高等教育改革在20世紀後不斷推陳出新且成為國家發展的重要項目之一，世界先進國家無不投入大量的經費和研究在發展高等教育上。從德國高等教育國際化的發展來看，市場的要求成了改變高等教育的主要推動力，而各個高等學校國際化的程度也成了大眾選校和評估職業發展的標準。研究發現，德國在統一以後不但高等學校增加，大學生人數也提高，其改革的真正動機就是國際化，目的是為了維持高等教育在歐洲乃至於全球的競爭力。德國統一以後最大的高教改革特色是引入學士碩士兩階段學制以和國際接軌，同時更積極在各校推行績效責任制度和評鑑以提升教學品質和落實辦學成效，最後更藉由擴大學校的自主管理為發展學校特色的手段，用來達到競爭的目的。德國的做法其實並不異於其他國家，而波隆那進程在促進歐洲高等教育區的發展更適時地給予了德國聯邦政府這麼做的理由。德國聯邦政府為了保障其高等教育在歐洲框架下的「地位」，必須將自己放入歐洲高等教育區的系統中，讓德國高等教育的體制與歐洲其他國家的標準相互連接起來。德國聯邦政府認為歐洲高等教育區在未來會是全球化的一個縮影，而德國各邦高等學校願意妥協也是因為意識到唯有將自己放入一個競爭的系統中學校才會更具吸引力。 / Reform of higher education continued to emerge in the late 20th century and has become one of the most important developments for a country. Advanced countries around the world have invested a lot of their time in funding, researching and developing their higher educational programs. From an international point of view, the requirements of the workplace are driving the changes in higher educational programs. Indeed, the degree of internationalization in colleges and universities can also affect how a school will be judged by students wanting to develop their professional skills. This study indicates that both the number of higher educational institution and also the number of student enrollments in Germany have been increasing since Reunification. The motivation of the reform is to internationalize the higher educational system with the purpose of maintaining the competitive potential of German students. Germany has opened up access to a new bachelor-master-system in order to more readily connect students to international programs. The new evaluation and accreditation processes have been instituted in order to raise the teaching quality and to ensure the effectiveness of schools. Germany's approach is not different from other countries. The Bologna Process, which is a guideline for the European Higher Education Area, gave the German Federal Government a reason timely to modernize its higher education system. If the German Federal Government had not addressed the accords, Germany would have lost its stature and fall behind European trends and development within the European Higher Education Area. The German Federal Government is aware that the European Higher Education Area will be a small microcosm of globalization in the future, and local German colleges and universities have also realized that they can be attractive only when they put themselves into a competitive international system.

國民政府遷台後，兩岸分治五十幾年是客觀的事實，長期以來各自發展不同的政治體系，經濟行為，意識形態。台灣早期的威權時期，對大陸政策固然保守，大陸方面尤其毛澤東時代更是封閉，兩岸關係在動員戡亂時期是全然隔離，軍事的敵對，影響了經濟、人文的聯繫。兩岸關係解凍後，政治緊張的現象依然存在，國際上互相拉扯，舉世皆知，外交競爭更是激烈。 二十一世紀開始，中國大陸累積實力，國家生產力大增，經濟發展向前跨越，外貿吸引各國，外匯增加速度實不容小視，不論是和平崛起還是霸權抬頭，已足以影響世局。兩岸關係也因而突顯其重要性，政界、國內學者莫不投入精力研究。 從整合理論的角度切入，探討兩岸發展，應有其意義。雖然整合理論最初被運用在1950年代，主要涉及對象是二次世界大戰後的歐洲，而南、北韓交流的互動模式來看也頗類似。整合理論具有規範性，它是以國家的統合作為目標，和分裂國家有很大的相似點。 而中共的反分裂國家法出爐後，引起國際間的關切，儘管事後加以解釋，世界各國大都抱著存疑的態度。我們可以看到「反分裂國家法」對兩岸政治爭議問題，依然沒有理性科學的解構和整合。「反分裂國家法」的訂立，對台灣人民的感情期待與實質認同，究竟是正面的還是負面的，甚或是否直接影響到台灣人民的感情，及是否會產生不利因素？都是非常值得關注問題。 雖然反分裂國家法橫立兩岸之間，我們是否可以試著從整合理論分析兩岸統合策略及面臨的困難。兩岸關係又具有相當錯綜複雜的特性，分歧問題甚多，如何找出一個平衡點，努力以新的觀念思維和智慧來化解的對立衝突危機，是我們應該深思的。 關鍵詞：整合理論、歐盟整合、德國統一、反分裂國家法、兩岸統一 / Upon the relocation of the Nationalist Government to Taiwan, the separate governances on both sides of the Taiwan Strait for over fifty years were an objective fact. For decades, different political systems, economic behaviors, and ideologies had been separately developed. For the authoritative period in Taiwan at the early stage, although a conservative stance was instituted by Taiwan on the Cross-Strait policies, it was a much more explicitly closed society on Mainland China during the Mao Tse-Dong Period. The Cross-Strait relations were thoroughly frozen during the Communist Rebellion Period. The military antagonism toward one another had impacted the economic and human contacts. Upon the liberation of the Cross-Strait relations, the unsettling political struggles are still observed to be in existence. The political wrangling between both parties at the global stage is well known by the international community. The diplomatic competitions are even far more severe. Since the beginning of the 21st Century, Mainland China has been accumulating competencies and increasing the national productivity profoundly. Many forward strides have been achieved in the economic developments; the foreign trade has attracted other countries, with the foreign reserve increasing at a staggering rate that cannot be easily ignored. Whether China is rising peacefully or as a super power, it is already capable of influencing the world. It has thus projected explicitly the significance of the Cross-Strait relations. Politicians and domestic scholars are unable to not to devote any energy and efforts in this area of discipline. Investigating the Cross-Strait developments from the perspective of the integration theories should be accompanied with the relevant implications. Although the integration theories were initially applied in the 1950’s, with the post-World-War-II Europe as the main entity involved. Further, the interactive exchange model adopted by North and South Koreas also exhibits a certain degree of similarity. The integration theories are characterized by the normality, which positions the integration at the national level as the objective and exhibits points of profound similarity with the secession of the country. The disclosure of the Anti-Secession Law enacted by Communist China caused concerns from the international community. Although further elaborations were instituted afterwards, a majority of the members of the international community still exhibit suspicious attitudes. It is observed that the Anti-Secession Law still lacks the rational scientific deconstruction and integration in the controversial Cross-Strait political issues. Whether the enactment of the Anti-Secession Law, in terms of Taiwanese people’s expectations for and substantial identifications with Mainland China, would indeed be a positive or negative impact or even directly affect the feelings of the Taiwanese people or generate any disadvantageous factor is a relatively critical issue for concern. Although the Anti-Secession Law has been laid between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, we may consider whether we could attempt to analyze the integration strategies and existing obstacles for both sides of the Taiwan Strait from the perspective of the integration theories. The Cross-Strait relations; moreover, exhibit relatively intertwined, complicated characteristics and myriad issues of difference. How to find a balance point to resolve the standoff, conflicts, and crises by applying the new concepts, thoughts, and wisdom is what we shall consider with profoundness. Key Word: Integration Theory, European Union Integration, German Unification, Anti-Secession Law, Unification Across the Taiwan Strait

90年代起，德國再統一後躍上全球政治舞臺，從過去歐洲安全的顧慮之國，轉型成為今日歐洲政治、經濟與軍事穩定力量。但是在後冷戰時期，過去許多次級威脅因子失去了壓抑力量後，成為後冷戰時期新形態的安全議題，威脅全球政治與經濟的穩定與安全。面對這些紛踵沓至的威脅，德國一方面必須鞏固與維護自身冷戰期間所累積的經貿成就，另一方面則積極配合聯合國、北大西洋公約組織與歐洲聯盟的決策，派遣聯邦國防軍遠赴海外，從事維和、軍事、人道與救援等國際性任務，追求自身外交正常化的目標。 本文研究發現，1991年至2009年為止，聯邦國防軍在過去19年來的71項海外維和、軍事、人道與救援等國際性任務，都嚴格限定在聯合國、北約與歐盟憲章的框架下，恪遵既有的國際秩序與國內憲法規範，實踐身為聯合國、北約與歐盟成員國的義務，成為上述三大國際組織最倚賴的軍事力量。 雖然歷年來德國政府已透過具體的立法與釋憲過程，排除《基本法》限制德國海外派兵政策的規範，但是行政部門的決策過程中仍須面臨國內外輿論對於德國海外派兵政策的反對與疑慮；加上德國政府每年投入國防建軍的經費有限，聯邦國防軍的軟硬體設備未必能夠負擔高頻率與海外派兵任務，眾多因素都使聯邦國防軍多年來的派兵成效有限。 德國再統一後雖於積極參與三大國際組織框架行動，配合自身的外交折衝談判與軍事影響力，欲積極重塑其國家的地位。面對諸多主客觀的限制與未臻成熟的條件，德國重返正常化國家的過程仍將艱辛無比。 / Since the re-unification in 90’s, Germany has leaped upon the stage of the global politics. With much effort, Germany has successfully rendered itself from “a nation of grave concern to European security” into “a stable political, economic and military power in modern Europe.” However, during the post-Cold War era, those probable and minor threats, which were suppressed by the huge atmosphere of U.S.-Soviet confrontation, will appear to became the new forms of security issues in the 21st century, and further to jeopardize the global political and economic security and stability. Dealing with these countless and non-stopping new forms of threat, Germany, on the one hand, must secure its existent accomplishment in trade and the miracle of economic development, and also, on the other hand, actively accommodate the decisions and charters of the United Nations, North Atlantic Treaty Organization and European Union, to pursue Germany’s “normalized diplomacy ”by deploying its Federal Defense Army, Bundeswehr, into the overseas hostile spots, to implement the peacekeeping, military, humanitarian and rescue operations. From 1991 to 2009, Bundeswehr has participated in 71 international peacekeeping, military, humanitarian and rescue operations, which were all implemented strictly under the framework and the charters of the UN, NATO and EU. Over the past 19 years, Germany has obediently complied with the existent regulations of the international laws and the German constitution, Grundgestez, and fulfilled the compulsory obligations as the member of the 3 institutions stated above. For this matter of fact, Bundeswehr has become the reliable military force in these institutions. This thesis has drawn the humble conclusions that although the German executive branches has overruled the legal obstacles and set new paths of deploying Bundeswehr overseas by the legislative move and the explication of the Grundgestez, the executive branches will always tackle the domestic criticism and the international skepticism; meanwhile, the executive branches have never allocated even more sufficient annual budget for the military branches to maintain its readiness-rate, therefore the training of personnel, software, equipment and facilities may not genuinely satisfy the needs for actual battles and afford the frequent and distant operations. The combination of these problem has compromised the actual consequence and the efficiency of Germany’s overseas military deployments in the past two decades. Having endeavored so hard to comply with the operations under the framework of the three major institutions, accompanying its maneuvering of diplomacy and military significance, Germany will still have to give much toil and labor to re-shape its international status. Nevertheless, being obstructed by the immature subjective and objective conditions, Germany’ road returning to its Normalcy of the state will still be long and difficult.