兩岸不對稱談判之研究
兩岸不對稱談判之研究
程長志
慈濟技術學院通識教育中心
摘 要
本文主要在探討兩岸不對稱的談判。眾所周知，自1949年以來，中共與台灣之間一直延續國共的歷史衝突。雖然吾人深知解決兩岸的衝突有許多不同的方式，採取和平解決是比較好的選項之一。不過兩岸從激烈的衝突到和平的談判確是漫長與艱困的過程。
當中共無法以武力奪取台海之際，乃改以統戰方法，易言之，以和平談判的方式。起初，台灣基於過去痛苦的經驗予以回絕，但是時代的變遷才勉強放棄所謂的「三不政策」(不接觸、不談判、不妥協)。在經由實際的接觸、對話與談判後，中共提出了「一個中國」之談判架構。在此原則下，台灣是中國的一部分的重要原則。台灣只要違反，中共即會中止談判，例如在前總統李登輝訪問美國以及提出兩國論後，中共即採取強烈的批判與軍事的行動。
海峽兩岸無論從權力、資源，以及軍事武力的觀點而言，呈現不對稱情況。例如經貿上對中共依賴日深。除此之外，中共採用軟硬兼施之談判策略。更嚴重的是國內政局對於大陸政策沒有一致的共識。在此不對稱情勢下，台灣似應更謹慎的思考。
在兩岸之間一直存在第三者，即是美國扮演者調停者。雖然美方一直聲稱不擔任調人，事實上，為了本身之利益卻是扮演著促進者、仲裁者等之角色。台灣為一小國無法支撐龐大軍事對應衝突，最佳的方式是以軟性的策略周旋於大國之間。
關鍵詞：不對稱談判、 結構、隱示性、顯示性、權力、資源、能力、衝突、策略、共生、掠奪、
誘捕、優先化、 輸贏、雙贏、零和、分配
The Study of Cross-Strait Asymmetric Negotiation between Mainland China And Taiwan
Chang-Chih Chen
General Education Center
Tzu Chi College of Technology
Abstract
This paper mainly probes into cross- strait asymmetric negotiation. It is well known that Mainland China and Taiwan have had conflict since 1949. Although there are many different ways to resolve cross-strait disputes, it seems that one of the best alternative to resolve dispute both sides is to take peaceful measures. It is, however, a long and arduous process form severe conflict to peaceful negotiation.
Since Mainland China could not seize Taiwan by force, Beijing launched an intensive united front campaign, namely, peaceful negotiation. At first, Taiwan refused it because of the past painful experiences, but it had to abandon so called the“three no's policy”( no contacts, no negotiations , and no compromise ) with the change of time. After practical contact, dialogue and negotiation, China proposed One- China formula. It becomes an important principle that Taiwan is an integral part of China. As long as Taiwan violates this framework, Beijing would suspend negotiation. For example, after the former president Le Teng-hui visited the United States and stated that relations between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait should be characterized as a “special state-to-state relationship”. Beijing broke off the cross-strait negotiation and adopted fierce criticism and military maneuvers.
The situation between Mainland China and Taiwan appears to be asymmetric in terms of power, resources and armed force. For example, Taiwan's economy is increasingly dependent on the mainland. Besides, Communist China makes use of the carrot and the stick negotiating strategy. The worse is that the ruling party and opposition parties lack a common consensus in mainland policy. Facing such asymmetric circumstances, Taipei should think over the situation more carefully.
There has been a third party, the America, which plays the part of the mediator between China and Taiwan. Although the United States denies this role, it always appears to be a mediator, arbitrator and facilitator to seek for their own interest. As a small country, Taiwan cannot afford to support huge military budget dealing with the conflict situation, and the best way is to adopt a soft strategy, that is, to travel around great power, not to trend one side.
Key words：asymmetric negotiation, structure, tacit, explicit, power, resources, ability, conflict, strategy, symbiosis, predation, decoy, prioritization, win-lose, win-win, zero-sum, distributive
程長志
慈濟技術學院通識教育中心
摘 要
本文主要在探討兩岸不對稱的談判。眾所周知，自1949年以來，中共與台灣之間一直延續國共的歷史衝突。雖然吾人深知解決兩岸的衝突有許多不同的方式，採取和平解決是比較好的選項之一。不過兩岸從激烈的衝突到和平的談判確是漫長與艱困的過程。
當中共無法以武力奪取台海之際，乃改以統戰方法，易言之，以和平談判的方式。起初，台灣基於過去痛苦的經驗予以回絕，但是時代的變遷才勉強放棄所謂的「三不政策」(不接觸、不談判、不妥協)。在經由實際的接觸、對話與談判後，中共提出了「一個中國」之談判架構。在此原則下，台灣是中國的一部分的重要原則。台灣只要違反，中共即會中止談判，例如在前總統李登輝訪問美國以及提出兩國論後，中共即採取強烈的批判與軍事的行動。
海峽兩岸無論從權力、資源，以及軍事武力的觀點而言，呈現不對稱情況。例如經貿上對中共依賴日深。除此之外，中共採用軟硬兼施之談判策略。更嚴重的是國內政局對於大陸政策沒有一致的共識。在此不對稱情勢下，台灣似應更謹慎的思考。
在兩岸之間一直存在第三者，即是美國扮演者調停者。雖然美方一直聲稱不擔任調人，事實上，為了本身之利益卻是扮演著促進者、仲裁者等之角色。台灣為一小國無法支撐龐大軍事對應衝突，最佳的方式是以軟性的策略周旋於大國之間。
關鍵詞：不對稱談判、 結構、隱示性、顯示性、權力、資源、能力、衝突、策略、共生、掠奪、
誘捕、優先化、 輸贏、雙贏、零和、分配
The Study of Cross-Strait Asymmetric Negotiation between Mainland China And Taiwan
Chang-Chih Chen
General Education Center
Tzu Chi College of Technology
Abstract
This paper mainly probes into cross- strait asymmetric negotiation. It is well known that Mainland China and Taiwan have had conflict since 1949. Although there are many different ways to resolve cross-strait disputes, it seems that one of the best alternative to resolve dispute both sides is to take peaceful measures. It is, however, a long and arduous process form severe conflict to peaceful negotiation.
Since Mainland China could not seize Taiwan by force, Beijing launched an intensive united front campaign, namely, peaceful negotiation. At first, Taiwan refused it because of the past painful experiences, but it had to abandon so called the“three no's policy”( no contacts, no negotiations , and no compromise ) with the change of time. After practical contact, dialogue and negotiation, China proposed One- China formula. It becomes an important principle that Taiwan is an integral part of China. As long as Taiwan violates this framework, Beijing would suspend negotiation. For example, after the former president Le Teng-hui visited the United States and stated that relations between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait should be characterized as a “special state-to-state relationship”. Beijing broke off the cross-strait negotiation and adopted fierce criticism and military maneuvers.
The situation between Mainland China and Taiwan appears to be asymmetric in terms of power, resources and armed force. For example, Taiwan's economy is increasingly dependent on the mainland. Besides, Communist China makes use of the carrot and the stick negotiating strategy. The worse is that the ruling party and opposition parties lack a common consensus in mainland policy. Facing such asymmetric circumstances, Taipei should think over the situation more carefully.
There has been a third party, the America, which plays the part of the mediator between China and Taiwan. Although the United States denies this role, it always appears to be a mediator, arbitrator and facilitator to seek for their own interest. As a small country, Taiwan cannot afford to support huge military budget dealing with the conflict situation, and the best way is to adopt a soft strategy, that is, to travel around great power, not to trend one side.
Key words：asymmetric negotiation, structure, tacit, explicit, power, resources, ability, conflict, strategy, symbiosis, predation, decoy, prioritization, win-lose, win-win, zero-sum, distributive
