本研究目的在建立美國傳統戰略模糊與臺灣避險策略間之理論關聯性。主要假設當臺灣從美國獲得較多且明確之安全承諾時，將可能更依賴美國安全保護傘，進而降低自身制定外交政策之自主與靈活性。過去數十年，華盛頓持續且長期的安全承諾，即有可能限制臺灣的避險策略選擇。本研究的實證證據，主要探討川普與拜登政府任內，華府戰略模糊逐漸轉變為戰略清晰下，臺北在美中兩強之間的外交政策。此外，藉由將避險的理論「模型化」，並區別避險與樞紐的關係，是本文另一個研究貢獻。

The study aims to establish a theoretical connection between strategic ambiguity and hedging policy. The assumption is that as Taiwan receives more security assurance and clarity from the United States, it may rely more on the U.S. security umbrella, reducing its autonomy and flexibility in crafting its foreign policy. Over time, consistent and prolonged security commitments from the United States could limit Taiwan’s hedging options, as it increasingly aligns with the U.S. position. The empirical evidence in this article explores how..

1970 年代研究三角關係的專家塔圖(Michel Tatu)指出，美、中、蘇 「三者之一欲激起另兩方同謀之必然方式，為展現過度侵略性」。本文以塔圖之分析，探討 1979 年以來美臺軍事、政治與經貿關係之演變。由過去美、中、臺三角關係之互動，可以看出以下的特性:(1)中國對臺有過度侵略性的舉止，如 1996 年臺海危機，美國主動強化美臺軍事關係，增加美臺合作的空間;(2)在中國壓力下，國際組織有過度的舉止，如 2007 年聯合國秘書長潘基文謬誤解讀臺灣地位，..

Michel Tatu, an expert on US-China-USSR relations, observed in 1970 that “the surest way for any of the three to provoke the other two into collusion is to display undue aggressiveness.” This study analyses US- Taiwan relations in light of Tatu’s assumption. The interactions of US- Taiwan-China relations since 1979 are marked by the following features: (1)When China acts with undue aggressiveness against Taiwan – as for example in the 1996 missile crisis which prompted the US to dispatch two aircraft c..