兩岸關係中的互動「結構」常常在操作與思考過程中被視為是一 種「既定的」、「難以改變」的既存事實，並且以此作為理性選擇或 博弈的起點。然而，這是一種脫離現實的、類似在真空中進行理性博 弈的分析模式，忽略了行動體與結構之間的辯證互動關係，這種化約 的博弈思維也讓兩岸關係陷入一個無法突破的博弈僵局中。本文由 「結構博弈」的觀點，取代理性博弈中博弈各方受結構制約的主客二 元觀念，論述結構存在與理性選擇博弈之間的結合作用，強調結構與 行動體之間的辯證，從而論述如何運用結構博弈的觀點來分析兩岸之 間的僵局，以及可能的解決之道。

The interactional “structure” between the both of the Taiwan Strait is often regarded as an “existing” and “unchangeable” fact in the process of operation and evaluation, and taken as a starting point of rational choice or gaming. This, however, is an unrealistic mode of analysis and not dissimilar to a rational gaming undertaken in a vacuum, totally neglecting the dialectical interactions between the subject of actor and the structure. Such a reductive thinking leads cross-strait relations to a deadlock/stalemate. The present paper proceeds from the position of “structural gaming,” it avoids the pitfall of the structurally constrained subjectobject dualism in the rational gaming. The paper discusses the combinatory function of structural existence and rational choice gaming, emphasizes on the dialectic between the structure and the subject of action, and explores how breakthroughs in the cross-strait relations might be achieved through the insight of structural gaming.

結構;博弈理論;理性選擇;結構博弈;兩岸關係

Structure; Game Theory; Rational Choice; Structural Gaming; Cross-Strait Relations