Jang Song Taek’s execution creates great speculation about the stability and future direction of the North Korean government.

In most countries, a major government shake up like this would have much clearer implications — the reshuffling would give us a sense of what it meant for the future direction of the country.

But because North Korea is so opaque, Jang’s ouster raises more questions than it provides answers.

First, we wonder if it means that Kim Jong Un’s rule is increasingly threatened–or that he has actually established a firmer grip on power? This is a crucial question because political instability in North Korea would have such serious implications for regional stability. But we just can’t be sure what lessons to draw from recent events.

We also want to know what Jang’s ouster means for the future direction of the country. Many argue that Jang was a reformer (see commentary in NYT article), so his execution means that hardliners are cracking down, and we should not expect to see economic or political reform anytime soon. But again, it’s hard to know what direction Jang was advocating for North Korea, and therefore what his ouster means for its future.

The one thing we do know with certainty is that serious political instability in North Korea–such as a coup or civil war–has a risk of triggering a major regional crisis. Bruce Bennett (RAND) and I modeled the military missions for stabilizing a collapsed North Korea, and it’s a dangerous disaster that no one wants to see occur. This crisis could drag not only South Korea into war, but also China and the United States. In short, Jang’s execution is a very big deal–if only we knew how big.