It was at Princeton University that I was first introduced to Asia. In the mid-1950s, Asia, particularly China, was not a major issue in American universities or politics. My intention at that point was to study what Asians think of us, due to the fact that they were different from one another and had to be understood. Also, as for the Western world, it should allow the rich and diverse cultures of Northeast Asia to integrate into a global system.

The experience I have as a professor has always been China-related, as well as writing about it. After becoming successful economically and important in international affairs, China has come to be a very important country. Then, I worked extensively with Chinese academics and traveled to China often. The last time was an invitation from the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the most distinguished think tank in China.

As China became the second-largest economy in the world, everybody admired it but didn't really understand it. Some American scholars cite the relationship between ancient Greece and ancient Sparta, because Sparta was an upcoming country like China, and Athens was like the United States. Their argument is that when a newly rising power like China, tries to compete with the leading country, that conflict inevitably happens.

However, my reaction to that is Athens and Sparta existed over 2000 years ago. They were small countries without nuclear weapons, and they had the same culture. Such an analogy - the rising of the second power will inevitably result in conflict, military conflict, - is inappropriate.

During the Cold War, when we were conflicting with the Soviet Union, there was a threat of nuclear war going on. U.S. and other politicians from other countries had negotiation with the Soviet Union, trying to end the use of nuclear weapons, but they failed that. Over the Puget Sound region, there is a submarine base, and it contains nuclear-powered Trident submarines. Each of those submarines has between 12 and 14 missiles. Each one of the missiles has 8 to 10 hydrogen bombs. And there is a total control over the discretion of using them. 

Frankly speaking, human beings cannot have a nuclear war, especially strategic nuclear war. Even only using tactical nuclear weapons would cause large land pollution, and the strategic nuclear war would change the whole world. 

In my opinion, Beijing and Washington have the same interests. I suggest promoting cooperation between the two countries, not conflict. Such act like punishing China by imposing tariffs would have devastating effects not only on China and America, but also on the world economy. No one could have that kind of change in free trade that has made China so successful and made the world globalized as it has become. 

It can't be just competition. Obviously, the two most important countries driving the digital revolution are China and the United States. The U.S.-China relationship needs to be improved in some positive ways. Like the Arctic, international monetary system and global warming, these constructive positive activities are the best way to lay the foundation for real understanding. 

We live in a world that is increasingly interdependent but not convergent. Differing cultures, differing histories, beget different kinds of ways of relating to other people in one's country. China does not pursue Western individualism and Western-style democracy, and is unlikely to become just like the West. It is therefore necessary for people around the world to transcend their respective cultural and ideological limitations and work toward a common goal.

Nowadays, China is not any more an exotic, remote world for the U.S. As opposed to my experience as a student, Americans have more channels to learn about China. But so far, the communications between the two countries are not enough.

There are still many cognitive biases about China in Western countries. In contrast to political relations and affairs, cultural exchanges can help avoid those cognitive biases. Currently, people-to-people diplomacy is non-political. Whether Chinese or American students want to understand each other, they must experience both.

In spite of the fact that there are a large number of Chinese students studying in the United States, most of them just come to see the United States and get education. They did not address the issue of cooperating with and understanding the dynamics of Chinese society and how we could live in a globalized world. 

And if I ever became a billionaire, I would set up a foundation that was focused on exchanging students between the two countries and all of the countries of Northeast Asia, to increase broader understanding. It would take time, a decade or two at minimum, to lay a foundation for real understanding. But that is what has to happen.

Furthermore, the generations that come in the midst of a technological revolution could learn and communicate in a way people cannot have imagined in past few years. There is no doubt that this will provide a technical impetus for further deepening of non-governmental exchanges between the United States and China. Therefore, it's important to institutionalize exchange programs. The real question is how we can use exchanges including student exchanges and people-to-people exchanges to build bilateral relations. 

Regardless of the field, whether education, business, or another, these things need to be accomplished. In my opinion, China should be more open about sharing their culture with the United States. On the American side, we should be much more generous in answering the question I was given, namely, how can we really understand China.