English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  全文笔数/总笔数 : 49189/83570 (59%)
造访人次 : 7088378      在线人数 : 43
RC Version 7.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library & TKU Library IR team.
搜寻范围 查询小技巧:
  • 您可在西文检索词汇前后加上"双引号",以获取较精准的检索结果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜寻,建议至进阶搜寻限定作者字段,可获得较完整数据
  • 进阶搜寻

    jsp.display-item.identifier=請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: http://tkuir.lib.tku.edu.tw:8080/dspace/handle/987654321/30187

    题名: 從九二香港會談論中共對臺談判策略
    其它题名: Beijing's negotiating tactics against Taiwan based on '92 HK talks
    作者: 陳天聲;Cheng Tien-sen
    贡献者: 淡江大學中國大陸研究所碩士在職專班
    潘錫堂;Pan, His-tang
    关键词: 中共;談判;談判的原則;談判的策略;China;Negotiations;principle of negotiations;strategies of negotiation
    日期: 2008
    上传时间: 2010-01-10 23:26:16 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 台海兩岸,自一九四九年對峙至今,五十餘年,在二十世紀末的歐洲諸國,逐漸放棄了它們所倡導的主權國家觀,而邁向跨國界的統合。想想歐洲的成功,身為同文同種的中華民族,是不是應該開始思考,除了戰爭之外,有沒有其他的選項,有沒有和平的可能?要和平,勢必要經過談判階段,要如何創造雙贏局面!
    The political standoff between China and Taiwan has been going on for over 50 years since 1949. Sarcastically, European countries have broken away from the traditional concept of sovereignty state and successfully established an inter-state union at the end of the 20th century. People on both sides of the Taiwan Strait need to consider alternative options for peace rather than going to war. A win-win situation always requires continuous dialogues and negotiations.
    The way Beijing authorities negotiate is based on Marx -Lenin theory, rooted on the Chinese culture, and utilize their tactics of united front. When negotiating, the Beijing authorities always make clear their button lines first, then force their opponents to accept. To avoid the negotiations from breaking down, their opponents have no choice but to make a concession. To the Chinese, achieving victory seems more important than solving problems.
    Of all the cross-strait functional dialogues and negotiations, ’92 Hong-Kong talks is the most significant event, which was the only occasion where the issue of “one China” was discussed.
    At that meeting, the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS) suggested that both sides interpret their own position on “one China”. However, the talks went into a deadlock as no consensus was reached on their respective interpretation.
    Since it was unlikely to reach a consensus, the Taipei-based Mainland Affair Council authorized the Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) to propose to the ARATS that “both sides adhere to its own position of one China and express it orally”. This is the so-called “one China, respective interpretations”.
    The ARATS accepted the SEF’s proposal and agreed that how “one China” would be interpreted by both sides could be negotiated at a later time.
    This is a significant event throughout the cross-strait interactions as China accepted Taiwan’s political offer for the first time.
    Toady, the existence of “’92 consensus” is questioned by the Democratic Progressive Party government, which has already hurt the cross-strait relations. How to mend the relations can be a major event in the 21st century.
    The true willingness by both governments to break the deadlock is the key to move cross-strait relations forward. Dialogues and negotiations are still the best way to improve relations.
    Putting aside ideology and unilateral interests and replacing confrontation with dialogues are the only way to bring a positive hope to the cross-strait relations.
    The author believes that: “one China” formula is the key to maintaining stability. Only following the “one China” policy can lead to peaceful competition.
    显示于类别:[中國大陸研究所] 學位論文


    档案 大小格式浏览次数



    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library & TKU Library IR teams. Copyright ©   - 回馈