1802 North Korea's `Game of Thrones'

North Korea's `Game of Thrones'

North Korea's `Game of Thrones'


By Jason Lim


A few months ago, I wrote about two widespread cognitive biases about North Korea that tend to mislead us when making policy decisions about North Korea.

One, that North Korea is a one-party, socialist dictatorship like the former Soviet Union or today’s China, with internal decision-making dynamics similar to what we see in those systems. Wrong. North Korea is still essentially a monarchy with hereditary kings who rule in conjunction with a tight-knit group of elites mostly interrelated by blood and whose original elite stature was given through their forefathers’ participation in the original struggle that liberated the new country.



Two, that North Korea wants to be a “normal” country as we define a normal country: a member of an international community of nations with open borders and lively interchanges. This, too, is wrong. The last thing that North Korea would want to do is to welcome global forces that would change its current political and socioeconomic status quo, which the ruling elites have carefully and meticulously built up over the past few decades as a means to keep themselves at the apex.

The two biases are actually symptoms of a single underlying diagnosis. North Korea is a country permanently and intentionally living in the past. It’s not only backward, but also backward looking.

In that context, the assassination of Kim Jong-nam, the older half-brother of Kim Jong-eun, is a very ordinary by-product of a typical hereditary succession that Koreans have witnessed hundreds of times throughout its history. Although these two Kims are called brothers, they’ve only been rivals for the throne ever since they became conscious of each other’s existence.

The elevation of the third son by Kim Jong-il as the successor went against the traditional protocol of anointing the eldest son as the crown-prince. The throne was Kim Jong-nam’s to lose, which he seemed to have done. Nevertheless, Jong-nam’s presence meant that he could always form the nucleus of a potential opposition movement within or outside the country, especially if a powerful foreign benefactor such as China chooses to actively support his candidacy. Further, the fact that Kim Jong-un is a product of the second wife also lends more legitimacy to Kim Jong-nam when royal succession protocols are strictly interpreted, making him a constant threat to Kim Jong-un, the current king.

And king he certainly is. More importantly, the person of Kim Jong-un probably places himself in a historical royal context. In other words, he models his decisions and behavior based on lessons that he has learned from well-known historical narratives and figures in Korea’s past. But who? Knowing that would be interesting because we would be able to model his potential next steps based on what type of a historical figure he sees himself being.

A natural candidate, of course, is the greatest king in Korea’s history: Sejong. The historical parallels are there. Kim Jong-un is the third king of a new dynasty, like Sejong was the third “real” king (there was a puppet second king that had no bearing) of the nascent Joseon Dynasty. Both Sejong and Kim Jong-un’s grandfather founded the country after a bloody upheaval _ both were celebrated as military heroes. Both Sejong and Kim Jong-un’s father were the real builders of the political and military infrastructure that undergirds their respective kingdoms. Both Sejong and Kim Jong-un were chosen above their two older brothers to succeed their fathers as the king. Both Sejong and Kim Jong-un’s father personally oversaw the succession process while alive, grooming their sons into the position.

Granted, these are accidental and superficial similarities. However, human beings always seek meaning in our lives and want to maximize the significance of our own place on earth. Kim Jong-un would naturally choose someone who represents the most grandiose version of who he would want to be. And this someone would necessarily be from Korea’s past.

This might not mean anything. Conversely, it could mean everything. If Kim sees himself fulfilling some destiny as the next King Sejong of the modern era, then it would give us insight into the type of leverage that would be most effective in any eventual negotiations with the North Korean leadership. What would give Kim Jong-un the biggest meaning and most reinforcement to his adopted identity as the next great Korean king? After all, in a monarchy, it’s always what’s most important to the king that’s the key to unlocking the gates of the kingdom.

This recognition is significant because it implies that North Korean leadership’s reference point for its decisions would probably be based on historical precedents, rather than strategic thinking about the future.
---------

Jason Lim is a Washington, D.C.-based expert on innovation, leadership and organizational culture. He has been writing for The Korea Times since 2006. Reach him at jasonlim@msn.com, facebook.com/jasonlimkoreatimes or @jasonlim2012.
====

Charles Park
9 hrs ·



Thought of the day : Turn North Korea into a Constitutional Monarchy.

NK has evolved into a Marshal Law State and that is an additional impediment to peace in Korea. The Kims are portrayed as national saviors and military genius. Then in the ongoing Perpetual Propaganda War, NK needs the US imperial bogeyman and the conflict to continue (much as the US relies on a reliable NK bogeyman).

But it appears they prefer peace to continuing isolation. If US (and South Korea) all of a sudden is no longer the obstacle, NK's war orientation remains a challenge and key among that is the titular position of Kim Family who rule like emperors as the savior and military geniuses. Without an enemy and ongoing conflict, how to justify the rule or Cult?

The Personality Cult presents another challenge. If the US and international sanctions conspire to Isolate NK, an equal conspirator is the NK Kim Personality Cult which relies on monopolizing information to promote itself. However, as Frederick Hayek and other political economists have pointed out, totalitarian system suffer from artificially erecting impermeable bounded rationality both at micro and macro levels.

How to safely transition to peace without risking total loss for the Kim's? For a while now, I entertained the idea of NK turning into a constitutional monarchy, like Britain, Thailand, or Japan.

It is true that in some respects NK is a reactionary and backward state with a Socialist Dynastic Monarchy. Thus the analysis of Palace Politics and Court Protocols can be useful. However, associating it with King Sejong seems limited. Rather, the Kim Dynasty is a unique modern creation intertwined with communism, fascism, and perpetual anti-imperialist war with the United States.

Then is peace with NK possible and can the regime survive peace? If there is peace treaty with the US (and end to the Korean War), you take away one of their key rationale for existence and legitimacy.

If it is a Monarchy of the old variant, they can convert it into a Constitutional Monarchy. Then the Kim Family would obtain symbolic status, with actual power being waged by the National Assembly and elected Head of State, much like the Japanese Emperor and British Queen Elizabeth. It would require modifying the myths surrounding the Kims as hands on leaders, but it could succeed in gradually modernizing and democratizing (e.g. Normalizing) NK government.

Kim Jong Un himself should lead the transition by overseeing transparent elections and gradually ceding power to the constitutional head of state of state. At a certain point and under the right circumstances, he could announce he will step down after achieving a specific marker of development.

This is something he should seriously think through. Considering the contradictions of dictatorial and totalitarian rule, there is a great deal of risks to his life and the legacy of his family from both internal and external factions. Proceeding thus may be one way to preserve the legacy his family and ensure its survival as well as successfully bring his grandfather's revolution to closure.

I might add that it is not about bringing the revolution to a "closure" but could be about bringing the ongoing war and war footing to a closure. From wartime rule to a Peace time rule. Rather, it could be a way to keep the "Revolution" "alive" through a new reality of peace.