverty/deprivatons/delusions.

It's similar with Myanmar, btw, the top generals know all about representative democracy & how the outside world views them, but it suits them to preserve status quo.

I would guess that Kim Jong-Il, like so many dictators, was kept in place by the faceless henchmen around him rather than by sheer force of personality. As long as the henchmen are still in the same powerful position and can remain faceless, they will tolerate Kim junior and use him as poster-boy. If they tire of him, he may well meet with a nasty accident and they'll get someone else. I think it's the same in Syria. By all accounts, President Assad was thought to be 'a decent bloke' until he got the top job that his elder brother had originally been groomed for. The transformation from student of medicine and opthalmology to bloodthirsty, oppressive tyrant won't have been arrived at solo.

Agree with Cogito. Kim Jong un will no more be running the country than you or I.

Plus, I suspect Kim Jong il actually died a while back, so they have had plenty of time for a transition before his death was announced IYSWIM.

because the regime pay the military their wages and that's really all you need to keep power.
There's also the threat of the death camps for anyone who is suspected of not being loyal.

"I get that the N Korean regime is very repressive, etc, but would this apply right up to those people at the very top"

Take any tyrannical regime from Stalinist Russia (or even modern Russia) to Mugabe's Zimbabwe to Gadaffi's Libya to Ceausescu's Romania to Saddam's Iraq. Brutal dictator, military oppression, dissenters mysteriously vanishing, widespread poverty and neglect, ... all the usual ingredients. And yet the chosen few at the top of the tree, when the regime comes tumbling down, are invariably found to be living in luxurious gold-plated surroundings. Preaching 'all men are equal' but making sure they are more equal than others. Major motivation to maintain the status quo.

Better still, read Orwell's 'Animal Farm' :)

The notion of a Communist dynasty is absurd in itself.

Thanks - some interesting thoughts. I've never really studied how dictators stay in power though I assume a willingness to kill a lot has to be part of the deal.

Am just puzzled, really, why some ambitious general(s) haven't gone "you know what, we could do better without this Kim [or any Kim]" or "I want this to be All Mine" - somewhat in the manner of Richard 3rd or even ambitious wives a la Lady Macbeth.

Favoured officials do very well for themselves (as well as you can somewhere like NK) - access to things like consumer goods, imported cars, the best apartments, freedom to travel outside the country etc. They have a deeply vested interest in making sure the status quo is maintained. If they tried to stage a coup and failed, they would be put to death for certain, and their families sent to forced labour camps and generally ostracised from society. It's far too risky.

The generals know that while Kim-anything is the figurehead, they can carry on as they always have done, running the country and living well. If they upset the applecart by taking out the figurehead, they will be the ones who get the blame for anything going wrong.

I'd guess there is/has been/will be a power struggle amongst the generals, but the figurehead will stay the same and the population at large won't even know about it.

It's no more crazy then our royal family hanging on for dear life, the eternal president, father of the nation and his blood successors.

Interesting Telegraph article which puts in some specifics on who/why/etc.

and much speculation.

Always better to be the power behind the throne rather than the target sitting on it.

So you pop a pliable figurehead in the top job and then everything stays the same, which is just how most people like it.

I don't know much about NK but eventually people will have had enough and heads will roll.

The thing about North Korea is that the army is number one in line for the food rations, so the people with the guns have a vested interest in making sure that remains the case.

DH and I were talking about what would push NK to the tipping point.

We agreed that it would be some sort of technological thing - an air drop of tens of millions of cheap tablet computers loaded with video from the outside world, or something like that. By all accounts, North Koreans are told relentlessly that they enjoy the best standard of living in the world, so something that yanked the rug from under that would be the only way.

I have a couple of friends who've been to Pyongyang and they all came back saying it was the most depressing experience of their lives. One couldn't talk about it at all.

The army keeps the people in check, the army gets all it needs status quo continues.

"It's no more crazy then our royal family hanging on for dear life"

Our royal family is there by popular consent. The management of the country is decided democratically. Not the same model at all.

Popular consent? when was the referendum on it then because I must have missed it.

it's the same thing, we are a democracy with the hang over legacy stuck here of people born into a position of extremely high statues and wealth purely because of an outdated idea of a blessed bloodline.

North Korea may well be communist but ruled over by the children of the blessed bloodline of the eternal president the father of the nation, it's not that different.

the only real difference is the fact we know the royal family have no power, they are a figurehead, where as we have been given the impression that the blessed bloodline of North Korea are in control and are the bedrock of the country that cements it all together.