“Kim Jong

The world is not held together by desires, dreams, or shared hopes alone, but by the far more complex and uncomfortable balance of fear. While people often prefer to believe that cooperation arises naturally from goodwill, history repeatedly shows that stability emerges when consequences are clearly understood. Fear, in this sense, is not blind terror but awareness: the understanding that actions carry costs and that boundaries exist. Civilizations, empires, and even modern international systems have relied on this principle, whether openly acknowledged or quietly enforced. Laws work not merely because people agree with them, but because violations invite punishment. Borders hold not simply because they are lines on maps, but because crossing them improperly has consequences. This balance of fear does not negate morality or justice; rather, it reinforces them by giving structure to ideals that might otherwise remain abstract. Without this balance, desires clash endlessly, each group seeking its own benefit without restraint. In such an environment, chaos does not arise suddenly—it grows gradually, as rules are questioned, limits are tested, and enforcement weakens. Fear, therefore, is not the enemy of order but one of its foundations, an uncomfortable truth that societies ignore at their own risk.

When a power demonstrates that it does not retreat, it is often misunderstood as acting out of ego or arrogance. In reality, such firmness is frequently less about pride and more about preserving order. Retreat, when misinterpreted as weakness, invites further challenges, each bolder than the last. History offers countless examples where concessions made in the name of peace only postponed conflict while emboldening aggressors. Firmness, on the other hand, establishes predictability. It signals that rules are not flexible based on pressure or convenience. This does not mean that compromise has no place, but compromise without strength is merely surrender by another name. A power that stands its ground communicates something essential: that certain lines exist not to dominate others, but to prevent the erosion of structure itself. In both domestic governance and international relations, consistency is crucial. When enforcement becomes selective, legitimacy collapses. The refusal to retreat, therefore, can function as a stabilizing force, anchoring systems that would otherwise drift toward disorder. Such firmness is not cruelty; it is discipline applied at a structural level.