At the same session, one country may use a veteran senior official with non-official status as the representative, while another country may have a young professor from a university. While this is positive cross-fertilization in a Track Two dialogue, in Track One-Point-Five it may lead to unequal representation and impact among different member countries. Membership in Track One-Point-Five may also pose problems just as in Track One Diplomacy because of political protocal and considerations, while Track Two can avoid such issues more easily.
Furthermore, because of the semi-official status of the dialogue, many a time a Track One-Point-Five process becomes a consensus-forcing process rather than a consensus-building process.
Consensus-forcing has its role. It is sometimes deemed necessary to "force" (or induce) consensus in order to reach a difficult decision. But, on the other hand, consensus-forcing can only result in compliance on issues that are not of highest priority, where compliance is not perceived as totally negative or when the member to the party is too weak to resist. For issues perceived as crucial, consensus-forcing may have the opposite effect, causing ill will and mistrust.
Thus we can see： Track One, Track Two and Track One-Point-Five Diplomacy all have their own role to play. Formal government-to-government agreements, at the final stage, have to be negotiated and signed at Track One level. Sensitive, complex and diverse or controversial issues need to be worked out in Track Two activities. Track Two process also help to enhance cooperation among people of different background and interests, while Track One-Point-Five Diplomacy would be best used to work out the details of an accepted framework or policy direction.
Whether it is Track One, Track Two, or Track One-Point-Five Diplomacy, one has to point out that the process may be as important as the results. In relative term, one may say Track One and Track One-Point-Five Diplomacy are generally more goal- and result- oriented, while Track Two Diplomacy is more process-oriented.
