polymathwannabe treats law as being important. The question isn’t “What does the law say” but does anybody currently in a position of power in North Korea benefits from bringing him back and would be therefore motivated to bring him back.
That is true. But maybe the law itself doesn’t have to command respect to be a predictor of compliance. For example, given that the law stipulates Kim’s eternal presidency, we can infer that a Kim is in power. From this we can infer that the DPRK government would want to preserve Kim.
For example, given that the law stipulates Kim’s eternal presidency, we can infer that a Kim is in power.
No. “In power” is a pretty relative term. By North Korea own admission there were times when secret services of the nation did whatever they wanted without input from their leader.
From what we know about the current Kim, he was an introvert ten years ago when he went to school in Switzerland. Current power structures in North Korea are very opaque.
polymathwannabe treats law as being important. The question isn’t “What does the law say” but does anybody currently in a position of power in North Korea benefits from bringing him back and would be therefore motivated to bring him back.
That is true. But maybe the law itself doesn’t have to command respect to be a predictor of compliance. For example, given that the law stipulates Kim’s eternal presidency, we can infer that a Kim is in power. From this we can infer that the DPRK government would want to preserve Kim.
No. “In power” is a pretty relative term. By North Korea own admission there were times when secret services of the nation did whatever they wanted without input from their leader.
From what we know about the current Kim, he was an introvert ten years ago when he went to school in Switzerland. Current power structures in North Korea are very opaque.