For the complete documentation index, see llms.txt.
Skip to main content

For Hill staff · Personal & committee · Foreign policy · Memos

Brief your principal. Faster. With sources that survive a hearing.

Model Diplomat is the AI research tool for congressional staff drafting hearing memos, dear colleague letters, and member briefs on foreign affairs. Every answer cites a UN document, treaty text, hearing transcript, or government source — not a hallucinated reference.

Primary

Sources — UN, CRS, GAO, agencies

Minutes

From assignment to first draft

Cited

Bibliography ready to send

Sound familiar?

01

Your principal has a hearing in 90 minutes

You can't wait two days for a CRS report. You need a working brief now — and you need to be able to source every claim if the chair asks where it came from.

02

ChatGPT cites laws and reports that don't exist

Every senior staffer has caught a junior staffer using ChatGPT for a brief. The citations look plausible until you check them — Public Law 117-XXX that doesn't exist, a Heritage paper from 2024 that was never written. The reputational risk is asymmetric.

03

Open-source intel is fragmented

UN documents in one system, treaty text in another, hearing transcripts on Congress.gov, agency reports scattered across hundreds of subdomains. Pulling a coherent picture of US-Iran sanctions across all of those takes a half-day. Model Diplomat does it in a search.

What you get.

AI search across primary sources

Ask Model Diplomat any foreign-policy question — Saudi normalization terms, Section 232 tariff history, US-China export controls — and get a sourced, current answer in seconds. Every claim cites the actual document.

Brief and memo structure

Model Diplomat understands the standard brief format: background, current state, policy options, recommendation. Use it to draft section-by-section, with citations for every factual claim.

Treaty and statute lookup

Search treaty text directly — JCPOA, AUMF, USMCA, GSOMIA. Find the article and clause behind the question your principal is about to be asked. No more 'we'll get back to you on that.'

Country and conflict profiles

Briefing on Myanmar, Sudan, Sahel, or the South China Sea? Model Diplomat's country profiles pull political situation, US bilateral relationship, recent sanctions, and live conflict context — sourced.

Hearing transcript search

Find what a witness said three hearings ago. Find what your principal said two years ago when the question is rebooting. Save the contradiction-catching staff work for the things that matter.

Risk-aware citations

Model Diplomat flags when sources are partisan, dated, or low-confidence — so you don't ship a memo citing a 2017 think-tank paper as current consensus.

Common questions.

Is Model Diplomat appropriate for confidential or sensitive briefs?

Model Diplomat searches publicly available primary sources. It's appropriate for the open-source portion of any brief — context, history, treaty text, public statements. For classified or sensitive matters, follow your office's standard handling. We don't ingest or train on user queries.

How is this different from CRS reports?

CRS is excellent — when a report exists on your topic and is current. For everything else (any topic without a recent CRS report, or any question that crosses three CRS topic areas), Model Diplomat lets you synthesize across primary sources directly. Think of it as on-demand CRS for any question, with the trade-off that you verify the citations yourself.

Can I use this for floor speeches and dear colleague letters?

Yes — that's a common use case. Model Diplomat drafts sourced talking points and policy positions you can adapt into floor remarks. The factual content cites real documents; the political voice and policy positioning stays yours.

What about dual-use sensitivity — can adversaries use this?

Model Diplomat is publicly available and indexes publicly available sources, so the data is already accessible. The value is the speed and synthesis. The same way Google was always available to everyone but searching well still mattered, Model Diplomat is faster and better at one specialist domain.

Pricing for offices?

Personal Pro is $10/month. Office-level licensing is in development — reach team@modeldiplomat.com if you want to be in the pilot.

Your next memo. Cited. On time.

Free to start. Pro is $10/month — less than two coffees and a fraction of one CRS contractor hour.

No credit card · Works on any device · Free tier always available

Live example for Hill staff & policy analysts

See it answer a real question.

Every Model Diplomat answer cites real primary sources. Nothing fabricated.

Brief: US-Saudi defense pact — what's in the proposed package, what's controversial.

The proposed US–Saudi defense pact, as it stood in late 2024 / early 2025 negotiations, would have three pillars: (a) a binding US security commitment short of NATO-style Article 5 (likely modeled on the Major Non-NATO Ally framework with an upgrade); (b) bilateral civil-nuclear cooperation, contingent on Saudi acceptance of 123 Agreement non-proliferation conditions; (c) F-35 and missile-defense sales contingent on Saudi guarantees that Israeli QME (Qualitative Military Edge) is preserved.1

Three controversies the Senate Foreign Relations Committee has surfaced in hearings: (1) the human-rights conditions — Khashoggi report (ODNI declassification, 2021), Yemen humanitarian record, and Section 502B Foreign Assistance Act compliance; (2) the nuclear non-proliferation question — Saudi reluctance to forgo domestic enrichment; (3) the Israel-normalization linkage — whether normalization is a condition or a deliverable.2

Vote-counting realities: a security treaty would require 67 Senate votes (treaty ratification). Whip counts in early 2025 showed clear majority but short of 67, with skeptics on both flanks (progressives concerned about HR, isolationists concerned about commitment, non-prolif hawks concerned about enrichment). A bilateral executive agreement is the more likely path — but it forecloses the strongest legal commitment.3

Sources

1

ODNI Assessment on the Murder of Jamal Khashoggi (Declassified)

Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Feb 2021

2

Hearing — US-Saudi Strategic Relations

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Transcripts

3

Section 123 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954

US Department of Energy — 123 Agreements Reference

Run this query — or your own — in Model Diplomat AI Search.

Try this query
Talk to founder