| 美国国际政治学学者米尔舍梅尔，在他有关强权政治的“进攻现实主义”理论中表示，为了保障国家的安全，每一个强国都会随另一个强国的发展，相应地扩大自己的实力。 这个说法也适用于政治人物，为了争取领导地位，就必须击败竞争对手。 经过了一年多的时间，中国国家主席和中共总书记胡锦涛的地位，看来已经更为稳固。 在台湾，总统选举战的战情将非常激烈，陈水扁会竭尽所能在3月20日寻求连任，有关中国和台湾关系的公投是他竞选连任的中心策略。 在美国，布什总统也开始为11月的总统选举做准备，争取蝉联。不论民主党的候选人是谁，都将会是一场激战。 台湾的全民选举，将把台海的局势推向另一个一触即发的局面。北京已经强烈谴责陈水扁推行公投的举动。美国在一定程度上支持北京和“一个中国”的原则，不过，陈水扁却坚决不肯让步。 美台关系出现了20多年来最为严峻的形势，一些美国议员以中国对准台湾的飞弹数目越来越多，北京可能对台湾动武为理由，正呼吁美国给台湾更强有力的支持。 美国外交政策目前的重点是反恐（包括保留巴基斯坦为盟国）和维持阿富汗及伊拉克境内局势的稳定，亚洲的主要课题是朝鲜和它的核武器计划。 布什总统目前肯定不愿意被迫卷入北京和台北之间错综复杂和暗涛汹涌的纠纷。不过，他可能没有多大的选择。 中国已经在1月申请加入核供应国集团。这个检察组织拥有40个成员国，目的是防止和控制核武器原料在全球流动和扩散。中国的举动应该受到肯定，也应该有助于把朝核危机六方会谈推往正确的方向。 不过，台湾仍然是个问题。陈水扁的公投只是一项政治工具，公投的议题也毫无新意：大陆的飞弹瞄准台湾，台湾人当然会感到不安；过去七年的民意调查也一直显示大部分台湾人希望维持现状。 毫无意外的，少过10%的被访者主张台湾马上宣布独立，少过5%支持两岸立刻统一。 值得注意的是，如果陈水扁蝉联总统，他的公投立场可能使他骑虎难下，也会让北京和台北都没有什么回旋的空间。在其他地方的问题更需要美国的注意力时，布什和美国国会可能会被迫作出艰难的政策选择。 中国已经定下对台湾的底线。不过，北京可能应该考虑缓和它的强硬军事姿态，并尽量模糊这个底线。仔细的考量和及时的行动，目的不一定是武力冲突，也可以是为了争取和平。另外，北京的举动，也会促使美国或者台湾，作出适当的考量和反应。 2/29/2004 Countdown to Taiwan's presidential election The offensive realism theory of great power politics， put forth by John Mearsheimer， argues that the goal of nations is to assure their security by expanding their power relative to other states. The same might be said of politicians， for the persons who achieve top status in governing hierarchies usually do so at the expense of competitors. Hu Jintao's hold on power in the halls of Zhongnanhai seems to be firmer now than a year ago. Across the Taiwan Strait， Chen Shui-bian seeks to reaffirm his presidential power in what looks to be a close run competition at the polls on March 20. Chen has made national referendums concerning the China-Taiwan relationship a centerpiece of his bid to retain power. In the United States， President George W. Bush is gearing up for his bid to secure a second term in power this November. The election， against whomever the Democratic Party nominates promises to be hotly contested. The “situation” across the Taiwan Strait is coming to another of its simmering points as Taiwanese prepare for “national” elections. Rhetoric from Beijing has been particularly strong in condemning Chen's push for referendums. Up to a point Washington has supported Beijing and the one China policy. Chen has refused to back down. With tensions between Taipei and Washington at their worst in over two decades， some US lawmakers are now calling for stronger US support for Taiwan against the possible use of force by China， and cite the growing number of Chinese missiles targeted at Taiwan. A large part of the foreign policy focus in America is on fighting terrorists (including maintaining Pakistan as an ally) and securing stable conditions in Afghanistan and Iraq. The predominating Asian issue is North Korea and its nuclear weapons programme. For President Bush， now is not the time to be forced to navigate the treacherous shoals of the cross-strait dispute between Beijing and Taipei. But he may have to. Beijing has finally requested membership in the Nuclear Suppliers Group， a watchdog organization of 40 nations dedicated to controlling the spread and transit of nuclear weapon materials across national borders. This is a welcome move and should help nudge six-party talks in a positive direction. Yet Taiwan remains an issue. Chen's referendums are a political tool that will not serve to illuminate that which is already known: no one in Taiwan feels comfortable with Chinese missiles aimed at them; opinion surveys for the past seven years show a majority of Taiwanese prefer to maintain the status quo. Typically， the polls show， fewer than 10% want immediate independence and fewer than 5% want immediate unification. Ironically， if Chen is reelected， his stance on referendums may put him in a box， leaving little maneuver room for either Beijing or Taipei. It may also force President Bush and the US Congress to make difficult policy choices at a time when events elsewhere should be demanding more urgent attention. Beijing has drawn a “line in the sand” over Taiwan， but it may want to soften its military posture and blur that line as much as possible. Careful calculation and timely action can work in two directions. 2/29/2004
| 
