inspiration

Saudi Arabia is the birthplace of Islam and home to Islam's two holiest shrines in Mecca and Medina. The king's official title is the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques. The government bases its legitimacy on its interpretation of sharia (Islamic law) and the 1992 Basic Law, which specifies that the rulers of the country shall be male descendants of the founder King Abdulaziz bin Abdulrahman Al Saud. The Basic Law sets out the system of governance, rights of citizens, and powers and duties of the government, and it provides that the Koran and Sunna (the traditions of the Prophet Muhammad) serve as the country’s constitution.
Islamic Sharia’a is the law of the land in Saudi Arabia. The country has no penal code. One of the main sources of Islamic law is the hadith or ascribed sayings of the Prophet Mohamed. Saudi officials base this on their interpretation of hadith and state that this is what is expected of them as the country that hosts the two holiest mosques in Islam, in Mecca and Medina.
The Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice (CPVPV), a semiautonomous agency--referred to by some as the “religious police" --has the authority to monitor social behavior and enforce morality subject to the law and in coordination with law enforcement authorities. Its members have been accused of beating, whipping, detaining, and otherwise harassing individuals. As of June 2014 the CPVPV had 12 branch offices, 129 subcommission offices, and 345 information centers throughout the kingdom.

Continuing its consistent decades-long record, Saudi Arabia received the lowest possible marks for civil and political freedoms in the annual Freedom House rankings in 2014. The countries placed alongside it were North Korea, Turkmenistan, and smattering of the most brutal African dictatorships. Among the punishments distributed is anything from hands and feet being chopped off for theft, lashes for adultery and other “social" misdemeanors, to beheading, which can be handed down for crimes as varied as sedition, carjacking, sorcery and drug smuggling.
The regime’s disregard for any accountability to its people is brazen. There are no national elections, no parties, and no parliament – only a symbolic advisory chamber, known as Majlis al-Shura.

Tribal factors and longstanding traditions continued to dictate many individual appointments to positions. Unofficially, government authorities will not appoint a Bedouin tribesman to a high-ranking cabinet-level position, and Bedouins can only reach the rank of major general in the armed forces. All members of the cabinet who were tribal were not members of Bedouin tribes but urbanized “Hamael" tribes. Exceptions are sometimes made when a person marries into the Al Saud family.

In 1962, then-King Faisal abolished slavery in Saudi Arabia by royal decree. Decades later, migrant workers in the purportedly modern society that the kingdom has become continue to suffer extreme forms of labor exploitation that sometimes rise to slavery-like conditions. Their lives are further complicated by deeply rooted gender, religious, and racial discrimination. Employers or sponsors controlled the departure of foreign workers and residents from the country; employers/sponsors were responsible for processing residence permits and exit visas on their behalf. Sponsors frequently held their employees’ passports against the desires of the employees, despite a law specifically prohibiting this practice. Typically, foreign workers provide sponsors with their residence permit (iqama) before traveling in exchange for their passport to ensure the worker’s return to their employer after their travel.

There were Baloch, West Africans, and Rohingya Muslims from Burma; however, only a portion of these communities was stateless. For example, many Rohingya had expired passports their home government refused to renew. The UNHCR estimated there were between 250,000 to 500,000 Rohingya in the kingdom; some of these individuals benefited from a program to correct their residency status during the year; the government issued approximately 200,000 four-year residency permits by the end of 2014. Only an estimated 2,000 individuals of Rohingya origin had Saudi citizenship. There also were between 300,000 and 400,000 Palestinian residents not registered as refugees, as well as between 750,000 and one million Syrian nationals in the kingdom, although most of these arrived prior to the 2011 outbreak of the conflict in Syria.

The Basic Law establishes absolute monarchy as the political system. The goal of the House of Saud has been to make every Saudi citizen in some way dependent on the royal family in order to convince the citizenry that their own personal well-being is tied up with the existing political system. Riyadh's continued inability to provide the standard of living expected by Saudi citizens has encouraged opponents of the regime to push for a greater say in the way affairs in the Kingdom are conducted. These calls for greater political participation are exacerbated by the moves of Saudi Arabia's neighbors, particularly Bahrain, to liberalize their political systems and encourage participation from their citizens.

Because the House of Saud is a weak regime, it is highly distrustful of its own citizens. Principal human rights issues include abuse of prisoners and incommunicado detention; prohibitions or severe restrictions on freedom of speech, press, peaceful assembly and association, and religion; denial of the right of citizens to change their government; systematic discrimination against women and ethnic and religious minorities; and suppression of workers' rights.

According to the family monarchy system enshrined in the Basic Law, only a few members of the ruling family have a voice in the choice of leaders, the composition of the government, or changes to the political system. The 2006 succession law created the Allegiance Commission, comprising 34 senior princes appointed by the king and responsible for selecting a king and crown prince upon the death or incapacitation of either. The king serves as prime minister and his crown prince serves as deputy prime minister. The king appoints all other ministers, who appoint subordinate officials with cabinet concurrence. The Consultative Council (Majlis as-Shura), a royally appointed 150-member body, advises the king.

Citizens do not have the right to change their government peacefully. The Basic Law states that the government is established on the principle of consultation (shura) and requires the king and crown prince to hold majlis meetings, open-door events where in theory any male citizen or foreigner may express an opinion or a grievance. A prince or other important national or local official can also hold a majlis. The Basic Law states that all individuals have the right to communicate with public authorities on any issue. The government interpreted this provision as a right to be exercised within traditional nonpublic means, not by the use of mass media.

Political parties are illegal. The Green Party continues to operate illegally. There was no media coverage of the party's activities. The Basic Law does not provide for freedom of association, and the government strictly limited this right in practice. The government prohibited the establishment of political parties or any group it considered as opposing or challenging the regime. All associations must be licensed by the MOI and comply with its regulations. Groups that hoped to change some element of the social or political order reported that their licensing requests went unanswered. The MOI reportedly used arbitrary means, such as requiring unreasonable types and quantities of information, to effectively deny associations licenses.

There are no laws that prevent minorities from participating in political life on the same basis as other citizens, but the dominant societal norms marginalize the Shia population. The Consultative Council included only five Shia members. There were no religious minorities in the cabinet. There were some Shia judges.

Criticism is strictly forbidden: in 2014, prominent opposition activist Abd al-Kareem al-Khoder joined hundreds of the country’s political prisoners, when he was sentenced to eight years for demanding the changeover to a constitutional monarchy. Just days before King Abdullah’s death, blogger Raif Badawi was given the first 50 of his 1,000 lashes – for calling for free speech on his blog.

The courts continue to use corporal punishment as a judicial penalty, almost always in the form of floggings, a practice government officials defended as dictated by sharia. According to local human rights activists, police conducted the floggings according to a set of guidelines determined by local interpretation of sharia. The police official administering the punishment must place a book under his arm that prevents raising the hand above the head, limiting the ability to inflict pain on the person subjected to the punishment, and instructions forbid police from breaking the skin or causing scarring when administering the lashes. Courts sentenced several individuals convicted of theft to be punished by amputation, and there was one confirmed case of judicially administered amputation during 2014.

The law does not provide for freedom of association, and the government strictly limited this right. The government prohibited the establishment of political parties or any group it considered as opposing or challenging the regime. All associations must be licensed by the Ministry of Labor and Social Development and comply with its regulations. Some groups that advocated changing elements of the social or political order reported their licensing requests went unanswered for years, despite repeated inquiries.

The law requires a government permit for an organized public assembly of any type. The government categorically forbids participation in political protests or unauthorized public assemblies, and security forces reportedly arrested demonstrators and detained them for brief periods. Security forces, nonetheless, allowed a small number of unauthorized demonstrations throughout the country, despite a 2011 Ministry of Interior statement that demonstrations were banned and that it would take “all necessary measures" against those seeking to “disrupt order."

There are severe restrictions on foreign travel, including for women and members of minority groups. No one may leave the country without an exit visa and a passport. Women, minors (men younger than 21), and other dependents or foreign citizen workers under sponsorship require a male guardian’s consent to travel abroad. According to Ministry of Interior regulations, a male guardian must apply for and collect a passport for women and minors.

Saudi Arabia has frequently used arbitrary travel bans and detentions of Saudis over the years. In many cases the Saudi interior ministry did not inform citizens that they were on a travel ban list or the reasons for the restrictions. Some learned when they attempted to travel abroad. The government reportedly confiscated passports on occasion for political reasons and revoked the rights of some citizens to travel, often without providing them notification or opportunity to contest the restriction. Most travel bans reportedly involved individuals in court cases relating to financial and real estate disputes. During the year 2016 the government banned several individuals engaged in human rights activism or political activities from foreign travel, in addition to hundreds of other travel bans promulgated by the courts.

The number of political prisoners, including detainees who reportedly remained in prolonged detention without charge, could not be reliably ascertained. In many cases it was impossible to determine the legal basis for incarceration and whether the detention complied with international norms and standards. Those who remained imprisoned after trial, including persons who were political activists openly critical of the government, were often convicted of terrorism-related crimes, and there was not sufficient public information about the alleged crimes to judge whether they had a credible claim to being political prisoners.

King Abdallah, who died in 2015, started the reform movement by allowing Saudi women to run for the country’s consultative “Shoura" council and to enter the work force, becoming lawyers, bankers and salespeople. Some recent moves to change the status of women have angered parts of the kingdom’s mostly conservative population. Traditionalists, were not used to such quick change and many were afraid, because things are moving too fast for them.

In clashes with conservative clerics back in the 1960s, after King Faisal opened a school for girls in Riyadh, and when the king opened the first TV station in Riyadh in 1965, the government prevailed. Whenever the state clashes with the (conservative) clerical establishment, the state emerges victorious.

On 05 November 2017 numerous Saudi royals and top government officials were arrested as part of an apparent anti-corruption campaign, quickly nicknamed the "Game of Tobes". The moves consolidated Prince Mohammed's control of the Kingdom's internal security and military institutions, which had long been headed by separate, powerful branches of the ruling family. The arrests were conducted mere hours after Saudi ruler King Salman announced the creation of a powerful new anticorruption committee led by his son and heir, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. Well-known billionaire investor Prince Alwaleed bin Talal was among those who have been detained in connection with newly-opened corruption probes.

According to Washington Post, this move was carried out during "a time of unprecedented political, social and economic upheaval in Saudi Arabia" as the kingdom seeks to reform its economy and decrease its dependence on oil exports. This development led some analysts to speculate that it was part of the crown prince’s plan to secure his power base.

"Knowledgeable observers of Saudi internal politics point to the many arrests of prominent clerics and intellectuals this summer as a sign of tensions inside the kingdom… The latest round of arrests only reinforces the sense that the succession debate is more difficult than the king and his son want," Bruce Riedel, director of the Intelligence Project at the Brookings Institution, wrote for Al-Monitor.

The targeting of Saudi Arabia's long-standing elite represents a shift from family rule to a more authoritarian style of governance based around one man, according to Durham University academic Christopher Davidson. "Going after such 'big fish' is intended by MBS and his allies in Abu Dhabi as a signal of MBS' newly-established sultanistic powers," he said, using the widely-used acronym for Mohammed bin Salman and referring to his close ties to the leaders of the United Arab Emirates. "By going after the richest, whether fellow princes or media moguls and construction magnates, MBS is demonstrating that nobody is outside his control, as he is now at the top of a more authoritarian, 'one-man regime', with the old consensus-based, dynastic monarchy of the past century having effectively collapsed at some point earlier this year."

Former CIA officer Bob Baer credited the Saudi royal family's consensus-based approach to rule for preventing a war with Iran up until now, warning Mohammed bin Salman's purge made the country's future stability less certain. "The Al Saud [ruling family of Saudi Arabia] have survived all these years, thanks to a remarkable and unbreakable consensus among their ranks and has avoided war with Iran," said Baer.

Others however considered this development a sign of actual reforms and a message to the country’s elite. "Cynics are calling this a power play but it's actually a message to the people that an era of elite indulgence is coming to an end," Ali Shihabi, executive director of the Arabia Foundation think tank cited by WaPo, said, adding that this move “will have a wide resonance with the masses since elite indulgence has been a sore issue for decades."

-------------------------------------------
Defense Expenditures
Military expeditures have grown to 12.6% of GDP (2015 planned) from a level of 7.98% of GDP in 2012. At oil prices around $30-35 p/b this year, Saudi Arabia will lose another $55 billion in 2016 addition to $110 billion loss in 2015. Without expenditure cuts, it would exhaust its reserves by the end of the decade. The IMF reported that Saudi cash reserves are in freefall, due in large part to the fall in oil prices". Saudi Arabia has lost about half of its 2015 fiscal revenues following the price drop from USD 96 in 2014 to USD 53 in 2015, equivalent to USD 110 billion or about 15 percent of GDP. With spending at a high level, a deficit of USD 140 billion is projected in 2015. Since Saudi Arabia generates 90 percent of its income from oil, the slump in global energy prices represents a potential crisis for the regime, both economic and political.

Approximately 35 percent of Saudi government expenditures are set aside for defense and homeland security (Ministry of Defense, Ministry of Interior, National Guard and Royal Guard). Industry experts estimate that Saudi defense and security expenditures exceeded $80 billion in 2015. Saudi Arabia has surpassed India to become the world’s largest importer of defense equipment. The increasing involvement of the Saudi military in regional conflicts is reinforcing demand for defense imports while at the same time shifting priorities to acquiring new equipment to counter unconventional, asymmetric threats from sub-state actors and militias.
Saudi military spending increased to meet the Iranian threat, but it is difficult to say by what amount. According to a 2013 report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), Saudi Arabia’s military spending increased to $67 billion, making the kingdom the world’s fourth largest military spender after the US, China and Russia.

For the year 2011 SIPRI estimated the Saudis were devoting 10.1% of their GDP to military and security spending, which would yield a PPP budget of $69.4 Billion. This would place Saudi Arabia fifth place, behind only the US, China, Russia and India. The Kingdom's total military spending in 2011 was $46.2 billion, by SIPRI's estimate. US arms sales to Saudi Arabia in 2011 included purchase of 84 advanced F-15 fighters, upgrades of 70 of the F-15 fighters in the current fleet, a variety of ammunition, missiles and logistics support, dozens of Apache and Black Hawk helicopters, all contributing to a total Saudi weapons deal from the United States of $33.4 billion. The CIA estimated purchasing power parity GDP at $687.7 billion in 2011, but the most recent military expenditure estimate from CIA was from 2005, at which time it was estmated at 10% of GDP by CIA, but only 8% by SIPRI.
During the 1980s, Saudi Arabia's outlays on national security were among the highest in the world in spite of its relatively small population. In 1989 its expenditures of US$14.7 billion ranked eleventh among countries of the world. Nonetheless, this level of spending reflected a declining trend from a peak of US$24.8 billion reached in 1983. Budgeted defense expenditures maintained this gradual decline between 1988 and 1990. Actual defense expenditures rose dramatically in 1990, however, to almost US$31.9 billion to meet the costs of additional arms and the contributions to United States and British military expenditures necessitated by the Iraqi aggression against Kuwait. The defense budget of US$26.8 billion in 1991 included more than US$13.7 billion in contributions to the United States, French, and British war efforts, but did not include projected heavy additional arms purchases. Saudi Arabia also contributed to the costs of other non-Western members of the coalition forces acing Iraq.

In early 1991, Saudi officials estimated that during the first five months of the gulf crisis the country had earned roughly US$15 billion in windfall oil profits arising from increased production and higher market prices, while assuming an additional US$30 billion in commitments related to the crisis. The latter figure included US$13.6 billion in new arms and equipment, US$2.7 billion in extra mobilization and deployment costs and civil defense, with the remainder consisting of grants and loans to other governments to offset the economic effects of the crisis.

During 1983, when defense spending reached a peak, military expenditures per capita were at an annual level of nearly US$2,500. This amount was more than twice the per capita defense spending in the United States, and was not approached by any other country except Israel, Iraq, and the other oil-exporting states of the Persian Gulf. As a consequence of the reduced rate of defense spending after 1983, military expenditures per capita had declined to US$897 by 1989.

The share of gross national product (GNP) originally earmarked for defense in 1990 was 16.9 percent, materially below the peak of 22 percent reached in 1983 but still about twice as high as the Middle East as a whole. Defense outlays constituted 35.5 percent of central government expenditures in 1989, which was also higher than the Middle East average of 32 percent.

The declining rate of defense spending between 1984 and 1990 resulted largely from reductions in oil revenues that produced a negative growth rate for the entire economy. A secondary factor may have been the completion of several large-scale infrastructure projects. Arms imports, which accounted for 16 percent of the defense budget in 1983, had risen to 25 percent by 1988. The major contracts for weaponry placed with Britain, the United States, and France since 1988, the extraordinary expenses of the Persian Gulf War, and plans for expansion of the armed forces during the 1990s seemed certain to impose pressure on the defense budget for years to come.

-----
Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK)
North Korea has been ruled by one of the most repressive totalitarian regimes on earth. Millions of North Koreans have been starved to death and sent to concentration camps to die in inhumane ways not seen since the days of Hitler or Stalin. The extent of human rights abuses, a list too long to go into great detail, are deliberate and calculated actions utilized by the Kim regime to quell dissent and maintain ultimate control.

Exposure to and desire for other cultures is spreading throughout the poplulace and armed forces. As people begin to see how other cultures live, they find their current situation less appealing and question huge defense expenditures like missile launches. Kim Jung Un is not only aware of the increasing dissatisfaction and desertion within the ranks of the NKPA, but also understands how a weakening of the military threatens his national defense strategy and the stability of his regime. He is quoted as saying “If the military deteriorates and collapses, our fatherland will be blown away like sand."
Kim Jong Un rebuked the military for having many political schools that practice “Hailing Yang, while practicing Yin." This phrase means that they “pretend to obey but secretly betray."Kim Jong Un ordered the eradication of “aberrant lifestyles," in which people view and listen to “impure materials," but according to a North Korean source, interest in and desire for different cultures is spreading in the country.
The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea or DPRK) is a Communist state with an underdeveloped economy, but a powerful military, situated on the Korean peninsula between northeast China and the Republic of Korea (South Korea). North Korea limits trade and transportation links with other countries and tightly restricts the circumstances under which foreigners may enter the country and interact with local citizens. Telephone and fax communications are unavailable in many areas of the country, and foreigners can expect their communications to be monitored by DPRK officials. In recent years, North Korea has experienced intermittent famine, chronic fuel and electricity shortages, and outbreaks of disease. Many countries, including the United States, have contributed to international relief efforts to assist the people of North Korea.
The DPRK adopted Marxism-Leninism as its ruling philosophy when it proclaimed its establishment in 1948, but in a Constitutional revision in 1972, supplemented it with the juche ideology, or national self-reliance. The two philosophies were combined into one as "the juche idea of the Worker's Party of Korea, a creative application of Marxism-Leninism to the conditions of our country". In 1980, the official ideology was simplified as "the juche thought of the Great Leader, Kim Il-Sung". According to the DPRK Constitution, juche is "a revolutionary ideology with a people-centred view of the world that aims to realise the independence of the masses, the guiding principle of its actions". Juche consists of two parts: the philosophical theory that claims the masses are the masters of history and the revolution, and the principle that the masses need the guidance of a leader (Kim Il-Sung and his son, Kim Jong-Il) to fulfil their destiny.

In practice, juche resulted in an inward looking economic and political system that ostensibly rejected international trade, but in reality became heavily dependent on the provision of goods on favourable terms from fraternal socialist states. With the demise of the communist bloc, the difficulties of this position soon became apparent. Shortages in spare parts, fuel, and food have grown but the isolationist ideology of juche continues to underlie all government policies and emphasis remains in advancing an independent road to national development. The population is motivated to pursue juche through an intensive ideological campaign and a pervasive programme of political indoctrination. Since its inception, juche has primarily stressed independence from external powers, but the regime now faces the dilemma of how to expand trade and investment with the outside world in order to resuscitate the economy, without jeopardising its political stability.

The "Military First" orientation has always been the heart and soul of the North Korean regime. It provides the only conceivable means by which the regime can survive and achieve its ultimate security through reunification. The military continues to grow in both conventional and asymmetrical forces with increasing emphasis on the latter. The military provides deterrence, defense, and a massive offensive threat, as well as leverage in international negotiations. The army is much more than just a military organization; it is North Korea's largest employer, purchaser, and consumer, the central unifying structure in the country, and the source of power for the regime.

In August 1945, the Japanese in Korea surrendered to the former Soviet Union, which gained control of the Korean peninsula south to the 38th parallel. In August 1948, supposedly following general elections throughout the peninsula, the DPRK was established, with Kim Il-song heading the central government. These factitious elections are the basis for Pyongyang's claim as the only legitimate government of Korea, and Pyongyang has made a national goal of reunifying the country on its terms. In pressing this claim, the DPRK has engaged in a political, economic, and military competition with the Republic of Korea (ROK). However, in any comparison except military power, Pyongyang is a poor second.

On Saturday, 24 June 1950, DPRK forces invaded the ROK. The United States, acting with a mandate from the UN, took the lead in defending the ROK. The Chinese entered into the fighting, and the war's inconclusive end led to a return to the status quo at the 38th parallel. An armistice, signed in July 1953, was followed 2 months later by the signing of a mutual defense treaty between the United States and the ROK.

The country is facing insurmountable internal problems and is unstable politically, economically, and socially. The Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK or North Korea) continues to commit serious human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, arbitrary arrests and detention, forced labor, and torture. Many of these abuses are committed in the country’s political prison camps (kwanliso), which hold an estimated 80,000 -120,000 prisoners, including children and family members of the accused. The government also maintains an extensive system of forced labor through its rigid controls over workers, and restricts the exercise of freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly, association, religion or belief, and movement.

There are no independent media in the country; all media are strictly censored and no deviation from the official government line is tolerated. The government allows no editorial freedom; all stories are centrally directed and reviewed to ensure that they are in line with the state ideology. The government also controls academic and cultural content. Authorities prohibit listening to foreign media broadcasts and take steps to jam foreign radio broadcasts. Various ministries are responsible for modifying television and radio equipment to prevent users from accessing material from overseas and other material deemed illegal by the government. Individuals accused of viewing foreign films are reportedly subject to imprisonment or even execution.

Various political setbacks have further isolated the DPRK and include the 1990 formal recognition of the ROK by the former Soviet Union, and the 1991 entrance of both Koreas to the UN. The DPRK lost one of its major supporters with the demise of the Soviet Union. Moreover, although the People's Republic of China (PRC) remains the only credible supporter of the DPRK, economic and political rapprochement between the PRC and the ROK continues. The DPRK will continue to be both economically and socially repressed and will become increasingly isolated. The DPRK will likely cling to its outmoded style of communism and political change will not occur until the current leaders are gone.

On June 19, 2000, the US eased economic sanctions against North Korea. Imports from North Korea are allowed, subject to an approval process. Direct personal and commercial financial transactions are allowed between US and North Korean citizens. Restrictions on investment have also eased. Commercial US ships and aircraft carrying US goods are allowed to call at North Korean ports with prior clearance. Although modified periodically since 1995 as a result of commitments made to begin normalization of relations, US economic and financial sanctions against North Korea -- administered by the US treasury department -- remain in force. They affect all US citizens and permanent residents wherever they are located, all people and organizations physically in the united states, and all branches, subsidiaries and controlled affiliates of US organizations throughout the world.

Negative economic growth, chronic shortages of raw materials (especially oil), ineffective centralized economic planning, and an emphasis on military power contributed to the economic failure of North Korea. The requirement by Russia and the PRC that materials exported to the DPRK be paid for with cash further degraded North Korea's economic viability. The DPRK can no longer generate sufficient electrical power to meet industrial needs, social services have been severely degraded, and segments of society have been reduced to one meal a day. There are chronic shortages of many of the basic commodities required for subsistence and industrial production. Critical resources continue to be dedicated to the military with increasing detriment to the economy.

There will be no relief from the severe shortages, which could foster growing dissatisfaction among the intelligentsia, workers, students, and bureaucrats. The DPRK's management of its economy provides no freedom of action for producers, real incentives for individuals to excel, or a government responsive to scientific and technological progress. If the DPRK keeps its emphasis on its military and does not reform its eco-nomic system, the country could eventually be in grave danger of imploding. The DPRK is, and will likely remain, one of the most dangerous countries in the world.


With its external reputation for worst-case socialism, in the 1990s most observers thought North Korea would go the way of the Stalinist states of Eastern Europe and collapse. Some thought East Germany would be the model, with North Korea folding up and embracing a new unity with the South. Others suggested the example of Romania, where Nikolae Ceausescu had modeled his dictatorial rule on Kim Il Sung’s. The “revolution of 1989" was so unexpected as to breed humility into all observers of socialist states, but, so far, North Korea has not followed the East German path.

It was Mikhail Gorbachev who reined in the military there; amid the widespread demonstrations against Erich Honnecker’s regime, Gorbachev kept the 360,000 Soviet Army troops in their barracks. North Korea, however, has an independently controlled army estimated at 1.2 million strong, and most of the pressure the Soviets could exert had been applied (overall Soviet aid to P’yongyang declined precipitously after Gorbachev took power, although military aid continued). In the early twenty-first century, the North reportedly has trafficked in illegal narcotics and counterfeit currency.

Korea’s main difference from Eastern Europe was that it suffered a terrible civil war, with some 4.5 million killed, in recent memory. The North probably suffered nearly 2 million casualties. There also were 1 million Chinese casualties. It was very hard to believe that military commanders who fought the South in a bloody civil war would allow South Korea to overwhelm North Korea, by whatever means. If North Korea’s socialist system collapses under intense international pressure, probably the apparatchiks will declare themselves to have been nationalists all along (with some measure of truth) and try to keep their hold on power.

In April 2016 the Government called on the citizens to prepare for a new "arduous march." The term was first coined by the North Korean leadership in 1993 as a metaphor for the four-year famine that decimated the nation from 1994. The famine - in which as many as 3.5 million of the nation's 22 million people died - was brought on by economic mismanagement, natural disasters, the collapse of the Soviet bloc, and the consequent loss of aid, combined with the regime's insistence on putting the military first.

Acute respiratory disease common cold, flu and bronchitis may be more dominant during winter seasons. (December ~ February) No human case of SARs and Avian Influenza has been reported so far in DPRK. Diarrheal Disease is also common during summer months. The main casuses being poor water quality, lack of sanitary facilities and poor food storage. However, Pyongyang city and the hotel facilities strictly observe the sanitation standards, causing no harms to the foreigners. Only boiled water should be used for drinking, bottled water is also available in most cities.

---------------------------------------


DPRK Government
The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK or North Korea) is an authoritarian state led by the Kim family for more than 60 years. North Korea is a communist state under the one-man leadership of Kim Jong Un, chairman of the National Defense Commission—the nation’s “highest administrative authority," supreme commander of the Korean People’s Army (KPA), and general secretary of the Korean Workers’ Party (KWP). The constitution was adopted in 1948, completely revised in December 1972, and revised again in April 1992 and September 1998.
The position of president ceased to exist with the elder Kim’s death in 1994. The premier is head of government (since April 2007) and is assisted by three vice premiers and a cabinet of 27 ministers, all of whom are appointed by the Supreme People’s Assembly (SPA). A twenty-eighth minister, the minister of the People’s Armed Forces, is not subordinate to the cabinet but answers directly to Kim Jong Un.
The Three Revolution Teams These teams, created to pursue the ‘Three Revolutions Movement’ stated by the 1972 Socialist Constitution, were dispatched to production facilities at all levels. The teams consisted of 20~50 party members, university students, and scientists. From the 1980s on, the teams came under the direct supervision of Kim Jong-il and were dispatched to all institutional schools to lead the ‘Three Revolutions Movement’. Considering the fact that the dominant post-war generational members from the teams were appointed en masse as SPA members in the 6th KWP meeting in October 1980, it seems the teams were actually created for the purpose of supporting Kim Jong-il’s succession to power. The Three Revolution Teams have shown little activity following the 1990s.

The Supreme People's Assembly (SPA) of North Korea unanimously adopted the ordinance of the SPA On Revising and Supplementing the Socialist Constitution of the DPRK [Democratic People's Republic of Korea" on April 9, 2009. When last revised in September 1998, the Constitution contained three references to “communism," but the new revision has deleted the word. The new revision includes six clauses stating the role and authority of the Chairman of the National Defense Commission as “supreme leader" of the country. Kim Jong Il was re-elected as the Chairman of the National Defense Commission, “reflecting the unanimous will of the whole Party and army and all the people," on the same day the new constitution was approved.
In July 2012 Kim Jong Un was named marshal of the DPRK and supreme commander of the Korean People’s Army. Kim Jong Un’s grandfather, the late Kim Il Sung, remains “eternal president." Authorities maintained effective control over the security forces. Security forces committed human rights abuses.

Citizens did not have the right to change their government. The Korean Workers’ Party (KWP) is the ruling party of North Korea. The secretary general of the KWP is Kim Jong Un, and he runs the party with few formal meetings. North Korea wrapped up its seventh Workers’ Party of Korea Congress with a massive parade and a mass rally, on 10 May 2016 at the Kim Il-sung Square in Pyongyang. Thousands of North Koreans cheered and applauded when their leader Kim Jong-un appeared at a podium at the square.

The government subjected citizens to rigid controls over many aspects of their lives, including denial of the freedoms of speech, press, assembly, association, religion, movement, and worker rights. Reports continued of a vast network of political prison camps in which conditions were often harsh and life threatening and included forced and compulsory labor.

Despite the consolidation of party, state, and military structures under the leadership of one man, some analysts see these three power centers as rivals for power, with the military in the ascendant.

Kim Jong Il was first appointed to the National Defense Commission by his father, President Kim Il Sung, in April 1993, and he was reelected to this position in 1998 and 2003. In true dynastic fashion, Kim Jong Il groomed one or the other of his sons — Kim Jong Chul and Kim Jong Un — as his successor. Signs of possible change in the leadership structure and succession scenario — or at least a reduction in Kim’s personality cult — emerged in the summer and fall of 2004, when reports were received that portraits of Kim Jong Il were being removed from public sites, but nothing came of this.

Traditionally, Koreans never conceived of society as merely an aggregate of individuals, each pursuing private ends, but as a harmonious and collective whole; more important than the individuals composing it. This emphasis on harmony has justified the DPRK government's paternalistic intervention in the lives of the people. In the DPRK today, the dominant ideology is Marxist-Leninist, strongly influenced by traditional Confucian values and Kim Il-song's chuche (self-reliance) ideology.

By Western standards, life in the DPRK is regimented and grim. The centralized party state maintains tight control over all aspects of daily life, and citizens must dedicate their lives to state-defined goals rather than personal interests. Proper attitudes and correct human relations are stressed. It would be a mistake to assume that North Koreans see their lives as harsh and colorless, since the majority have spent their entire life under a totalitarian regime.

While the total number of political prisoners and detainees remained unknown, the current year’s KINU white paper reported that the state detained between 80,000 and 120,000 in the kwanliso. Guards held political prisoners separately from other detainees. NGOs and the media reported that political prisoners were subject to harsher punishments and fewer protections than other prisoners and detainees. The government considered critics of the regime to be political criminals.

"Systematic, widespread and gross human rights violations have been, and are being, committed by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, its institutions and officials. In many instances, the violations of human rights found by the Commission constitute crimes against humanity. These are not mere excesses of the state. They are essential components of a political system that has moved far from the ideals on which it claims to be founded. The gravity, scale and nature of these violations reveal a state that does not have any parallel in the contemporary world."