戰略三角理論在「爭霸」過程中的應用與修正：以冷戰時期美蘇中與未來美中台關係為例

源自心理學與社會學的戰略三角理論，應用至國關理論時產生若干變化，其中最為顯著的是行為者對於策略選擇偏好的改變。在國關理論中，由於行為者必須考量在互動過程中策略選擇的利得，因此，「樞紐」的位置是優先於「朋友」與「夥伴」等關係。然而，其並未考慮意識型態在中間扮演的關鍵角色。本文認為，意識型態之爭，在國際局勢渾沌不明朗時（即「爭霸」過程），尤為關鍵，因此，在決定策略選擇優先順序時，似乎應該將意識型態納入考量。中共建政恰逢美蘇爭雄時期，雙方透過軍事情報甚至是戰爭互相探底，正處於二元體系初現，但整體國際格局尚未明朗的情形。從戰略三角理論來看，中共在此刻應該佔據「樞紐」的位子，但中共卻做出了「一邊倒」的決策，顯不符合理論預期。然美蘇兩國最大的區別即在於意識型態之爭，美蘇的聯盟行為基本上也依循著意識型態劃線，恰說明了中共在1970年代之前採取「一邊倒」而非搶佔「樞紐」位置的原因。在兩大強權激烈爭鬥的過程中，意圖在中間玩弄兩國的可能性極低，尤其是對中共這樣一個意識型態色彩濃厚的共產大國而言，更不可能在美蘇爭霸過程中，選擇樞紐的位置，因此，一邊倒政策，是極為理性且現實的考量。今中國大陸迅速崛起，未來必將出現某種中美爭霸局面，美中台三角關係也將有所改變。長期以來，「樞紐」位置均為台灣理性上最佳戰略位置，然未來中美激烈爭霸時，「樞紐」將逐漸成為不可能也不可得的戰略角色，而「一邊倒」政策，即戰略三角理論中的「夥伴」，勢將成為未來台灣最為可欲而且可能的戰略位置。

關鍵字

戰略三角；中國大陸；蘇聯；一邊倒政策

並列摘要

When we apply the strategic triangle theory, originated from psychology and sociology, to international relation, there comes into being some changes. In most international relation theories, taking the ＂hub＂ position is prior to making friendship or partnership, because actors have to consider their profits when selecting a diplomatic strategy. Therefore, the importance of ideology is underestimated. This paper suggests that when great powers compete for hegemony, which make international politics filled with uncertainty, ideology will play the crucial role in shaping strategy preference. The People's Republic of China was built in the period that the U.S. and the Soviet Union were competing for hegemony. These two big powers checked each other's ability by arm race and war, making international system gradually become bilateral structure and filled with uncertainty. According to the strategic triangle theory, China should not lean to any side but occupy the ＂hub＂ position under this situation. However, China's action was exactly opposite to the expectation of the theory. Ideology, which is the critical difference between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, had defined their ally boundary and therefore made China take ＂leaning to one side＂ policy. In such intense competition, it was very tough to straddle the fence between two great powers. As a big communist country, it was also impossible for China to stand at the ＂hub.＂ In sum, leaning to the Soviet Union was a rational and realistic choice for China. With the rapid growth of China nowadays, competing for hegemony between the U.S. and China will be indispensable in the future, so that the triangular relationship among the U.S., China, and Taiwan will accordingly change. For a long time, standing at the ＂hub＂ has been the best and most rational strategy for Taiwan. However, when the competition between the U.S. and China has gradually become intense, the ＂hub＂ will be a position that cannot stand and impossible to stand anymore. ＂Leaning to one side＂ policy, which equals the ＂partnership＂ in the strategic triangle theory, will be the best strategy that Taiwan wants to and is possible to take.