"Can we be friends?" (#123; Topic A)

At the very beginning of a seminar on "China Today" for high-school students held in Shepherdstown WV yestesterday (#122), the MC asked for questions from the audience. "Can we be friends?" was one of the questions offered. This is indeed a profound question, and reminds me of an utterance, by Rodney during a Los Angeles riot many years ago. In the LA case, involving a conflict between an Afro-American citizen and European-American policemen, the speaker was speaking from a position of weakness; he sought accommodation. Here, the speaker, a citizen of a superpower, is speaking from a position of strength; still, he/she seeks understanding and offers cooperation. A very positive attitude. When I had occasion to touch upon this question, I mentioned that, among western powers, the Chinese people view Americans most favorably -- or, stated in the reverse, least unfavorably -- that latter honor is reserved for the UK for its role in the Opium War (an event mentioned by one of the panelists in this seminar). Time did not permit me to comment that, while accepting reparations after China lost a war against an alliance of 8-powers, the other seven (six European countries plus Japan) tried to squeeze every last ounce of silver from China, but USA at least had the decency (when confronted by a Chinese diplomat) to leave some money behind for sending Chinese students to USA to study. The first group of such students was sent to Yale, and President Hu Jintao made reference to it during his visit to Yale last week. Because of this gesture, China and USA were always friends -- never enemies. Thus, "Can we be friends?" is superfluous. Perhaps a better phrasing might be "How can we be better friends?" Friends suggests mutual acceptance -- tolerance, if you will. Friends are not dominant-recessive, not "you are either with us or against us;" friends are equals, "live and let live."