寬鬆或緊縮、創新或僵化？以歷史制度主義分析中共「一國兩制」至「臺灣方案」的內涵演變

Flexible or Restrictive, Innovative or Rigid? A Historical Institutionalist Analysis of the Evolution from“One Country, Two Systems”to the“Taiwan Proposal”

本文以歷史制度主義為框架，檢視中共對臺「一國兩制」到「臺灣方案」的內涵演變。研究發現，「一國兩制」自鄧小平時期確立後，即呈現高度穩定，其延續性主要源自路徑依賴所形成的結構性約束，使後任的中共領導人受制於既有路徑之獨立約束力，難以進行根本性翻轉。
其次，「臺灣方案」雖試圖透過細化安排以區隔港澳模式，實質上仍屬制度內的增量變遷。論述從早期的寬鬆創新，轉向習近平時期強調「一國」主導的緊縮僵化；此趨勢雖受香港「反送中」及兩岸、國際局勢催化，但無法跳脫單一制框架，導致其在實踐上與港澳模式呈現結構性趨同。
最後，若中共無法正視中華民國存在之政治現實並重啟寬鬆思維，「臺灣方案」將持續遭臺灣主流民意拒絕。

This article adopts historical institutionalism as its analytical framework to examine the conceptual evolution of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) discourse from “One Country, Two Systems” to the “Taiwan Proposal.” The study finds that the “One Country, Two Systems” principle has remained highly stable since its establishment during the Deng Xiaoping era. Its continuity is rooted in the structural constraint of path dependence, which translates to exclusive commitment undertaken by subsequent CCP leaders. This makes fundamental reversal extremely difficult for the CCP.
Furthermore, although the CCP seeks to differentiate the “Taiwan Proposal” from the Hong Kong and Macau model through more detailed arrangements, the “Taiwan Proposal,” in essence, constitutes an incremental change from the existing institutional framework. The characteristics of the discourse has shifted from early flexibility and innovation to restrictiveness and rigidity under Xi Jinping, with emphasis on “one country.” While this trend is catalyzed by Hong Kong’s anti-extradition protests, as well as cross-strait and international developments, the “Taiwan Proposal” is unable to escape the unitary-state framework, leading to a structural convergence with the Hong Kong and Macau model in practice.
Last but not least, if the CCP fails to face the political reality of the Republic of China’s existence and bring back a more flexible approach, the “Taiwan Proposal” will continue to be rejected by the mainstream public opinion in Taiwan.