This refers to the nuclear crisis in North Korea and the opinion page article by Jun Yang "South Korean student provides perspective on armed North Korea" (SN 2/17). I agree with his proposal to continue talks with North Korea, but I am disappointed to hear his logic for doing so.

The war shouldn't be fought just to protect the lives in South Korea while those on the other side of the boundary don't matter at all. He says South Koreans are not bothered about the possible loss of lives in North Korea, and their only concern is about their own lives. If that is true, then why does Mr. Yang want us to worry about the loss of lives in South Korea? If we were like him, then we shouldn't be concerned with what might happen in the whole of the Korean Peninsula. Mr. Jun Yang is confident that he represents the majority opinion in South Korea. Well, maybe not.

People are concerned with what happens to people in other parts of the world. If this were untrue, then there would be no charity, and no humanitarian assistance whatsoever. As the war protesters have shown, national governments cannot take their citizens for granted. Most people do not want bloodshed, whether it is in their own back yard or thousands of miles away.

What we need to understand is that there can be no peace through violent means. Violence only breeds more violence. Instead, we may need to reflect on why countries like North Korea take to arms. Mr. Jun Yang says that most people in North Korea are starving, while the South Koreans have, of course, prospered over the last half century. What have we done to bridge this economic divide?

Rohit Jindal
CARRS graduate student