The assumption here is that peace between nations can somehow be resolved by just communication among private citizens and individual friendships; that conflicts are just misunderstandings or that we are too prejudiced or don't have enough sympathy. I can see how that is sometimes the case, but I don't see how that is always or even commonly the case. In many conflicts, there are very real underlying issues that need to be resolved and unless those fundamental imbalances are addressed, then there will not be peace.

For example, it looks like China is on a possible collision course with India and Southeast Asian nations over water rights. China's north is heavily populated, rapidly growing, and severely short of water. Tibet on the other hand is very rich in water resources that are upstream of major rivers in India, Laos, Vietnam, etc. As we speak there are gigantic projects diverting water from China's south to the north. It's likely not to be enough, and if China moves on to divert and dam rivers that cross international borders, there will likely be war.

This is just one example, but my guess would be that a resource-driven conflict that incites national pride on both sides will break those friendships rather than the other way around. If the fundamental reasons driving a conflict are not resolved, it's hard to see why friendships will be able to prevent war.