Back to the Future

So, here comes a deja-vu.

South Korea's President says his country should pursue a future-oriented relationship with Japan. Then Japan unnerves its neighboring country by bringing up a controversial issue. This time, Dokdo (in Korean) or Takeshima (in Japanese), whichever you prefer to call them.

I'm not sure whether the islands belong to Korea or Japan. However, I believe it is not historians but politicians obligated to discuss and determine the sovereignty issue over the islands. It seems to me that this dispute has been unresolved over half a century because of the negligence of politicians and diplomats. Both Korean and Japanese.

share a slice peacefully

Politicians and media in both countries should stop using the islands as political tool. It has always helped boost Korean president's approval rate, though. Or is there any confidential agreement between the two administrations?: Keeping the islands for dispute so that Japanese government brings up the issue whenever the approval rate of Korean president gets closer to the bottom.

When the Korean president talks about its future-oriented relationship with Japan, he always add such that the past should never be forgotten. Indeed, future is merely an extention of present and, past. I wonder if this is what the "future-oriented relationship" really means.

Still, I'm getting sick of watching this political sitcom. As far as I remember, this "Back to the Future" dispute have arisen during the administrations of Lee MyungBak, Roh MooHyun and Kim Young Sam (not sure about Kim DaeJung). Given that the movie series "Back to the Future" ended with the three stories, isn't it time to end this political adventure comedy as well?