Depending on the version you choose to believe, Kim Jong-Nam was killed by two female assassins from Pyongyang using poisoned needles, a poisoned spray, or a poison-laced cloth placed over his face.

That is assuming he was killed by North Korean agents at all.

The reports so far are short on hard facts, high on Cold War-style intrigue.

Kim Jong-Nam had kept a low profile in recent years.

Image: North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un

He was believed to have been living in exile with his family in the Chinese territory of Macau, but he was once the next in line to rule North Korea.


If this was a targeted assassination, carried out on a Monday morning, in a busy airport terminal in Malaysia - and let me just reiterate that we are a long way from definitive proof on this - the next question is what this tells us about what is going on inside the Kim Jong-Un regime.

Should we see this as an act of strength, of weakness, of paranoia, or perhaps all of the above?

Kim Jong-Nam was not an outspoken critic of his younger half-brother, but he was also not a supporter.

He had spoken of the need for reform in North Korea, for Chinese-style economic liberalisation, and he had questioned the current system of dynastic succession, which is used to cement the legitimacy of Kim Jong-Un's cult-like rule.

He was also the rightful heir by birth - as the eldest son of former leader Kim Jong-Il - in a largely traditional and highly conservative society.

Certainly there was a time when he appeared to be groomed for leadership, and there are various different theories for why he fell from grace.

Who was Kim Jong-Nam? And was he really assassinated by his brother?

One was his politics. He was rumoured to be seen by his father as having become too westernised, too market-oriented - like his half-brother he was educated in Switzerland.

Another was that his mother had fallen out of favour with Kim Jong-Il.

The most colourful explanation, and the one most beloved by journalists, was that he had embarrassed the regime by being caught in Japan in 2001, using a fake passport, trying to get to Tokyo Disneyland.

Whatever the truth, he seems to have spent most of the subsequent years abroad, lately in the gambling mecca of Macau, where it was rumoured - but again, never confirmed - that he received financial support and protection from China.

Beijing was said to have seen him as a potential ruler-in-waiting - a member of the Kim dynasty who could be installed as a legitimate ruler and command the support of the indoctrinated masses, in the event that the current regime collapsed.

So was his death intended to be seen as a show of strength? A sign that Kim Jong-Un is so secure in his leadership he fears no backlash from ordering the assassination of a family member, and perhaps more worryingly, that the regime can strike beyond its borders?

Or rather, could it be a sign of weakness? A leader so paranoid about plots against him and fears of being overthrown that he needs to remove any possible source of opposition, and signal to any would-be high-ranking defectors and traitors that they will be dealt with mercilessly?

Image: General Jang Song-Thaek, the North Korean leader's uncle, was executed in 2013

Kim Jong-Nam's death follows the purge earlier this month of one of the most powerful men in North Korea, the head of Kim Jong-Un's feared, Stasi-like intelligence agency.

The fate of Kim Won-Hong remains unknown, but Kim Jong-Un showed no compunction in having his uncle General Jang Song-Thaek, then one of his most senior officials, put to death in 2013 for alleged disloyalty.

The regime also suffered the embarrassment of its deputy ambassador to the UK defecting to South Korea last year.

Thae Yong-Ho has said he sees signs of a "crack in the elite" in Pyongyang under what he called Kim Jong-Un's "tyrannical reign of terror".

There is also the possibility that this was a standing order - issued years in advance, perhaps when Kim Jong-Un first took power - and only carried out now when the opportunity arose.

The truth is, at this stage, we simply do not and cannot know.

What we do know with certainty is this: that the man accused of ordering this killing is actively trying to develop nuclear weapons capable of reaching the mainland United States, and making progress towards that goal.