True enough. It's not my preferred solution, either. And like you say, it's up to chance whether it actually changes anything.

But NK had a system around passing on the dictatorship. As for the stability of their regime, it's hard to know.

It's a much smaller country and from what has been seen, everything is set up in just such a way that a dictatorship can stay stable. And Kim Jong-un isn't rocking the boat by doing stupid things like, say, attempting to annex a neighbour.

While Putin's death may or may not change things, he seems to have put little effort into preparing for it. Worst case, someone exactly like him but younger seamlessly steps into the power vacuum. But they need to be just as skilled in identifying when and where to apply pressure to stay in power, for there be no change in stability.

I'm making the point that Putin seems to think he can rule forever. Worse than that, in his old age, he is taking on giant risky projects, one of which is a literal war. If still in progress when a transfer of power occurs, they massively increase the risk of something going wrong in the machine that is his regime.

And yes that can mean the result is something better, but also something worse.

My point is that building governments like those of Russia and China is a self-defeating exercise, where in order to stay in control more and more action must be taken. But the more action is necessary, the more precarious the control becomes. (At least until tech changes things by a lot more than it already has)