最先提出第二軌道外交（Track II Diplomacy）的是一群精神分析師，他們依據美國市民社會的特性，想出這一套解決外交衝突的機制。實際運用中發現，臺灣的第二軌道擁有與西方第二軌道不同的生命與邏輯，因為它不只是以任務為核心的委任或契約行為，它亦依附於政府，接受動員，更沒有相對於國家機器而具優勢地位的市民社會做其後盾。因此，美國與臺灣的第二軌道外交，在形式、意義、風格與行為上顯現差異。目前兩岸對第二軌道尚存有相當猜忌，弱勢一方尤然，使得第二軌道做為一宣洩爭端緊張關係的作用猶待發揮，這不能不說是因為人們不習於拾起市民文化這塊後盾，進而徒增各方對於第二軌道的不信任與爭議。如此一來，美國以市民社會做基礎所提議的美中臺第二軌道，恐難在短期內培養出解決臺海兩岸爭端的感同之心與利他傾向。

　　　　　Second-track diplomacy is aimed at providing a non-state, and thus less competitive, environment for professionals, primarily academics, from countries in dispute to brainstorm one another for creative solutions to chronic conflict. The unstated assumption that participants have independent roles outside of state, which support them to be caring human beings, carries strong liberal legacy. This paper shows that when this assumption fails to hold, as in Taiwan and China, the meaning of the second track diplomacy to those involved would be dramatically different. The interactions facilitated along the second tracks would have little impacts on conflict resolution.