In-Character Writing

In-character writing is the practice of producing Model UN materials—position papers, opening speeches, working papers, draft resolutions, directives, and crisis notes—in the voice, interests, and ideological framing of the assigned delegation or character. It is a baseline expectation in nearly every MUN circuit, from THIMUN-style General Assemblies to fast-moving crisis committees.

The technique requires three layers of discipline:

• Policy fidelity. Arguments must align with the country's documented foreign-policy record: voting patterns in the UN General Assembly, treaty ratifications, public statements by the foreign ministry, and bloc affiliations (G77, EU, OIC, NAM, etc.). A delegate of the Russian Federation, for example, would not endorse expansive humanitarian intervention language echoing the Responsibility to Protect framework as articulated at the 2005 World Summit.
• Register and tone. Diplomatic writing avoids first-person pronouns ("I think") in favor of third-person sovereign voice ("The delegation of Brazil believes…" or "France calls upon…"). Crisis directives from a historical figure should mirror that figure's era, rank, and known rhetorical habits.
• Strategic framing. Even when a country's real-world position is unpopular, in-character writing presents it as principled. Delegates representing authoritarian states are expected to defend sovereignty and non-interference rather than break character to condemn their own assignment.

In crisis committees, in-character writing extends to private directives, joint personal directives (JPDs), and press releases, where the character's personal ambitions, rivalries, and resources shape every action. Backroom staff typically reject directives that violate a character's known capabilities or break the fourth wall.

Chairs and judges weigh in-character consistency heavily when scoring. Breaking character—lecturing the committee on modern human-rights norms while representing a 1938 cabinet minister, or having Saudi Arabia co-sponsor a resolution on LGBTQ+ protections—usually costs awards. Strong delegates research their assignment's red lines, allies, and rhetorical style before the conference and rehearse phrasing that sounds authentically governmental rather than personal.