本研究採用歷史研究途徑的方法來研究國共合作平台，利用文獻分析法來進入本文主題進而探究國共合作平台下對我國大陸政策的可能影響。國民黨和共產黨一共合作過三次，前兩次發生的時間都是在二次大戰前國民黨仍握有大陸政權的時候，第三次則是在國民黨已經在野的時候；不可否認的是，國共合作對於國民黨後來在台灣不論是執政或在野都發生了一定程度的影響，特別是對政策產出所造成的影響，而國共交流平台的論述成果同樣也對兩千年拿下執政權的民進黨造成某種程度的影響。因此，本研究採用伊斯頓（David Easton）的模型來將國共合作視為政治環境的輸入項，而政策產出結果當作輸出項，本研究發現國共論壇或稱國共合作對國民黨乃至於民進黨都有相當程度的影響。對國民黨而言，前兩次和共產黨的合作經驗讓其在後來政權遷往台灣後採取「封鎖中共」的政策輸出，例如在兩蔣時期。這樣的作法一直持續近三十年，直到大環境改變才重新調整；而民進黨的政治光譜是傾向左派的，強調台灣主體意識的，他雖然承認中國的存在，但因為意識型態的差異，因此選擇和中共劃清界限，雖有往來，但拒絕官方接觸。因此，國、民兩黨在心態上對於共產黨的「統一戰線」及「多黨合作」的策略感到一定程度反感，因而在政策上選擇與共產黨保持距離，亦即過去的國共合作模式會對我國政府的政策輸出造成一定程度的影響。職是之故，本研究認為國、民兩黨的大陸政策輸出項是受到國共合作的影響，所以會有不同的政策產出。 This research adopts the historical approach to analyze the causal relations between the cooperation of KMT and CCP and Taiwan’s China policy. The study of essential historical and academic documents provides the main resources of the research projects. The conclusion of this research is that: Taiwan’s China policy, no matter under the domain of KMT or DDP, is deeply influenced by the status of cooperation between KMT and CCP. So far there are three times of cooperation between KMT and CCP happened in history. The previous two happened before World War II, when KMT still controlled the regime of China. The third time happened when KMT became the opposite party and DDP came into power. All these experiences of cooperation between KMT and CCP had causal effect on KMT and DDP, though the level of influence might be different. The discourse created by the cooperation between KMT and CCP also had impacted the DDP when it was in the office since 2000. David Easton focuses on the study of political system; his model is helpful for understanding the causal relations in my research project. The hypothesis here is that the input of the cooperation between KMT and CCP influences the political environment in Taiwan, thus creates the output, which is the China policy. For the KMT, the negative results of the first two experiences of the cooperation led it adopt the policy of besieging PRC government after its domain moved to Taiwan. This policy had lasted for thirty years. Not until the international environment had changed did KMT adjust its policy. On the other hand, DDP has been standing on the Left side of the spectrum. The subjectivity of Taiwan has always been its main concern. DDP recognizes the PRC government, but rejects the interaction between the two sides in the governmental level. This is mainly because the dramatic discrepancy of their ideology. Furthermore, both KMT and DDP prefer keeping distance with PRC, for they resent the PRC’s policy of unification and cooperation among multiple parties. However, the decision-making process of their China policy is still under the influence of the cooperation of KMT and PRC.