(no subject)

[randomness]

Many of the articles about Jang Sung-taek's execution lead with the information that Jang was supreme leader Kim Jong-un's uncle. This is true but North Korea has a hereditary form of government so this isn't that noteworthy. Jang married into the Kim family by marrying Kim Jong-il's younger sister.

I think it's slightly more illustrative to say that Kim Jong-un had his would-be regent executed. Jang was promoted by Kim Jong-il (Kim Jong-un's father, and predecessor as supreme leader) during the last years he ruled North Korea, and he seems to have had some executive role during Kim Jong-il's illness.

Seen that way, Jang's purge and execution is still a brutal way to eliminate a potential threat but very much in line with centuries of practice in hereditary monarchies all over the world, including those in Europe.

Comments

[r-ness.livejournal.com]

I would more describe it as Kim Jong-Un getting rid of his regent.

The reason I didn't put it that way is because from what I've been reading he had more power when the elder Kim was ailing than he did after the younger Kim took power. Calling Jang the younger Kim's regent implies that he was actually running things after the younger Kim ascended to the throne...er, became supreme leader.

It's always possible he was running things to some extent, so maybe the easier description you suggest is accurate. Finally, one very plausible course of events was that they had a serious disagreement about whether Jang was running things, and Kim the younger decided that he needed to make very clear who was in charge.

But I'm kind of surprised that he did it so violently, rather than just retiring the guy.

North Korea is evidently the kind of place where people "get retired" with extreme prejudice.