North Korea remains one of the most closed political systems in the contemporary world. Access to reliable information about the functioning of the state and the lives of its elites is extremely limited; therefore, accounts by former members of the ruling apparatus hold particular cognitive value. This text, inspired by the testimony of Han Jin-myung, a former North Korean diplomat, attempts to analyze the lives of North Korean elites in a manner similar to the style of publications by the Boym Institute, combining an analytical approach with reflection on mechanisms of power and social structures. Han Jin-myung’s account can be found in the book I Was a North Korean Diplomat.
The book consists of two parts, both in the form of extended interviews. The first focuses on the internal functioning of the North Korean system, while the second is devoted to North Korea’s foreign policy. It also includes unique threads concerning Polish–North Korean relations that have not been previously described. The publication stands out among similar works also because its first edition was published in Polish. It was later translated into English and French.
Han Jin-myung studied French at the Pyongyang University of Foreign Languages and Kim Il Sung University, which opened the path to a career within state structures. He later worked at the North Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs, dealing with relations with African countries and promoting the Juche ideology abroad. Between 2013 and 2015, he served as Third Secretary at the North Korean embassy in Hanoi. In January 2015, he defected and was granted asylum in South Korea. After his escape, he cooperated with South Korean intelligence services and later lived with his family in the United Kingdom for some time. In 2023, he returned to South Korea. His experience makes him one of the few “insiders” capable of presenting the mechanisms of North Korean diplomacy and power structures from within.
Han Jin-myung emphasizes that the North Korean system is based on a strict social hierarchy in which the so-called “core class” plays a key role. Membership in this class depends primarily on political genealogy—especially the merits of one’s ancestors, such as participation in the Korean War or revolutionary activity. Thus, elites are not defined by economic capital but by political-symbolic capital rooted in loyalty to the Kim dynasty. In practice, this means the inheritance of privileges and access to key state resources, such as education, housing in Pyongyang, and positions within the party and state apparatus.
An important element in the reproduction of elites is the education system. Prestigious schools, such as Changdok School, attended by Han Jin-myung, bring together the children of top state officials. This fosters the consolidation of networks and ideological uniformity. Education is not neutral—it serves as a tool for internalizing the state narrative, in which leaders assume an almost quasi-religious role.
The capital of North Korea serves both as a political and symbolic center. Districts such as Mangyongdae, inhabited by elites, are carefully managed representative spaces. Han Jin-myung’s description of his childhood points to a kind of “golden cage”: a space of relative material comfort that remains under full state control. Apartments are not privately owned but allocated by authorities and can be taken away at any time. This means that elites operate within a system of conditional privileges—their status depends on continuous loyalty. Privilege does not equate to autonomy, but rather to deeper entanglement in the structure of power.
One distinguishing feature of the elite is access to foreign language education. Institutions such as the Pyongyang University of Foreign Languages train personnel for international contacts. Learning languages—French, English, and even Polish—is not meant for individual development but for serving state interests. Students are trained as instruments of North Korea’s representation on the international stage.
Paradoxically, exposure to knowledge about the outside world can lead to cognitive dissonance. The propagandistic image of the West often diverges from reality encountered through literature or audiovisual materials. Over time, this may weaken the ideological cohesion of the elite.
The career path of elite members is relatively clearly defined: education, followed by military service, and then work within the state apparatus. Service in the Korean People’s Army functions not only as an obligation but also as a test of loyalty and a tool of political socialization. Afterward, the most promising individuals are directed to institutions such as the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The system is closed and reproductive—access to top positions remains limited to a narrow group, although occasional exceptions do occur.
Work within state institutions reveals the specificity of the North Korean governance model. Formal structures exist, but real power is highly centralized around the leader. Documents prepared by officials require approval—at least indirectly—by Kim Jong-un or his inner circle. As a result, even administrative elites lack real decision-making autonomy.
At the same time, the system demands high competence and full commitment. Long working hours, ideological duties, and participation in state ceremonies are integral parts of professional life. A key element of elite functioning is an extensive system of control, encompassing both individuals and their families. Particularly important is the mechanism of collective responsibility: in the case of defection by one family member, relatives bear the consequences, as in the case of Han Jin-myung. These measures are preventive in nature and effectively limit disloyal behavior, but they also generate tension and may erode trust in the system.
Han Jin-myung’s account shows that even individuals deeply embedded in the power structure may eventually begin to question the official narrative. This process is gradual and results from the confrontation between ideology and lived experience.
The second part of the book focuses on North Korea’s foreign policy, presenting it as a tool for regime survival and a means of balancing the influence of major powers. Particular attention is paid to relations with Southeast Asian countries and the importance of ASEAN, which serves as an important diplomatic platform for Pyongyang—enabling it to maintain international contacts despite isolation and to ease tensions through participation in regional dialogue forums.
The analysis based on Han Jin-myung’s account reveals the internal contradictions of the North Korean system. On the one hand, there is a high level of institutional organization; on the other, an almost complete lack of decision-making autonomy. Access to knowledge about the outside world, intended to strengthen the state, may paradoxically undermine its ideological foundations. Han Jin-myung himself took significant risks in sharing his story—and while he exposes the inner workings of the system, he also admits that his decision to leave was not free from doubt and internal struggle.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Han Jin-myung is a former North Korean diplomat who served in the country’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and was posted abroad, including in Vietnam. Educated in foreign languages, he was part of the elite cadre trained to represent North Korea internationally. In January 2015, he defected from his post in Vietnam where he served as a diplomat at the North Korean embassy in Hanoi. Later he resettled in South Korea after a period in the United Kingdom.
Nicolas Levi is a scholar and analyst specializing in North Korea, East Asian politics, and international relations. He is affiliated with the Institute of Mediterranean and Oriental Cultures of the Polish Academy of Sciences. He has authored numerous publications on the Korean Peninsula, including works on North Korean elites and diplomacy. His research combines political analysis with insights into social structures and everyday life in North Korea. Levi is also known for contributing to public debate through commentary and expert analysis on regional affairs.
