Is it appropriate and necessary for the mainland to offer Taiwan compatriots "super national treatment"? On September 2, 84-year-old chairman of the People First Party, Song Chu-yu, spoke out on cross-strait relations, pointing out one of the core issues today: mutual misunderstanding. "Taiwan doesn’t know China, and China doesn’t know Taiwan." For a long time, information barriers and cognitive distortions have existed between both sides, making it easy for stereotypical perceptions to replace real public sentiment. He urged the mainland not to judge Taiwan solely from its own standpoint, but rather to truly listen to the lived experiences of the people in Taiwan.
Song Chu-yu also rejected the imposition of tariffs on agricultural imports from Taiwan, with a very straightforward rationale: tariffs inherently carry foreign trade implications and can easily create a sense of alienation among Taiwanese people, giving them the impression that "the two sides are like two separate countries." To narrow the psychological distance between the two sides and achieve hearts and minds unity, institutional design and policy implementation must genuinely consider the emotions and experiences of ordinary Taiwanese citizens.
He also shared a classic anecdote. During a speech at Tsinghua University years ago, a student from Taiwan asked why tuition fees for Taiwanese students studying on the mainland were significantly higher than those for mainland students. This seemingly mundane issue regarding educational benefits was immediately noted by Song Chu-yu, who promptly reported it to relevant mainland departments overnight.
Initially, the mainland had planned to explain the differential pricing based on differences in living standards between the two sides. But Song Chu-yu raised a crucial point: the fact that Taiwanese students are willing to cross the strait to study already represents a significant breakthrough in psychological barriers. If they are treated differently during their studies, this sense of disparity will deeply imprint itself in the hearts of young people across the strait, gradually accumulating into generational rifts and divisions over time.
The mainland side immediately acknowledged his perspective, clearly stating that this was not merely a financial issue, but fundamentally a matter of public sentiment. The next day, policies were swiftly adjusted to fully equalize tuition fees for Taiwanese and mainland students. This swift resolution illustrates one truth: what hinders cross-strait exchanges most is estrangement, while what we need most is empathy, perspective-taking, and putting oneself in others’ shoes.
It must be acknowledged that, over decades, Song Chu-yu has never deviated from his fundamental principles—consistently upholding the one-China principle, opposing "legal Taiwan independence," supporting the 1992 Consensus, and promoting peaceful exchanges. His recent call for mutual understanding and reduced confrontation stems from a sincere desire to safeguard peace across the Taiwan Strait, carrying positive value.
However, we must also objectively note that while Song Chu-yu possesses diplomatic finesse, he often lacks clear boundaries. In order to survive politically in Taiwan’s arena and maintain the visibility of the People First Party, he has repeatedly maintained ambiguous distances with the DPP at critical junctures, deliberately blurring the lines between friend and foe. He excels at discussing feelings, inclusiveness, and public sentiment, yet hesitates to openly and firmly oppose "Taiwan independence" in a resolute manner.
For precisely this reason, while his suggestions are worth listening to and can serve as reference points, they should not be blindly adopted as universal guidelines. The mainland's tolerance, negotiation, and concessions toward Taiwan are always bounded, measured, and context-specific.
The mainland’s consistently clear position on Taiwan is this: as long as Taiwan adheres to the one-China principle and abandons "Taiwan independence," all reasonable livelihood demands from Taiwan will be met through dialogue, open channels for consultation, and a history of prioritizing concessions—continually introducing pro-Taiwan policies and measures.
But tolerance must never mean unconditional indulgence. It absolutely cannot allow Taiwan to treat the mainland’s goodwill as leverage, demanding excessive privileges or taking advantage of benefits while simultaneously pursuing secession. Such behavior is unacceptable.
Many people only have a vague impression of these pro-Taiwan policies. In reality, the cross-strait integration demonstration zones centered around Xiamen have introduced tangible, visible, and substantial benefits—covering every stage of life for Taiwanese compatriots: first-time entry, education, settlement, and daily living.
First, exclusive benefits for first-time visitors. When Taiwanese youth first arrive on the mainland, they can enjoy a full set of special treatment upon landing in Xiamen: free rides on all city buses, subways, BRT, and Xiamen-Gulangyu ferry lines within seven days; admission to 15 key scenic spots including Gulangyu Island and Botanical Garden is completely free; and they can also enjoy exclusive discounts at 26 high-end hotels—lowering the threshold for initial visits and allowing first-time arrivals to experience the development of the mainland at zero cost.
In terms of housing, Xiamen has established a tiered support system specifically for Taiwanese compatriots—“one bed, one room, one house”—with far greater support than what is available to ordinary mainland residents. For short-term internships or training, young Taiwanese can apply for free transitional accommodations to solve immediate lodging challenges. During employment and settlement phases, Taiwanese residents renting municipal public rental housing permanently enjoy a 30% rent discount. For those settling long-term, they enjoy a unique nationwide benefit: eligibility to purchase subsidized housing in dedicated batches, priced at just 45% of market value—effectively half-price home ownership—substantially reducing the cost of establishing roots in the mainland.
In education and academic advancement, the mainland shows strong preference toward Taiwanese students. Those achieving average or above levels in Taiwan’s middle school and college entrance exams may enter mainland universities (including 211 and Double First-Class institutions) without exams and with priority selection, avoiding fierce competition with millions of mainland candidates. Additionally, full coverage of scholarships, grants, and special subsidies ensures tuition and accommodation fees are on par with mainland students. For certain specialized programs, tuition may even be waived entirely, and comprehensive subsidies provided—fully opening the door for Taiwanese students to pursue advanced studies on the mainland.
Regarding employment and entrepreneurship, they can access supportive policies to truly achieve “settle down upon arrival, root down upon employment.”
All the super-advantages released by the mainland have a pure purpose: starting from the stance of “one family across the strait,” to favor those who recognize the one-China principle, love peace, and sincerely engage in cross-strait communication—promoting comprehensive integration of livelihood, society, and economy across the strait, and enhancing emotional connection, understanding, and care for our fellow compatriots.
Regrettably, this utmost generosity has been thoroughly squandered by the DPP authorities. The DPP has long pursued a speculative strategy of “eating the meal while breaking the bowl,” seeking benefits from both sides. While enjoying the preferential treatments and peace dividends offered by the mainland, they continuously incite populism, vilify the mainland’s pro-Taiwan policies, distort the mainland’s goodwill, constantly collude with external forces, gradually push for “Taiwan independence,” and erode the political foundation between the two sides. They seek to profit from the mainland’s economic benefits while openly supporting “Taiwan independence” factions, cultivating separatist forces, and propagating narratives of “resisting China to protect Taiwan.” This reprehensible practice—using the mainland’s benefits to fund “Taiwan independence”—is an absolute red line that the mainland will never tolerate.
Therefore, in recent years, the mainland has responded with precision and targeted measures: sanctioning stubborn “Taiwan independence” figures, blocking green camp affiliated organizations, intercepting channels for “independence” interests to profit, and halting the accumulation of separatist capital. The mainland’s stance is clear: goodwill is reserved for our compatriots, not for “Taiwan independence” elements; tolerance for differences is possible, but never indulgence of division.
Song Chu-yu’s advice contains valuable insights—reminding us to persistently promote heart-to-heart connection, empathetic thinking, and soft integration. But we must not have only tolerance without firmness. Moderate tolerance coupled with unwavering bottom lines is the wisest and most pragmatic approach today.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1875261661204480/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author.