Track 1.5

When two countries negotiate with each other, there are various ways to do so. The official route runs through governments: ministers, diplomats, and agency representatives sit at the table and speak on behalf of their state. Alongside this there is the unofficial route, in which only researchers, think tanks, or companies talk, entirely without a governmental mandate. Track 1.5 lies exactly in between and mixes both groups in one room. Government people take part, but explicitly not as official negotiators, rather in their personal capacity. The number 1.5 is thus meant literally: half official, half private. The term has appeared regularly for a few years now whenever international talks about artificial intelligence are concerned.

Why states need a semi-official space

Official negotiations have a problem: every sentence counts. What a government representative says there counts as the position of their country and can be held against them later. This makes participants extremely cautious. New ideas are barely voiced this way, because no one wants to be the first to make a concession.

In a Track 1.5 format, this pressure largely falls away. Participants can play through proposals that would not yet be officially conceivable at all. This is sometimes called a trial balloon: you let an idea rise and see how the other side reacts. If the reaction turns out badly, formally no one has committed to anything.

With AI, there is a second reason. The technology is developing faster than ministries can understand it. The people who really know how a large language model is trained mostly work at companies or universities. A format that brings officials and experts together closes this knowledge gap.

Who sits at the table and how the results travel onward

Invitations are usually issued by a neutral organization, such as a foundation, a university, or a research institute. This role is important, because none of the states involved is supposed to appear as the host. The rounds are small, often twenty to forty people, and take place without press present.

Almost always, the so-called Chatham House Rule applies. It allows what was said to be recounted later, but forbids naming the speaker. This allows a participant to speak openly without a quote ending up in the newspaper the next day. This rule is the actual engine of the format.

At the end there is rarely a treaty, but usually a report or a list of joint recommendations. These papers go back into the ministries and sometimes resurface months later in real negotiations. That is exactly the purpose: Track 1.5 prepares decisions, but does not make them.

Track 1.5 in AI policy between the USA and China

The term is most often read in connection with talks between the USA and China. Both countries are pushing AI development forward and deeply distrust one another. Official channels there have been interrupted several times, while semi-official rounds continued regardless. Topics include, for instance, the use of AI in weapons systems or the question of whether software alone should be allowed to decide on the launch of a nuclear weapon.

The format also plays a role in safety testing for new models. Research groups from different countries exchange views on how to measure a system’s dangerous capabilities. Such technical standards can be clarified more easily among experts than in a ministerial round.

A common misconception is that Track 1.5 is a secret backroom deal. That is not accurate, because the results are usually published, just without attribution of names. Conversely, one should also not overestimate the format. It can build trust and clear up misunderstandings, but it does not commit anyone to anything.