This study investigates the feasibility of automating political discourse analysis using large language models (LLMs), with a focus on 87 editorials from Rodong Sinmun, North Korea’s official newspaper. We introduce a structured analytical framework that integrates Chain-of-Thought prompting for claim–evidence extraction and a GPT-4o–based automated evaluation system (G-Eval). Experimental results demonstrate that LLMs possess emerging discourse-level reasoning capabilities, showing notably improved alignment with expert analyses under one-shot prompting conditions. However, the models often reproduced ideological rhetoric uncritically or generated interpretive hallucinations, highlighting the risks of fully automated analysis. To address these issues, we propose a Hybrid Human-in-the-Loop evaluation framework that combines expert judgment with automated scoring. This study presents a novel approach to analyzing politically sensitive texts and offers empirical insights into the quantitative assessment of ideological discourse, underscoring the scalability and potential of automation-driven methodologies.