History has proven, that often times friendships can form between nations after long confrontations, Vietnam and US now have a friendly relationship, many Americans feel such warmth for Vietnamese, because they shared scars of war, Chinese and British have friendship on international level, their nations relationships have been good on the whole, because of Hong Kong, a result of war and battles, Chinese have friendly relationship with the French as well, because of the past history, went way back to the battles in Ching Dynasty. China and Italy has mutual respect because of the fact that they are both old civilization, and Italy never attacked China. The recent hostility and boycott of french goods by Chinese public isn't going to harm France/China relationship in the longterm, most politicians and history observers would tell you that.

Judging from Chinese history, China had never used force when dealing with the Western nations, not even when they were at their strongest, back to Tang Dynasty, Sung Dynasty, and Yuen Dynasty, to even now, they hadn't been always kind to their people, but they had never used aggression on western nations, as a govt. I hope this tradition won't change, as I hate war, so sick and tired of wars period.

Things are changing fast. I hope this will bring positive change.

In Shift, China Offers to Meet With Dalai Lama Envoys
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/26/world/asia/26china.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp

This is more moderate

China versus CNN: Who’s to blame for the clash of Titans?
BY TOM PLATE (Pacific Perspectives)

26 April 2008
Khaleej Times Online >> News >> OPINION

A NOISY Trans-Pacific storm has blown up, starring the Chinese Foreign Ministry and CNN. That’s a superpower squall if there ever was one. But it’s hard to know for whom to root!

The story so far: Some Chinese officials and many Chinese on the mainland are steamed over Western media coverage of the Tibet demonstrations.

Their complaint (and a whole lot of people elsewhere in Asia agree) is the usual Asian moan about our media: That we portray world events that are inherently complicated, nuanced and sensitive as if they were simple black and white morality plays.

When will we ever learn that the more accurate colouration is almost always a shade or two of gray?

And so Asian anger, on a low simmer, absolutely boiled over the other day when a CNN opinion-commentator offered highly opinionated and unflattering remarks about China and its tainted food exports and its policy toward Tibet. They won’t be repeated in any detail here; you can simply ask your favourite search-engine to find you “CNN, Jack Cafferty, China, Tibet” and you will get more than you need.

But it must be noted for the record here that the last line of the aired commentary about the Chinese and their government sounded thusly: “I think they’re basically the same bunch of goons and thugs they’ve been for the last 50 years. So, what should be made of this?

The Chinese government in effect called for something approaching Cafferty’s immediate guillotining, without sedation. In response, CNN, mid-week, issued a sort of half-baked, conditional apology: “It was not Mr. Cafferty’s nor CNN’s intent to cause offence to the Chinese people, and we would apologise to anyone who has interpreted the comments in this way.” CNN added that its opinion columnist was, merely, offering his strongly held opinion of “the Chinese Government, not China’s people.”

Unfortunately, that ultra-carefully worded “apology” hit many Chinese as about as sincere as a spammed email offering you a million dollars from your winning ticket in the Irish Lottery.

There is something else that’s unfortunate: Jack Cafferty himself. To know him may be to love him, and many do, especially for his taxicab-driver style rudeness that makes fun of virtually everything and everyone. But if you don’t know him, and you think of CNN as aiming to be some kind of serious, sensible, objective and internationally respected news organisation, you would probably be wondering why they would have on the air an ‘opinion commentator’ who’s a cross between an insult comic and a one-person prejudice machine?

Jack the Hack once memorably opined about an effort in the US Congress to ban gay marriages: “This is all being done by the Republican majority in an effort to appeal to Right-wing nuts in the Republican Party ahead of the upcoming mid-term elections. Ignore all of the pressing issues facing the country, and instead go grovel at the feet of the lunatic fringe. Moderation in the pursuit of precise and balanced perception is not Cafferty’s game, you see.

Personally, I sort of dig his in-your-face, chalk-on-a-blackboard brand of irreverence. The reason perhaps is that, for decades, I lived in New York City. That thoroughly inured me to rudeness and overt prejudice. Practically everyone in New York is an equal-opportunity insulter: No ethnic, gender or race group is ever exempt.

But if I am running a serious media organisation, I’d put that kind of stuff on some cable comedy show. It’s too easily misunderstood.

And the fact that Cafferty is being widely misunderstood across Asia is no reason to excuse the fact that CNN offered him the bullhorn on an issue like this in the first place. The road to the Summer Olympics is obviously going to be and indeed has been bumpy enough without CNN throwing firecrackers into the street.

You might say, in response, that China has to learn and accept that our media culture is very different from theirs, that Cafferty spoke for no one but himself, and that half the things people sometimes say in the media they may not even believe themselves, they do it just for effect (especially talk shows).

But the truth is that the nation of China containing as it does almost one quarter of the globe’s population doesn’t have to learn anything unless it wants to, so that in the meantime perhaps we in the West need to learn more about China how it will think and how it will react to what we say and do.

Perhaps by being more cosmopolitan about them, they will become more cosmopolitan about us. Communication at its best is always a two-way street.

Prof. Tom Plate, a member of the Pacific Council on International Policy, teaches Asian politics and media at the University of California at Los Angeles

p?xfile=data/opinion/2008/April/opinion_April97.xml§ion=opinion&col=

'But the truth is that the nation of China containing as it does almost one quarter of the globe's population doesn't have to learn anything unless it wants to, so that in the meantime perhaps we in the West need to learn more about China how it will think and how it will react to what we say and do.

Perhaps by being more cosmopolitan about them, they will become more cosmopolitan about us. Communication at its best is always a two-way street.'

GREAT READING ... BUT OF OF COURSE ....... It could also be written as follows:

' But the truth is that the world containing as it does almost three quarters of the globe's population doesn't have to learn anything unless it wants to, so that in the meantime perhaps we in China need to learn more about the rest of the world how it will think and how it will react to what we say and do' ..... and I add .....in the international political and economical arena "

Perhaps by being more cosmopolitan about the world , they will become more understandable about us. ........'

' Communication at its best is always a two-way street.'....... how very true and may I add .... no need to issue threats is definitely a part of the whole effort and exercise in THE ART OF COMMUNICATION !

I find some of the Westerners have no interests in knowing any of the history of China(just listen to how some of the westerners say that Tibet has always been an independent nation shows), while many Chinese had learned European history, from arts and philosophy, I can see why the West is so forceful and price individual freedom, because I can trace in your history, how that was all evolved, and I can see where Chinese mentality is coming from, how it affects their foreign policy, because I know the history. I think modern politicians must also be scholars of history of east and west, there's no way to solve world conflict diplomatically if one nation has no clue how the other nation's customs and cultures shaped their govt and their policies.

I think Jack Cafferty if he had said "goons and thugs" in regards to the Saudi Arabia govt, CNN could face the same protests by people in Saudi. Not judging freedom of speech now, but if look at the big picture, in human history, what CNN did violated certain protocol in human history when referring to another nation period, in the global level, since CNN can be viewed in the world. China in this respect, looking from this perspective in terms of human history in diplomacy, actually has been exercising restrain, the state and people got upset, there's a war of words going on, boycotts, but China as a lender to the US, has every right to change conditions of the loans, then US would really be f***ed. The fact that this is still within the level of war of words, and probably would stay in this level then dies down, many Chinese feeling disrepected, which is justified because China due to its open policy and to its people, within 40 years have pulled itself out of poverty and into shocking prosperity, is some kind of a miracle. So to have CNN commentator blasted them like that, even just his own opinion, is really insulting to the people of the nation. I am speaking from what I think why they are dealing with this in such a way, to many Chinese, even Chinese who have been living in the west, since they still feel for their culture and people, this is not a matter of freedom of speech, but a complete disregards to their achievements, and solely focusing on their problems.

Of course the westerners could argue, as I did, "well, he said he meant the govt, not the people!", but if you are living in China, enjoying the fruits of the govt open policy, even though you knew there are still imprisonment of individuals, but on the whole, people's lives have improved tremendously, and since no govt, no society is perfect, you would then find Cafferty's words completely unjust and non objective to the govt. And if the western states had looked at this whole thing from this point of view, I think their diplomatic tactics would have changed in terms of dealing with the opening ceremony of the Olympics. I am not disagreeing with their stand on forcing China to change and improve human rights, I want that for China, but this whole Olympic politics has turn into a charade, a tactic nations use to threaten each other.