Belonging to the Kuril Islands. The problem of the Kuril Islands. History of the conflict: causes and stages of development

Statement Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe about the intention to resolve the territorial dispute over the Kuril Islands and again attracted the attention of the general public to the so-called “problem of the Southern Kurils” or “northern territories”.

Shinzo Abe's loud statement, however, does not contain the main thing - an original solution that could suit both sides.

Land of the Ainu

The dispute over the Southern Kuril Islands has its roots in the 17th century, when there were neither Russians nor Japanese on the Kuril Islands.

The indigenous population of the islands can be considered the Ainu, a people whose origins are still debated by scientists. The Ainu, who once inhabited not only the Kuril Islands, but also all the Japanese islands, as well as the lower reaches of the Amur, Sakhalin and the south of Kamchatka, have today turned into a small nation. In Japan, according to official data, there are about 25 thousand Ainu, and in Russia there are just over a hundred of them left.

The first mentions of the islands in Japanese sources date back to 1635, in Russian sources - to 1644.

In 1711, a detachment of Kamchatka Cossacks led by Danila Antsiferova And Ivan Kozyrevsky first landed on the northernmost island of Shumshu, defeating a detachment of local Ainu here.

The Japanese also showed more and more activity in the Kuril Islands, but no demarcation line and no agreements existed between the countries.

Kuriles - to you, Sakhalin— us

In 1855, the Shimoda Treaty on trade and borders between Russia and Japan was signed. This document for the first time defined the border of the possessions of the two countries in the Kuril Islands - it passed between the islands of Iturup and Urup.

Thus, the islands of Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and the Habomai group of islands came under the rule of the Japanese emperor, that is, the very territories around which there is a dispute today.

It was the day of the conclusion of the Shimoda Treaty, February 7, that was declared in Japan as the so-called “Northern Territories Day”.

Relations between the two countries were quite good, but they were spoiled by the “Sakhalin issue.” The fact is that the Japanese claimed the southern part of this island.

In 1875, a new treaty was signed in St. Petersburg, according to which Japan renounced all claims to Sakhalin in exchange for the Kuril Islands - both Southern and Northern.

Perhaps, it was after the conclusion of the 1875 treaty that relations between the two countries developed most harmoniously.

Exorbitant appetites of the Land of the Rising Sun

Harmony in international affairs, however, is a fragile thing. Japan, emerging from centuries of self-isolation, was rapidly developing, and at the same time its ambitions were growing. The Land of the Rising Sun has territorial claims against almost all its neighbors, including Russia.

This resulted in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905, which ended in a humiliating defeat for Russia. And although Russian diplomacy managed to mitigate the consequences of military failure, nevertheless, in accordance with the Portsmouth Treaty, Russia lost control not only over the Kuril Islands, but also over South Sakhalin.

This state of affairs did not suit not only Tsarist Russia, but also the Soviet Union. However, it was impossible to change the situation in the mid-1920s, which resulted in the signing of the Beijing Treaty between the USSR and Japan in 1925, according to which the Soviet Union recognized the current state of affairs, but refused to acknowledge “political responsibility” for the Portsmouth Treaty.

In subsequent years, relations between the Soviet Union and Japan teetered on the brink of war. Japan's appetite grew and began to spread to the continental territories of the USSR. True, the defeats of the Japanese at Lake Khasan in 1938 and at Khalkhin Gol in 1939 forced official Tokyo to slow down somewhat.

However, the “Japanese threat” hung like a sword of Damocles over the USSR during the Great Patriotic War.

Revenge for old grievances

By 1945, the tone of Japanese politicians towards the USSR had changed. There was no talk of new territorial acquisitions—the Japanese side would have been quite satisfied with maintaining the existing order of things.

But the USSR gave an undertaking to Great Britain and the United States that it would enter the war with Japan no later than three months after the end of the war in Europe.

The Soviet leadership had no reason to feel sorry for Japan - Tokyo behaved too aggressively and defiantly towards the USSR in the 1920s and 1930s. And the grievances of the beginning of the century were not forgotten at all.

On August 8, 1945, the Soviet Union declared war on Japan. It was a real blitzkrieg - the million-strong Japanese Kwantung Army in Manchuria was completely defeated in a matter of days.

On August 18, Soviet troops launched the Kuril landing operation, the goal of which was to capture the Kuril Islands. Fierce battles broke out for the island of Shumshu - this was the only battle of the fleeting war in which the losses of Soviet troops were higher than those of the enemy. However, on August 23, the commander of the Japanese troops in the Northern Kuril Islands, Lieutenant General Fusaki Tsutsumi, capitulated.

The fall of Shumshu became the key event of the Kuril operation - subsequently the occupation of the islands on which the Japanese garrisons were located turned into acceptance of their surrender.

Kurile Islands. Photo: www.russianlook.com

They took the Kuril Islands, they could have taken Hokkaido

On August 22, Commander-in-Chief of the Soviet troops in the Far East, Marshal Alexander Vasilevsky, without waiting for the fall of Shumshu, gives the order to troops to occupy the Southern Kuril Islands. The Soviet command is acting according to plan - the war continues, the enemy has not completely capitulated, which means we should move on.

The initial military plans of the USSR were much broader - Soviet units were ready to land on the island of Hokkaido, which was to become a Soviet zone of occupation. One can only guess how the further history of Japan would have developed in this case. But in the end, Vasilevsky received an order from Moscow to cancel the landing operation in Hokkaido.

Bad weather somewhat delayed the actions of Soviet troops in the Southern Kuril Islands, but by September 1, Iturup, Kunashir and Shikotan came under their control. The Habomai island group was completely taken under control on September 2-4, 1945, that is, after the surrender of Japan. There were no battles during this period - the Japanese soldiers resignedly surrendered.

So, at the end of World War II, Japan was completely occupied by the Allied powers, and the main territories of the country came under US control.

Kurile Islands. Photo: Shutterstock.com

On January 29, 1946, Memorandum No. 677 of the Commander-in-Chief of the Allied Powers, General Douglas MacArthur, excluded the Kuril Islands (Chishima Islands), the Habomai (Habomadze) group of islands, and Shikotan Island from Japanese territory.

On February 2, 1946, in accordance with the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, the Yuzhno-Sakhalin Region was formed in these territories as part of the Khabarovsk Territory of the RSFSR, which on January 2, 1947 became part of the newly formed Sakhalin Region as part of the RSFSR.

Thus, de facto, South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands passed to Russia.

Why didn't the USSR sign a peace treaty with Japan?

However, these territorial changes were not formalized by a treaty between the two countries. But the political situation in the world has changed, and yesterday’s ally of the USSR, the United States, turned into Japan’s closest friend and ally, and therefore was not interested in either resolving Soviet-Japanese relations or resolving the territorial issue between the two countries.

In 1951, a peace treaty was concluded in San Francisco between Japan and the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition, which the USSR did not sign.

The reason for this was the US revision of previous agreements with the USSR, reached in the Yalta Agreement of 1945 - now official Washington believed that the Soviet Union had no rights not only to the Kuril Islands, but also to South Sakhalin. In any case, this is exactly the resolution that was adopted by the US Senate during the discussion of the treaty.

However, in the final version of the San Francisco Treaty, Japan renounces its rights to South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands. But here, too, there is a catch - official Tokyo, both then and now, states that it does not consider Habomai, Kunashir, Iturup and Shikotan to be part of the Kuril Islands.

That is, the Japanese are sure that they really renounced South Sakhalin, but they never renounced the “northern territories”.

The Soviet Union refused to sign a peace treaty not only because its territorial disputes with Japan were unresolved, but also because it did not in any way resolve similar disputes between Japan and the then USSR ally, China.

Compromise ruined Washington

Only five years later, in 1956, the Soviet-Japanese declaration on ending the state of war was signed, which was supposed to be the prologue to the conclusion of a peace treaty.

A compromise solution was also announced - the islands of Habomai and Shikotan would be returned to Japan in exchange for unconditional recognition of the sovereignty of the USSR over all other disputed territories. But this could happen only after the conclusion of a peace treaty.

In fact, Japan was quite happy with these conditions, but then a “third force” intervened. The United States was not at all happy about the prospect of establishing relations between the USSR and Japan. The territorial problem acted as an excellent wedge driven between Moscow and Tokyo, and Washington considered its resolution extremely undesirable.

It was announced to the Japanese authorities that if a compromise was reached with the USSR on the “Kuril problem” on the terms of the division of the islands, the United States would leave the island of Okinawa and the entire Ryukyu archipelago under its sovereignty.

The threat was truly terrible for the Japanese - we were talking about an area with more than a million people, which has the greatest historical significance for Japan.

As a result, a possible compromise on the issue of the Southern Kuril Islands melted away like smoke, and with it the prospect of concluding a full-fledged peace treaty.

By the way, control over Okinawa finally passed to Japan only in 1972. Moreover, 18 percent of the island’s territory is still occupied by American military bases.

Complete dead end

In fact, there has been no progress in the territorial dispute since 1956. During the Soviet period, without reaching a compromise, the USSR came to the tactic of completely denying any dispute in principle.

In the post-Soviet period, Japan began to hope that Russian President Boris Yeltsin, generous with gifts, would give up the “northern territories.” Moreover, such a decision was considered fair by very prominent figures in Russia - for example, Nobel laureate Alexander Solzhenitsyn.

Perhaps at this moment the Japanese side made a mistake, instead of compromise options like the one discussed in 1956, they began to insist on the transfer of all the disputed islands.

But in Russia the pendulum has already swung in the other direction, and those who consider the transfer of even one island impossible are much louder today.

For both Japan and Russia, the “Kuril issue” has become a matter of principle over the past decades. For both Russian and Japanese politicians, the slightest concessions threaten, if not the collapse of their careers, then serious electoral losses.

Therefore, Shinzo Abe’s declared desire to solve the problem is undoubtedly commendable, but completely unrealistic.

Introduction

Conclusion

Introduction

Political conflicts have always played an important and, undoubtedly, controversial role in the world diplomatic community. Disputes over the ownership of territories seem to be particularly attractive, especially if they are as long-standing as the diplomatic conflict between the Russian Federation and Japan over the ownership of the South Kuril Islands. This is what determines relevance of this work.

The course work is written in simple and understandable language for the general public. It has not only theoretical, but also practical value: the material can be used as a reference summary when preparing for an exam in history or the fundamentals of the theory of international relations on the topic of Russian-Japanese relations.

So, we set target:

Analyze the existing problem of belonging to the Kuril Islands and propose possible ways to solve this problem.

The goal determined and specific tasks works:

ñ Collect theoretical material on this topic, analyzing and systematizing the information;

ñ Form the positions of each party in a diplomatic conflict;

ñDraw conclusions.

The work is based on the study of monographs on conflictology and diplomacy, historical sources, news and report reviews and notes.

In order to facilitate the perception of incoming information, we have divided all the work into three stages.

diplomatic conflict Kuril Island

The first stage consisted of defining key theoretical concepts (such as conflict, state border, right to own territory). He formed the conceptual foundation of this work.

At the second stage, we looked at the history of Russian-Japanese relations on the issue of the Kuril Islands; the Russian-Japanese conflict itself, its causes, prerequisites, development. We devoted special attention to the present time: we analyzed the state and development of the conflict at the present stage.

At the final stage, conclusions were drawn.

Chapter I. The essence and concepts of diplomatic conflict in the system of international relations

1.1 Definition of conflict and diplomatic conflict

Humanity has been familiar with conflicts since its inception. Disputes and wars broke out throughout the historical development of society between tribes, cities, countries, and blocs of states. They were generated by religious, cultural, ideological, ethnic, territorial and other contradictions. As the German military theorist and historian K. von Clausewitz noted, the history of the world is the history of wars. And although this definition of history suffers from a certain absolutization, there is no doubt that the role and place of conflicts in human history are more than significant. The end of the Cold War in 1989 once again gave rise to rosy forecasts about the advent of an era of conflict-free existence on the planet. It seemed that with the disappearance of the confrontation between the two superpowers - the USSR and the USA - regional conflicts and the threat of a third world war would sink into oblivion. However, hopes for a calmer and more comfortable world were once again destined to not come true.

So, from all of the above it follows that conflict is the most acute way of resolving contradictions in interests, goals, views, arising in the process of social interaction, consisting in the opposition of the participants in this interaction, and usually accompanied by negative emotions, going beyond the rules and norms. Conflicts are the subject of study of the science of conflictology. Consequently, states that have opposing points of view on the subject of the dispute participate in an international conflict.

When countries try to resolve a conflict diplomatically - that is, without resorting to military action - their actions are aimed, first of all, at finding a compromise at the negotiating table, which can be very difficult. There is an explanation for this: often state leaders simply do not want to make concessions to each other - they are satisfied with some semblance of armed neutrality; Also, one cannot take into account the causes of the conflict, its history and, in fact, the subject of the dispute. National characteristics and needs play an important role in the development of the conflict - together, this can significantly slow down the search for a compromise between the participating countries.

1.2 State border and the right to challenge it by another country

Let us define the state border:

The state border is a line and a vertical surface running along this line that define the limits of the state territory (land, water, subsoil and airspace) of the country, that is, the spatial limit of the action of state sovereignty.

The following statement indirectly follows from the definition - the state protects its sovereignty, and, consequently, its air and land resources. Historically, one of the most motivating reasons for military action is precisely the division of territories and resources.

1.3 Right to own territories

The question about the legal nature of state territory presupposes the answer that there is a state territory from a legal point of view, or more precisely, that there is a state territory from an international legal point of view.

State territory is a part of the Earth's surface that legally belongs to a certain state, within which it exercises its supremacy. In other words, state sovereignty underlies the legal nature of state territory. According to international law, a territory is associated with its population. State territory and its population are necessary attributes of the state.

Territorial supremacy means the complete and exclusive power of a state over its territory. This means that the public authority of another power cannot operate on the territory of a particular state.

Trends in the development of modern international law indicate that a state is free to use its territorial supremacy to the extent that the rights and legitimate interests of other states are not affected.

The concept of state jurisdiction is narrower in scope than the concept of territorial supremacy. The jurisdiction of a state refers to the right of its judicial and administrative bodies to consider and resolve any cases within its borders, in contrast to territorial supremacy, which means the full extent of state power in a certain territory.

Chapter II. Russo-Japanese conflict regarding the Kuril Islands

2.1 History of the conflict: causes and stages of development

The main problem on the way to reaching an agreement is Japan's putting forward territorial claims to the southern Kuril Islands (Iturup Island, Kunashir Island and the Lesser Kuril Islands).

The Kuril Islands are a chain of volcanic islands between the Kamchatka Peninsula and the island of Hokkaido (Japan), separating the Sea of ​​Okhotsk from the Pacific Ocean. They consist of two parallel ridges of islands - the Big Kuril and the Lesser Kuril 4. The first information about the Kuril Islands was reported by the Russian explorer Vladimir Atlasov.

In 1745, most of the Kuril Islands were included in the “General Map of the Russian Empire” in the Academic Atlas.

In the 70s In the 18th century, there were permanent Russian settlements in the Kuril Islands under the command of the Irkutsk tradesman Vasily Zvezdochetov. On the map of 1809, the Kuril Islands and Kamchatka were assigned to the Irkutsk province. In the 18th century, the Russians' peaceful colonization of Sakhalin, the Kuril Islands, and northeastern Hokkaido was largely over.

In parallel with the development of the Kuril Islands by Russia, the Japanese were advancing into the Northern Kuril Islands. Reflecting the Japanese onslaught, Russia in 1795 built a fortified military station on the island of Urup.

By 1804, dual power had actually developed in the Kuril Islands: the influence of Russia was felt more strongly in the Northern Kuril Islands, and that of Japan in the Southern Kuril Islands. But formally, all the Kuril Islands still belonged to Russia.

On February 1855, the first Russian-Japanese treaty was signed - the Treaty on Trade and Borders. He proclaimed relations of peace and friendship between the two countries, opened three Japanese ports to Russian ships and established a border in the South Kuril Islands between the islands of Urup and Iturup.

In 1875, Russia signed the Russo-Japanese Treaty, according to which it ceded 18 Kuril Islands to Japan. Japan, in turn, recognized the island of Sakhalin as completely belonging to Russia.

From 1875 to 1945, the Kuril Islands were under Japanese control.

On February 1945, an agreement was signed between the leaders of the Soviet Union, the USA and Great Britain - Joseph Stalin, Franklin Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, according to which after the end of the war against Japan the Kuril Islands should be transferred to the Soviet Union.

September 1945 Japan signed the Act of Unconditional Surrender, accepting the terms of the Potsdam Declaration of 1945, according to which its sovereignty was limited to the islands of Honshu, Kyushu, Shikoku and Hokkaido, as well as the smaller islands of the Japanese archipelago. The islands of Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and Habomai went to the Soviet Union.

February 1946, by decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, the Kuril Islands Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and Habomai were included in the USSR.

On September 1951, at an international conference in San Francisco, a peace treaty was concluded between Japan and the 48 countries participating in the anti-fascist coalition, according to which Japan renounced all rights, legal grounds and claims to the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin. The Soviet delegation did not sign this treaty, citing the fact that it viewed it as a separate agreement between the governments of the United States and Japan.

From the point of view of contract law, the question of ownership of the Southern Kuril Islands remained uncertain. The Kuril Islands ceased to be Japanese, but did not become Soviet. Taking advantage of this circumstance, Japan in 1955 presented the USSR with claims to all the Kuril Islands and the southern part of Sakhalin. As a result of two years of negotiations between the USSR and Japan, the positions of the parties came closer: Japan limited its claims to the islands of Habomai, Shikotan, Kunashir and Iturup.

October 1956, a Joint Declaration of the USSR and Japan was signed in Moscow on ending the state of war between the two states and restoring diplomatic and consular relations. In it, in particular, the Soviet government agreed to the transfer to Japan after the conclusion of a peace treaty of the islands of Habomai and Shikotan.

After the conclusion of the Japan-US Security Treaty in 1960, the USSR annulled the obligations assumed by the 1956 declaration. During the Cold War, Moscow did not recognize the existence of a territorial problem between the two countries. The presence of this problem was first recorded in the 1991 Joint Statement, signed following the visit of the USSR President to Tokyo.

In 1993, in Tokyo, the President of Russia and the Prime Minister of Japan signed the Tokyo Declaration on Russian-Japanese relations, which recorded the agreement of the parties to continue negotiations with the aim of concluding a peace treaty as quickly as possible by resolving the issue of ownership of the islands mentioned above5.

2.2 Current development of the conflict: positions of the parties and search for a solution

In recent years, in order to create an atmosphere at the negotiations conducive to the search for mutually acceptable solutions, the parties have been paying great attention to establishing practical Russian-Japanese interaction and cooperation in the island area. One of the results of this work was the beginning of the implementation in September 1999 of an agreement on the most simplified procedure for visits to the islands by their former residents from among Japanese citizens and members of their families. Cooperation in the fisheries sector is carried out on the basis of the current Russian-Japanese Agreement on fisheries in the southern Kuril Islands of February 21, 1998.

The Japanese side puts forward claims to the southern Kuril Islands, motivating them with references to the Russian-Japanese Treaty on Trade and Borders of 1855, according to which these islands were recognized as Japanese, and also to the fact that these territories are not part of the Kuril Islands, from which Japan refused the San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1951. Japan made the signing of a peace treaty between the two countries dependent on the resolution of the territorial dispute.

The position of the Russian side on the issue of border demarcation is that the southern Kuril Islands passed to our country following the Second World War on a legal basis in accordance with the agreements of the allied powers (Yalta Agreement of February 11, 1945, Potsdam Declaration of July 26, 1945 d) and Russian sovereignty over them, which has the appropriate international legal registration, cannot be doubted.

Confirming its commitment to previously reached agreements on holding negotiations on a peace treaty, including the issue of border demarcation, the Russian side emphasizes that the solution to this problem must be mutually acceptable, not harm the sovereignty and national interests of Russia, and receive the support of the public and parliaments of both countries.

Despite all the measures taken, a recent visit to D.A. Medvedev on November 1, 2010, the disputed territory caused a storm of discontent in the Japanese media; Thus, the Japanese government appealed to the Russian president with a request to abandon the event in order to avoid aggravation of relations between the countries.

The Russian Foreign Ministry refused the request. In particular, the message from the diplomatic department noted that “the President of Russia independently determines travel routes within the territory of his country,” and advice on this matter “from the outside” is inappropriate and unacceptable7 .

At the same time, the restraining influence of the unresolved territorial problem on the development of Russian-Japanese relations has significantly decreased. This is due, first of all, to the strengthening of Russia’s international positions and Tokyo’s understanding of the need to develop Russian-Japanese relations, including trade and economic cooperation, against the backdrop of the progressive growth of the Russian economy and increasing the investment attractiveness of the Russian market.

Conclusion

The problem remains a problem. Russia and Japan have been living without any peace treaty since World War II - this is unacceptable from a diplomatic point of view. Moreover, normal trade and economic relations and political interaction are possible subject to the complete resolution of the Kuril Islands issue. A vote among the population of the disputed Kuril Islands may help bring the final point, because first of all, you need to listen to the opinion of the people.

The only key to mutual understanding between the two countries is the creation of a climate of trust, trust and more trust, as well as broad mutually beneficial cooperation in a variety of areas of politics, economics and culture. Reducing the mistrust accumulated over a century to zero and starting to move towards trust with a plus is the key to the success of a peaceful neighborhood and tranquility in the border maritime areas of Russia and Japan. Will current politicians be able to realize this opportunity? Time will tell.

List of sources used

1.Azriliyan A. Legal dictionary. - M.: Institute of New Economics, 2009 - 1152 p.

2.Antsupov A.Ya., Shipilov A.I. The meaning, subject and tasks of conflictology. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2008 - 496 p.

.Biryukov P.N. International law. - M.: Yurist, 2008 - 688 p.

.Zuev M.N. Russian history. - M.: Yurayt, 2011 - 656 p.

.Klyuchnikov Yu.V., Sabanin A. International politics of modern times in treaties, notes and declarations. Part 2. - M.: Reprint edition, 1925 - 415 p.

.Turovsky R.F. Political regionalism. - M.: GUVSHE, 2006 - 792 p.

7.http://www.bbc. co. UK

Tutoring

Need help studying a topic?

Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

Kuril Islands problem

group 03 History

The so-called “disputed territories” include the islands of Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and Habomai (the Lesser Kuril chain consists of 8 islands).

Usually, when discussing the problem of disputed territories, three groups of problems are considered: historical parity in the discovery and development of islands, the role and significance of the Russian-Japanese treaties of the 19th century that established the border between the two countries, as well as the legal force of all documents regulating the post-war structure of the world. What is especially interesting in this matter is that all the historical treaties of the past, which Japanese politicians refer to, have lost force in today’s disputes, not even in 1945, but back in 1904, with the outbreak of the Russo-Japanese War, because international law states: a state of war between states terminates the validity of any and all agreements between them. For this reason alone, the entire “historical” layer of the Japanese side’s argument has nothing to do with the rights of today’s Japanese state. Therefore, we will not consider the first two problems, but will focus on the third.

The very fact of Japan's attack on Russia in the Russo-Japanese War. was a gross violation of the Shimoda Treaty, which proclaimed “permanent peace and sincere friendship between Russia and Japan.” After the defeat of Russia, the Treaty of Portsmouth was concluded in 1905. The Japanese side demanded Sakhalin Island from Russia as an indemnity. The Treaty of Portsmouth terminated the exchange agreement of 1875, and also stated that all trade agreements between Japan and Russia would be canceled as a result of the war. This annulled the Shimoda Treaty of 1855. Thus, by the time of conclusion on January 20, 1925. Convention on the Basic Principles of Relations between Russia and Japan, in fact, there was no existing bilateral agreement on the ownership of the Kuril Islands.

The issue of restoring the rights of the USSR to the southern part of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands was discussed in November 1943. at the Tehran Conference of the Heads of the Allied Powers. At the Yalta Conference in February 1945. The leaders of the USSR, USA and Great Britain finally agreed that after the end of the Second World War, South Sakhalin and all the Kuril Islands would pass to the Soviet Union, and this was the condition for the USSR to enter the war with Japan - three months after the end of the war in Europe.

February 2, 1946 followed by a Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, which established that all land with its subsoil and waters on the territory of Southern Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands is state property of the USSR.

On September 8, 1951, in San Francisco, 49 countries signed a peace treaty with Japan. The draft treaty was prepared during the Cold War without the participation of the USSR and in violation of the principles of the Potsdam Declaration. The Soviet side proposed to carry out demilitarization and ensure democratization of the country. The USSR, and along with it Poland and Czechoslovakia, refused to sign the treaty. However, Article 2 of this treaty states that Japan renounces all rights and title to Sakhalin Island and the Kuril Islands. Thus, Japan itself renounced its territorial claims to our country, confirming this with its signature.

But later the United States began to argue that the San Francisco Peace Treaty did not indicate in whose favor Japan renounced these territories. This laid the foundation for the presentation of territorial claims.

1956, Soviet-Japanese negotiations to normalize relations between the two countries. The Soviet side agrees to cede the two islands of Shikotan and Habomai to Japan and proposes to sign a Joint Declaration. The declaration assumed first the conclusion of a peace treaty and only then the “transfer” of the two islands. The transfer is an act of good will, a willingness to dispose of one’s own territory “meeting the wishes of Japan and taking into account the interests of the Japanese state.” Japan insists that the “return” precede the peace treaty, because the very concept of “return” is a recognition of the illegality of their belonging to the USSR, which is a revision not only of the results of the Second World War, but also of the principle of the inviolability of these results. American pressure played its role, and the Japanese refused to sign a peace treaty on our terms. The subsequent security treaty (1960) between the United States and Japan made the transfer of Shikotan and Habomai to Japan impossible. Our country, of course, could not give up the islands for American bases, nor could it bind itself to any obligations to Japan on the issue of the Kuril Islands.

On January 27, 1960, the USSR stated that since this agreement was directed against the USSR and the PRC, the Soviet government refused to consider the issue of transferring these islands to Japan, since this would lead to an expansion of the territory used by American troops.

Currently, the Japanese side claims that the islands of Iturup, Shikotan, Kunashir and the Habomai ridge, which have always been Japanese territory, are not included in the Kuril Islands, which Japan abandoned. The US government, regarding the scope of the concept of “Kuril Islands” in the San Francisco Peace Treaty, stated in an official document: “They do not include, and there was no intention to include (in the Kuril Islands) the Habomai and Shikotan ridges, or Kunashir and Iturup, which previously always were part of Japan proper and should therefore be fairly recognized as being under Japanese sovereignty."

He gave a worthy answer regarding Japan’s territorial claims to us at one time: “The borders between the USSR and Japan should be considered as the result of the Second World War.”

In the 90s, at a meeting with the Japanese delegation, he also resolutely opposed the revision of borders, emphasizing that the borders between the USSR and Japan were “legal and legally justified.” Throughout the second half of the 20th century, the question of the ownership of the southern group of the Kuril islands Iturup, Shikotan, Kunashir and Habomai (in the Japanese interpretation - the question of the “northern territories”) remained the main stumbling block in Japanese-Soviet (later Japanese-Russian) relations.

In 1993, the Tokyo Declaration on Russian-Japanese relations was signed, which states that Russia is the successor of the USSR and that all agreements signed between the USSR and Japan will be recognized by Russia and Japan.

On November 14, 2004, the head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, on the eve of the president’s visit to Japan, stated that Russia, as a successor state of the USSR, recognizes the 1956 Declaration as existing and is ready to conduct territorial negotiations with Japan on its basis. This formulation of the question caused a lively discussion among Russian politicians. Vladimir Putin supported the position of the Foreign Ministry, stipulating that Russia “will fulfill all its obligations” only “to the extent that our partners are ready to fulfill these agreements.” Japanese Prime Minister Koizumi responded by saying that Japan was not satisfied with the transfer of only two islands: “If the ownership of all the islands is not determined, the peace treaty will not be signed.” At the same time, the Japanese prime minister promised to show flexibility in determining the timing of the transfer of the islands.

On December 14, 2004, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld expressed his readiness to assist Japan in resolving the dispute with Russia over the Southern Kuril Islands. Some observers see this as a US refusal of neutrality in the Japanese-Russian territorial dispute. And a way to divert attention from their actions at the end of the war, as well as maintain equality of power in the region.

During the Cold War, the United States supported Japan's position in the dispute over the South Kuril Islands and did everything to ensure that this position did not soften. It was under pressure from the United States that Japan reconsidered its attitude towards the Soviet-Japanese Declaration of 1956 and began to demand the return of all disputed territories. But at the beginning of the 21st century, when Moscow and Washington found a common enemy, the United States stopped making any statements regarding the Russian-Japanese territorial dispute.

On August 16, 2006, a Japanese fishing schooner was detained by Russian border guards. The schooner refused to obey the commands of the border guards, and warning fire was opened on it. During the incident, one member of the schooner's crew was fatally wounded in the head. This caused a sharp protest from the Japanese side. Both sides say the incident occurred in their own territorial waters. In 50 years of dispute over the islands, this is the first recorded death.

On December 13, 2006, the head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, Taro Aso, at a meeting of the foreign policy committee of the lower house of representatives of parliament, spoke in favor of dividing the southern part of the disputed Kuril Islands in half with Russia. There is a point of view that in this way the Japanese side hopes to solve a long-standing problem in Russian-Japanese relations. However, immediately after Taro Aso’s statement, the Japanese Foreign Ministry disavowed his words, emphasizing that they were misinterpreted.

Of course, Tokyo's position towards Russia has undergone some changes. She abandoned the principle of “inseparability of politics and economics,” that is, a strict link between the territorial problem and cooperation in the economic field. Now the Japanese government is trying to pursue a flexible policy, which means softly promoting economic cooperation and solving the territorial problem at the same time.

Main factors that need to be taken into account when solving the problem of the Kuril Islands

· the presence of the richest reserves of marine biological resources in the waters adjacent to the islands;

· underdeveloped infrastructure on the territory of the Kuril Islands, the virtual absence of its own energy base with significant reserves of renewable geothermal resources, the lack of its own vehicles to ensure freight and passenger transportation;

· proximity and virtually unlimited capacity of seafood markets in neighboring countries of the Asia-Pacific region; the need to preserve the unique natural complex of the Kuril Islands, maintain local energy balance while maintaining the cleanliness of the air and water basins, and protect the unique flora and fauna. The views of the local civilian population must be taken into account when developing a mechanism for transferring the islands. Those who remain must be guaranteed all rights (including property rights), and those who leave must be fully compensated. It is necessary to take into account the readiness of the local population to accept the change in the status of these territories.

The Kuril Islands have important geopolitical and military-strategic significance for Russia and affect Russia’s national security. The loss of the Kuril Islands will damage the defense system of Russian Primorye and weaken the defense capability of our country as a whole. With the loss of the islands of Kunashir and Iturup, the Sea of ​​Okhotsk ceases to be our inland sea. The Kuril Islands and the adjacent waters are a unique ecosystem of its kind, possessing the richest natural resources, primarily biological. The coastal waters of the Southern Kuril Islands and the Lesser Kuril Ridge are the main habitat areas for valuable commercial species of fish and seafood, the extraction and processing of which is the basis of the economy of the Kuril Islands.

The principle of the inviolability of the results of the Second World War should be the basis of a new stage of Russian-Japanese relations, and the term “return” should be forgotten. But maybe it’s worth letting Japan create a museum of military glory on Kunashir, from which Japanese pilots bombed Pearl Harbor. Let the Japanese often remember what the Americans did to them in response, and about the US base in Okinawa, but they feel the Russians’ tribute to their former enemy.

Notes:

1. Russia and the problem of the Kuril Islands. Defending tactics or surrender strategy. http:///analit/

3. The Kuril Islands are also Russian land. http:///analit/sobytia/

4. Russia and the problem of the Kuril Islands. Defending tactics or surrender strategy. http:///analit/

7. Modern Japanese historians about the development of the South Kuril Islands (beginning of the 17th - beginning of the 19th century) http://proceedings. /

8. The Kuril Islands are also Russian land. http:///analit/sobytia/

Briefly, the history of “belonging” to the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin Island is as follows.

1.During the period 1639-1649. Russian Cossack detachments led by Moskovitinov, Kolobov, Popov explored and began to develop Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands. At the same time, Russian pioneers repeatedly sailed to the island of Hokkaido, where they were peacefully greeted by the local Ainu aborigines. The Japanese appeared on this island a century later, after which they exterminated and partially assimilated the Ainu.

2.B 1701 Cossack sergeant Vladimir Atlasov reported to Peter I about the “subordination” of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands, leading to the “wonderful kingdom of Nipon”, to the Russian crown.

3.B 1786. By order of Catherine II, a register of Russian possessions in the Pacific Ocean was made, with the register being brought to the attention of all European states as a declaration of Russia's rights to these possessions, including Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands.

4.B 1792. By decree of Catherine II, the entire chain of the Kuril Islands (both Northern and Southern), as well as the island of Sakhalin officially included in the Russian Empire.

5. As a result of Russia’s defeat in the Crimean War 1854—1855 gg. under pressure England and France Russia forced was concluded with Japan on February 7, 1855. Treaty of Shimoda, according to which four southern islands of the Kuril chain were transferred to Japan: Habomai, Shikotan, Kunashir and Iturup. Sakhalin remained undivided between Russia and Japan. At the same time, however, the right of Russian ships to enter Japanese ports was recognized, and “permanent peace and sincere friendship between Japan and Russia” were proclaimed.

6.May 7, 1875 according to the Treaty of St. Petersburg, the tsarist government as a very strange act of “goodwill” makes incomprehensible further territorial concessions to Japan and transfers to it another 18 small islands of the archipelago. In return, Japan finally recognized Russia's right to all of Sakhalin. It is for this agreement the Japanese refer most of all today, slyly keeping silent, that the first article of this treaty reads: “... and henceforth eternal peace and friendship will be established between Russia and Japan” ( the Japanese themselves violated this treaty several times in the 20th century). Many Russian statesmen of those years sharply condemned this “exchange” agreement as short-sighted and harmful to the future of Russia, comparing it with the same short-sightedness as the sale of Alaska to the United States of America in 1867 for next to nothing ($7 billion 200 million). ), saying that “now we are biting our own elbows.”

7.After the Russo-Japanese War 1904—1905 gg. followed another stage in the humiliation of Russia. By Portsmouth peace treaty concluded on September 5, 1905, Japan received the southern part of Sakhalin, all the Kuril Islands, and also took away from Russia the lease right to the naval bases of Port Arthur and Dalniy. When did Russian diplomats remind the Japanese that all these provisions contradict the treaty of 1875 g., - those answered arrogantly and impudently : « War crosses out all agreements. You have been defeated and let's proceed from the current situation " Reader, Let us remember this boastful declaration of the invader!

8.Next comes the time to punish the aggressor for his eternal greed and territorial expansion. Signed by Stalin and Roosevelt at the Yalta Conference February 10, 1945 G. " Agreement on the Far East" provided: "... 2-3 months after the surrender of Germany, the Soviet Union will enter the war against Japan subject to the return to the Soviet Union of the southern part of Sakhalin, all the Kuril Islands, as well as the restoration of the lease of Port Arthur and Dalny(these built and equipped by the hands of Russian workers, soldiers and sailors back in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. naval bases were very convenient in their geographical location donated free of charge to “brotherly” China. But our fleet needed these bases so much in the 60-80s during the raging Cold War and the intense combat service of the fleet in remote areas of the Pacific and Indian Oceans. We had to equip the Cam Ranh forward base in Vietnam from scratch for the fleet).

9.B July 1945 in accordance with Potsdam Declaration heads of victorious countries the following verdict was adopted regarding the future of Japan: “The sovereignty of Japan will be limited to four islands: Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku, Honshu and those that WE SPECIFY.” August 14, 1945 The Japanese government has publicly confirmed its acceptance of the terms of the Potsdam Declaration, and September 2 Japan unconditionally surrendered. Article 6 of the Instrument of Surrender states: “...the Japanese government and its successors will honestly implement the terms of the Potsdam Declaration , give such orders and take such actions as the Commander-in-Chief of the Allied Powers requires in order to implement this declaration...” January 29, 1946 The Commander-in-Chief, General MacArthur, in his Directive No. 677 DEMANDED: “The Kuril Islands, including Habomai and Shikotan, are excluded from the jurisdiction of Japan.” AND only after that legal action, a Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR was issued on February 2, 1946, which read: “ All lands, subsoil and waters of Sakhalin and the Kul Islands are the property of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics " Thus, the Kuril Islands (both Northern and Southern), as well as about. Sakhalin, legally And in accordance with international law were returned to Russia . This could put an end to the “problem” of the Southern Kuril Islands and stop all further disputes. But the story with the Kuril Islands continues.

10.After the end of the Second World War US occupied Japan and turned it into their military base in the Far East. In September 1951 The USA, Great Britain and a number of other states (49 in total) signed Treaty of San Francisco with Japan, prepared in violation of the Potsdam Agreements without the participation of the Soviet Union . Therefore, our government did not join the agreement. However, in Art. 2, Chapter II of this treaty is written in black and white: “ Japan renounces all rights and claims... to the Kuril Islands and that part of Sakhalin and the adjacent islands , over which Japan acquired sovereignty by the Treaty of Portsmouth of September 5, 1905.” However, even after this, the story with the Kuril Islands does not end.

11.19 October 1956 The government of the Soviet Union, following the principles of friendship with neighboring states, signed with the Japanese government joint declaration, according to which the state of war between the USSR and Japan ended and peace, good neighborliness and friendly relations were restored between them. When signing the Declaration as a gesture of goodwill and nothing more it was promised to transfer to Japan the two southernmost islands of Shikotan and Habomai, but only after the conclusion of a peace treaty between the countries.

12.However The United States imposed a number of military agreements on Japan after 1956, replaced in 1960 by a single “Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security”, according to which US troops remained on its territory, and thus the Japanese islands turned into a springboard for aggression against the Soviet Union. In connection with this situation, the Soviet government declared to Japan that it was impossible to transfer the promised two islands to it.. And the same statement emphasized that, according to the declaration of October 19, 1956, “peace, good neighborliness and friendly relations” were established between the countries. Therefore, an additional peace treaty may not be required.
Thus, the problem of the South Kuril Islands does not exist . It was decided a long time ago. AND de jure and de facto the islands belong to Russia . In this regard, it might be appropriate remind the Japanese of their arrogant statement in 1905 g., and also indicate that Japan was defeated in World War II and therefore has no rights to any territories, even to her ancestral lands, except those that were given to her by the victors.
AND to our Foreign Ministry just as harshly, or in a softer diplomatic form you should have stated this to the Japanese and put an end to it, PERMANENTLY stopping all negotiations and even conversations on this non-existent problem that degrades the dignity and authority of Russia.
And again the “territorial issue”

However, starting from 1991 city, meetings of the President are held repeatedly Yeltsin and members of the Russian government, diplomats with Japanese government circles, during which The Japanese side every time persistently raises the issue of “northern Japanese territories.”
Thus, in the Tokyo Declaration 1993 g., signed by the President of Russia and the Prime Minister of Japan, was again the “presence of a territorial issue” was recognized, and both sides promised to “make efforts” to resolve it. The question arises: could our diplomats really not know that such declarations should not be signed, because recognition of the existence of a “territorial issue” is contrary to the national interests of Russia (Article 275 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation “ Treason»)??

As for the peace treaty with Japan, it is de facto and de jure in accordance with the Soviet-Japanese Declaration of October 19, 1956. not really needed. The Japanese do not want to conclude an additional official peace treaty, and there is no need. He more needed in Japan, as the side that was defeated in the Second World War, rather than Russia.

A Russian citizens should know that the “problem” of the Southern Kuril Islands is just a fake , her exaggeration, periodic media hype around her and the litigiousness of the Japanese - there is consequence of Japan's illegal claims in violation of its obligations to strictly comply with its recognized and signed international obligations. And Japan’s constant desire to reconsider the ownership of many territories in the Asia-Pacific region permeates Japanese politics throughout the twentieth century.

Why The Japanese, one might say, have their teeth in the Southern Kuril Islands and are trying to illegally take possession of them again? But because the economic and military-strategic importance of this region is extremely great for Japan, and even more so for Russia. This region of colossal seafood wealth(fish, living creatures, sea animals, vegetation, etc.), deposits of useful, including rare earth minerals, energy sources, mineral raw materials.

For example, January 29 this year. in the Vesti (RTR) program, short information slipped through: it was discovered on the island of Iturup large deposit of the rare earth metal Rhenium(the 75th element in the periodic table, and the only one in the world ).
Scientists allegedly calculated that to develop this deposit it would be enough to invest only 35 thousand dollars, but the profit from the extraction of this metal will allow us to bring all of Russia out of the crisis in 3-4 years . Apparently the Japanese know about this and that is why they are so persistently attacking the Russian government demanding that they give them the islands.

I must say that During the 50 years of ownership of the islands, the Japanese did not build or create anything major on them, except for light temporary buildings. Our border guards had to rebuild barracks and other buildings at outposts. The entire economic “development” of the islands, which the Japanese are shouting about to the whole world today, consisted in the predatory robbery of the islands' wealth . During the Japanese "development" from the islands seal rookeries and sea otter habitats have disappeared . Part of the livestock of these animals our Kuril residents have already restored .

Today, the economic situation of this entire island zone, as well as the whole of Russia, is difficult. Of course, significant measures are needed to support this region and care for Kuril residents. According to calculations by a group of State Duma deputies, it is possible to produce on the islands, as reported in the program “Parliamentary Hour” (RTR) on January 31 of this year, only fish products up to 2000 tons per year, with a net profit of about 3 billion dollars.
Militarily, the ridge of the Northern and Southern Kuriles with Sakhalin constitutes a complete closed infrastructure for the strategic defense of the Far East and the Pacific Fleet. They protect the Sea of ​​Okhotsk and turn it into an inland one. This is the area deployment and combat positions of our strategic submarines.

Without the Southern Kuril Islands we will have a hole in this defense. Control over the Kuril Islands ensures free access of the fleet to the ocean - after all, until 1945, our Pacific Fleet, starting in 1905, was practically locked in its bases in Primorye. Detection equipment on the islands provides long-range detection of air and surface enemies and the organization of anti-submarine defense of the approaches to the passages between the islands.

In conclusion, it is worth noting this feature in the relationship between the Russia-Japan-US triangle. It is the United States that confirms the “legality” of the islands’ ownership of Japan , against all odds international treaties signed by them .
If so, then our Ministry of Foreign Affairs has every right, in response to the claims of the Japanese, to propose that they demand the return of Japan to its “southern territories” - the Caroline, Marshall and Mariana Islands.
These archipelagos former colonies of Germany, captured by Japan in 1914. Japanese rule over these islands was sanctioned by the 1919 Treaty of Versailles. After the defeat of Japan, all these archipelagos came under US control. So Why shouldn't Japan demand that the United States return the islands to it? Or lack the spirit?
As you can see, there is clear double standard in Japanese foreign policy.

And one more fact that clarifies the overall picture of the return of our Far Eastern territories in September 1945 and the military significance of this region. The Kuril operation of the 2nd Far Eastern Front and the Pacific Fleet (August 18 - September 1, 1945) provided for the liberation of all the Kuril Islands and the capture of Hokkaido.

The annexation of this island to Russia would have important operational and strategic significance, since it would ensure the complete enclosure of the Sea of ​​Okhotsk by our island territories: Kuril Islands - Hokkaido - Sakhalin. But Stalin canceled this part of the operation, saying that with the liberation of the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin, we had resolved all our territorial issues in the Far East. A we don't need someone else's land . In addition, the capture of Hokkaido will cost us a lot of blood, unnecessary losses of sailors and paratroopers in the very last days of the war.

Stalin here showed himself to be a real statesman, caring for the country and its soldiers, and not an invader who coveted foreign territories that were very accessible in that situation for seizure.

Until the 19th century[edit | edit wiki text]
Before the arrival of the Russians and Japanese, the islands were inhabited by the Ainu. In their language, “kuru” meant “man,” which is where their second name “Kurilians” came from, and then the name of the archipelago.

The first information about the islands was obtained by the Japanese during an expedition to Hokkaido and Sakhalin in 1635. In 1644, following the results of the expeditions of 1635-1637. The first Japanese map of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands was compiled in Hokkaido.

In Russia, the first official mention of the Kuril Islands dates back to 1646, and is associated with reports on the campaigns of Ivan Yuryevich Moskvitin. In August 1711, a detachment of Kamchatka Cossacks under the leadership of Danila Antsiferov and Ivan Kozyrevsky first landed on the northernmost island of Shumshu, defeating a detachment of local Ainu here, and then on the second island of the ridge - Paramushir.

In 1738-1739, a scientific expedition took place under the leadership of the captain of the Russian fleet, Martyn Petrovich Shpanberg. This expedition was the first to map the Lesser Kuril Ridge (Shikotan and Habomai islands). Based on the results of the expedition, the atlas “General Map of Russia” was compiled depicting the 40 islands of the Kuril archipelago. State cross signs and copper plaques with the inscription “Land of Russian Dominion” were installed on the islands. In 1786, Empress Catherine II declared all the islands on the map as “lands acquired by Russian navigators” and ordered them to be transferred under the control of Kamchatka. This decree was published in foreign languages. After publication, not a single state challenged Russia’s rights to the Kuril Islands. Moreover, to send their ships to the Kuril Islands, permission was sought from the Russian authorities [source not specified 175 days].

XIX century[edit | edit wiki text]

General Map of the State of Japan, 1809
On February 7, 1855, Japan and Russia signed the first Russian-Japanese treaty - the Shimoda Treaty on Trade and Borders. The document established the border of the countries between the islands of Iturup and Urup. The islands of Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and the Habomai group of islands went to Japan, and the rest were recognized as Russian possessions. That is why February 7 has been celebrated annually in Japan as Northern Territories Day since 1981. At the same time, questions about the status of Sakhalin remained unresolved, which led to conflicts between Russian and Japanese merchants and sailors.

On May 7, 1875, the Treaty of St. Petersburg was signed, according to which Russia transferred to Japan the rights to all 18 Kuril Islands in exchange for the Japanese part of Sakhalin. Thus the borders were finally settled.

Russo-Japanese War[edit | edit wiki text]

Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands on a map of 1912
In 1905, as a result of the Russo-Japanese War, the Portsmouth Peace Treaty was signed, according to which Russia ceded the southern part of Sakhalin to Japan.

USSR Statement[edit | edit wiki text]
On January 20, 1925, after lengthy and difficult negotiations in Beijing, Japan and the USSR established diplomatic relations by signing the Treaty of Beijing. The USSR was forced to recognize the situation that arose in 1905 as a result of the Russo-Japanese War, but refused to acknowledge “political responsibility” for the Treaty of Portsmouth.

Picnic on Etorofu (now Iturup), 1933
«
...the Commissioner of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics has the honor to declare that the recognition by his government of the validity of the Portsmouth Treaty of September 5, 1905 in no way means that the government of the Union shares with the former tsarist government political responsibility for the conclusion of the said treaty.

»
World War II[edit | edit wiki text]
In June 1941, the countries of the Hitler coalition, except Japan, which complied with the Neutrality Pact concluded in April, declared war on the USSR (Great Patriotic War), and in the same year Japan attacked the United States, starting the war in the Pacific.

The Cairo Declaration of November 27, 1943 stated that the goal of the Allied Powers (USA, UK and China) was to strip Japan of all the Pacific islands it had captured or occupied since the outbreak of the First World War. This statement also stated that Japan should be deprived of territories it had seized through violence (particularly its colonies of Korea and Taiwan).

Map of Japan and Korea, published by the National Geographic Society of the United States, 1945. Detail. The signature in red under the Kuril Islands reads: “In 1945, in Yalta, it was agreed that Russia would regain Karafuto and the Kuril Islands.”
On February 11, 1945, at the Yalta Conference, the USSR, USA and Great Britain reached a written agreement on the Soviet Union’s entry into the war with Japan, subject to the return of South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands to it after the end of the war (Yalta Agreement of the Heads of Government of the USA, USSR and Great Britain on Far East Issues) . According to the terms of the agreement, the Soviet Union must enter the war no later than three months after the victory over Germany.

On April 5, 1945, V. M. Molotov received the Japanese Ambassador to the USSR Naotake Sato and, on behalf of the Soviet government, made a statement about the denunciation (in international law, the refusal of one of the parties to an international treaty to implement it) of the Soviet-Japanese Neutrality Pact.

The Potsdam Declaration of July 26, 1945 states that the terms of the Cairo Declaration will be fulfilled and Japanese sovereignty will be limited to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku and those smaller islands that the allies specify - without mentioning the Kuril Islands. The Cairo Declaration states that Japan must be deprived of those territories that it seized by force as a result of its aggression.

On August 8, 1945, exactly three months after the surrender of Germany, the USSR officially declared war on Japan and began military operations against it the next day. The Southern Kuril Islands were occupied by Soviet troops in August-September during the Kuril Landing Operation. After the signing of the Act of Surrender of Japan on September 2, garrisons were landed on the islands of the Lesser Kuril Ridge (Shikotan Island was occupied on September 1). The last landing of the garrison during the landing operation was carried out on September 4, 1945 on Fox Islands. The operation in the Southern Kuril Islands as a whole represented the acceptance of the surrender of the Japanese troops.

Occupation of Japan[edit | edit wiki text]
After the surrender, Japan was occupied by Allied forces.

On January 29, 1946, Memorandum No. 677 of the Commander-in-Chief of the Allied Powers, General Douglas MacArthur, excluded the Kuril Islands (Chishima Islands), the Habomai (Habomadze) group of islands, and Shikotan Island from Japanese territory.

On February 2, 1946, in accordance with the Decree of the Presidium of the USSR Armed Forces, the South Sakhalin Region was formed in these territories as part of the Khabarovsk Territory of the RSFSR, which on January 2, 1947 became part of the newly formed Sakhalin Region as part of the RSFSR.

Treaty of San Francisco (1951)
On September 8, 1951, a peace treaty was concluded in San Francisco between Japan and the allies, according to which Japan renounced all rights to the Kuril Islands and South Sakhalin. At the same time, according to the official position of modern Japan, Iturup, Shikotan, Kunashir and Habomai were not part of the Kuril Islands (Chishima Islands), and Japan did not abandon them. Representatives of the USSR proposed to amend the treaty to recognize the sovereignty of the USSR over South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands, but this and a number of other proposals were not taken into account, so the USSR, Poland and Czechoslovakia did not sign the treaty. Moreover, in 1951, the Japanese Foreign Ministry believed that the phrase Kuril Islands meant all the islands of both the Greater and Lesser Kuril chains. [not in the source 320 days]

San Francisco Peace Treaty (1951). Chapter II. Territory.

C) Japan renounces all rights, title and claims to the Kuril Islands and to that part of Sakhalin Island and the adjacent islands over which Japan acquired sovereignty under the Treaty of Portsmouth of September 5, 1905.

Post-war agreements[edit | edit wiki text]
Wikisource logo Wikisource has texts on the topic
Soviet-Japanese Declaration of 1956
On October 19, 1956, the USSR and Japan adopted the Moscow Declaration, which ended the state of war and restored diplomatic relations between the two countries, and also recorded the USSR’s consent to the transfer of the islands of Habomai and Shikotan to Japan, but only after the conclusion of a peace treaty. However, later the Japanese side refused to sign a peace treaty under pressure from the United States, which threatened that if Japan withdraws its claims to the islands of Kunashir and Iturup, the Ryukyu archipelago with the island of Okinawa, which, on the basis of Article 3 of the San Francisco Peace Treaty, would not be returned to Japan. was then under US control.

Joint Declaration of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and Japan (1956). Article 9.

The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and Japan agreed to continue negotiations on concluding a Peace Treaty after the restoration of normal diplomatic relations between the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and Japan.

At the same time, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, meeting the wishes of Japan and taking into account the interests of the Japanese state, agrees to the transfer to Japan of the islands of Habomai and the island of Shikotan with the fact that the actual transfer of these islands to Japan will be made after the conclusion of the Peace Treaty between the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and Japan .

On January 19, 1960, Japan signed the United States-Japan Cooperation and Security Treaty with the United States, thereby extending the Security Pact signed on September 8, 1951, which was the legal basis for the presence of American troops on Japanese territory. On January 27, 1960, the USSR stated that since this agreement was directed against the USSR and the PRC, the Soviet government refused to consider the issue of transferring the islands to Japan, since this would lead to an expansion of the territory used by American troops.

Throughout the second half of the 20th century, the question of the ownership of the southern group of the Kuril islands Iturup, Shikotan, Kunashir and Habomai (in the Japanese interpretation - the question of the “northern territories”) remained the main stumbling block in Japanese-Soviet (later Japanese-Russian) relations. At the same time, until the end of the Cold War, the USSR did not recognize the existence of a territorial dispute with Japan and always considered the southern Kuril Islands as an integral part of its territory.

In 1993, the Tokyo Declaration on Russian-Japanese relations was signed, which states that Russia is the legal successor of the USSR and all agreements signed between the USSR and Japan will be recognized by both Russia and Japan. The parties’ desire to resolve the issue of the territorial ownership of the four southern islands of the Kuril chain was also recorded, which in Japan was regarded as a success and, to a certain extent, raised hopes of resolving the issue in favor of Tokyo.

XXI century[edit | edit wiki text]
On November 14, 2004, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, on the eve of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s visit to Japan, stated that Russia, as a successor state of the USSR, recognizes the 1956 Declaration as existing and is ready to conduct territorial negotiations with Japan on its basis. This formulation of the question caused a lively discussion among Russian politicians. Vladimir Putin supported the position of the Foreign Ministry, stipulating that Russia “will fulfill all its obligations” only “to the extent that our partners are ready to fulfill these agreements.” Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi responded by saying that Japan was not satisfied with the transfer of only two islands: “If the ownership of all the islands is not determined, the peace treaty will not be signed.” At the same time, the Japanese prime minister promised to show flexibility in determining the timing of the transfer of the islands.

On December 14, 2004, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld expressed his readiness to assist Japan in resolving the dispute with Russia over the southern Kuril Islands.

In 2005, Russian President Vladimir Putin expressed his readiness to resolve the territorial dispute in accordance with the provisions of the Soviet-Japanese Declaration of 1956, that is, with the transfer of Habomai and Shikotan to Japan, but the Japanese side did not compromise.

On August 16, 2006, a Japanese fishing schooner was detained by Russian border guards. The schooner refused to obey the commands of the border guards, and warning fire was opened on it. During the incident, one member of the schooner's crew was fatally wounded in the head. This caused a sharp protest from the Japanese side; it demanded the immediate release of the body of the deceased and the release of the crew. Both sides said the incident occurred in their own territorial waters. In 50 years of dispute over the islands, this is the first recorded death.

December 13, 2006. The head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, Taro Aso, at a meeting of the foreign policy committee of the lower house of representatives of parliament spoke in favor of dividing the southern part of the disputed Kuril Islands in half with Russia. There is a point of view that in this way the Japanese side hopes to solve a long-standing problem in Russian-Japanese relations. However, immediately after Taro Aso’s statement, the Japanese Foreign Ministry disavowed his words, emphasizing that they were misinterpreted.

July 2, 2007. To reduce tensions between the two countries, Japanese Cabinet Secretary Yasuhisa Shiozaki proposed, and Russian Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Naryshkin accepted, Japanese proposals for assistance in the development of the Far Eastern region. It is planned to develop nuclear energy, lay optical Internet cables through Russian territory to connect Europe and Asia, develop infrastructure, as well as cooperation in the field of tourism, ecology and security. This proposal was previously considered in June 2007 at a G8 meeting between Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

July 1, 2008. “... a topic on which we have not yet been able to agree is the border issue...” “We must move forward, discuss this topic in accordance with the declarations that were previously made, we should not try to achieve maximum results in a short period, because that, most likely, they are impossible, but we must openly discuss both those ideas that already exist and those ideas that are being formed,” said Russian President D. A. Medvedev on the eve of the G8 meeting.

May 21, 2009. Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso, during a meeting of the upper house of parliament, called the southern Kuril Islands “illegally occupied territories” and said that he was waiting for Russia to propose approaches to solving this problem. Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Andrei Nesterenko commented on this statement as “illegal” and “politically incorrect.”

June 11, 2009. The lower house of the Japanese parliament approved amendments to the law “On special measures to promote the resolution of the issue of the Northern Territories and similar ones,” which contain a provision regarding Japan’s ownership of the four islands of the South Kuril ridge. The Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement in which it called such actions by the Japanese side inappropriate and unacceptable. On June 24, 2009, a statement by the State Duma was published, in which, in particular, the opinion of the State Duma was stated that in the current conditions, efforts to resolve the problem of a peace treaty, in fact, have lost both political and practical perspective and will make sense only if the amendments adopted by Japanese parliamentarians are disavowed. On July 3, 2009, the amendments were approved by the Upper House of the Japanese Diet.

On September 14, 2009, Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama said that he hoped to make progress in negotiations with Russia on the southern Kuril Islands "over the next six months to a year."

On September 23, 2009, at a meeting with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, Hatoyama spoke of his desire to resolve the territorial dispute and conclude a peace treaty with Russia.

February 7, 2010. On February 7, since 1982, Japan has celebrated Northern Territories Day (as the southern Kuril Islands are called). Cars with loudspeakers are running around Tokyo, from which demands for the return of four islands to Japan and the music of military marches are heard. Also an event of this day is the speech of Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama to participants in the movement for the return of the northern territories. This year, Hatoyama said that Japan was not satisfied with the return of only two islands and that he would make every effort to return all four islands within the lifetime of current generations. He also noted that it is very important for Russia to be friends with such an economically and technologically developed country as Japan. The words that these were “illegally occupied territories” were not said.

On April 1, 2010, official representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry Andrei Nesterenko made a comment in which he announced the approval on April 1 by the Government of Japan of changes and additions to the so-called. “The main course to promote the solution of the problem of the northern territories” and stated that the repetition of unfounded territorial claims against Russia cannot benefit the dialogue on the issue of concluding a Russian-Japanese peace treaty, as well as maintaining normal contacts between the southern Kuril Islands, which are part of the Sakhalin regions of Russia, and Japan.

On September 29, 2010, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev announced his intention to visit the southern Kuril Islands. Japanese Foreign Minister Seiji Maehara made a statement in response, saying that Medvedev’s possible trip to these territories would create “serious obstacles” in bilateral relations. On October 30, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in an interview that he sees “no connection” between the Russian President’s possible visit to the Kuril Islands and Russian-Japanese relations: “The President himself decides which areas of the Russian Federation he visits.”

Dmitry Medvedev in Kunashir
Wikinews logoWikinews on the topic:
Scandal over Medvedev's trip to the Kuril Islands
On November 1, 2010, Dmitry Medvedev arrived on Kunashir Island, this was the first visit of Russia's top leader to the disputed territory. Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan expressed “extreme regret” in this regard: “The four northern islands are the territory of our country, and we have consistently taken this position. The President's trip there is extremely regrettable. I am clearly aware that territories are the basis of national sovereignty. The areas that the USSR entered after August 15, 1945 are our territories. We have consistently maintained this position and insisted on their return." Japanese Foreign Minister Seiji Maehara confirmed the Japanese position: “It is known that these are our ancestral territories. The Russian President’s trip there hurts the feelings of our people and is extremely regrettable.” The Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement in which the Japanese side indicated that “the attempts it is making to influence the choice by the President of the Russian Federation D. A. Medvedev of his travel routes across the territory of the Russian Federation are absolutely unacceptable and incompatible with the good neighborly nature of Russian-Japanese relations that have developed in recent times.” years." At the same time, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov sharply criticized the Japanese side's reaction to President Medvedev's visit, calling it unacceptable. Sergei Lavrov also emphasized that these islands are Russian territory.

On November 2, Japanese Foreign Minister Seiji Maehara announced that the head of the Japanese mission in Russia would temporarily return to Tokyo to receive further information about the Russian president’s visit to the Kuril Islands. A week and a half later, the Japanese ambassador returned to Russia. At the same time, the meeting between Dmitry Medvedev and Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Congress, scheduled for November 13-14, was not cancelled. Also on November 2, information appeared that President Dmitry Medvedev would make a return visit to the Kuril Islands.

On November 13, the Foreign Ministers of Japan and Russia, Seiji Maehara and Sergei Lavrov, at a meeting in Yokohama, confirmed their intention to develop bilateral relations in all areas and agreed to search for a mutually acceptable solution to the territorial issue.

On September 11, 2011, Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation Nikolai Patrushev visited the southern Kuril Islands, where he held a meeting with the leadership of the Sakhalin region, and visited the border post on Tanfilyev Island, the closest to Japan. At the meeting in the village of Yuzhno-Kurilsk on Kunashir Island, issues of ensuring the security of the region, the progress of construction of civil and border infrastructure facilities were discussed, security issues were considered during the construction and operation of the port berthing complex in Yuzhno-Kurilsk and the reconstruction of Mendeleevo airport. Secretary General of the Japanese Government Osamu Fujimura said that Nikolai Patrushev's visit to the southern Kuril Islands deeply regrets Japan.

On February 14, 2012, the Chief of the Russian General Staff of the Armed Forces, Army General Nikolai Makarov, announced that the Russian Ministry of Defense would create two military camps on the southern Kuril Islands (Kunashir and Iturup) in 2013.

On March 2, 2012, the Japanese government at its meeting decided not to use the term “illegally occupied territories” in relation to the four islands of the southern Kuril Islands and replace it with a softer term in relation to Russia - “occupied without legal grounds.”

On July 3, 2012, Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev visited the South Kuril island of Kunashir for the second time in two years. His plane landed at Mendeleevo airport. The Prime Minister was accompanied by Deputy Prime Minister Olga Golodets, Minister of Far Eastern Affairs Viktor Ishaev, Minister of Regional Development Oleg Govorun and Sakhalin Governor Alexander Khoroshavin. The head of government inspected a number of industrial and social facilities in Kunashir, and also talked with residents of the island. The visit to the Kuril Islands was made as part of the prime minister’s large working trip to the Far East on July 2-5. Japan's reaction to Medvedev's new visit was swift. First, the Russian Ambassador to Tokyo, Yevgeny Afanasyev, was summoned to the Japanese Foreign Ministry, where they demanded clarification from him, and then the head of the ministry, Koichiro Gemba, warned that the visit would have a detrimental effect on bilateral relations. “Medvedev’s visit to Kunashir is a tub of cold water for our relations,” he said. The ministry noted that the visit could undermine the mutual agreement to discuss the territorial problem “in a quiet atmosphere.”

Russia's basic position[edit | edit wiki text]

The position of both countries on the issue of ownership of the islands. Russia considers all of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands its territory. Japan considers the southern Kuril Islands its territory, the northern Kuril Islands and southern Sakhalin as territory with an unsettled status, and northern Sakhalin as Russian territory.
Moscow’s principled position is that the southern Kuril Islands became part of the USSR, of which Russia became the legal successor, are an integral part of the territory of the Russian Federation on legal grounds following the Second World War and enshrined in the UN Charter, and Russian sovereignty over them, which has the corresponding international -legal confirmation is beyond doubt. According to media reports, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation in 2012 said that the problem of the Kuril Islands could be solved in Russia only by holding a referendum. Subsequently, the Russian Foreign Ministry officially denied raising the question of any referendum: “This is a gross distortion of the minister’s words. We regard such interpretations as provocative. No sane politician would ever put this issue to a referendum.” In addition, the Russian authorities once again officially confirmed the unconditional indisputability of the ownership of the islands to Russia, stating that in connection with this, the question of any referendum cannot by definition arise. On February 18, 2014, the Russian Foreign Minister stated that “Russia does not consider the situation with Japan on the issue of borders as some kind of territorial dispute.” The Russian Federation, the minister explained, proceeds from the reality that there are generally recognized and enshrined in the UN Charter results of the Second World War.

Japan's basic position[edit | edit wiki text]
Style problems
This article or section contains too many quotations or quotations that are too long.
Excessive and overly large quotations should be summarized and rewritten in your own words.
Perhaps these quotations would be more appropriate on Wikiquote or Wikisource.
Japan's basic position on this issue is formulated in 4 points:

(1) The Northern Territories are centuries-old Japanese territories that continue to be under illegal Russian occupation. The government of the United States of America also consistently supports Japan's position.

(2) In order to resolve this issue and conclude a peace treaty as quickly as possible, Japan is vigorously continuing negotiations with Russia on the basis of agreements already reached, such as the 1956 Japan-Soviet Joint Declaration, the 1993 Tokyo Declaration, the 2001 Irkutsk Statement and the Japanese-Soviet Declaration. Russian action plan 2003.

(3) According to the Japanese position, if it is confirmed that the Northern Territories belong to Japan, Japan is ready to be flexible in the time and procedure for their return. In addition, since Japanese citizens living in the Northern Territories were forcibly evicted by Joseph Stalin, Japan is willing to reach an agreement with the Russian government so that Russian citizens living there will not suffer the same tragedy. In other words, after the return of the islands to Japan, Japan intends to respect the rights, interests and desires of the Russians currently living on the islands.

(4) The Government of Japan has urged the Japanese population not to visit the Northern Territories outside of the visa-free procedure until the territorial dispute is resolved. Likewise, Japan cannot permit any activity, including the economic activity of third parties, that could be considered subject to Russia's “jurisdiction,” nor may it permit any activity that would imply Russia's “jurisdiction” over the Northern Territories. It is Japan's policy to take appropriate measures to prevent such activities.

Original text (English) [show]
Original text (Japanese) [show]
Ainu position[edit | edit wiki text]
The Ainu Birikamoshiri Society demanded that Russia and Japan stop the debate over the disputed islands. Corresponding statements were sent to the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Russian Embassy in Tokyo. In their opinion, the Ainu people have sovereign rights to the four southern islands of the Kuril archipelago - Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and Habomai.

The defensive aspect and the danger of armed conflict[edit | edit wiki text]
In connection with the territorial dispute over the ownership of the southern Kuril Islands, there is a danger of military conflict with Japan. Currently, the Kuril Islands are defended by the 18th Machine Gun Artillery Division (the only one in Russia), and Sakhalin is defended by a motorized rifle brigade. These formations are armed with 41 T-80 tanks, 120 MT-LB transporters, 20 coastal anti-ship missile systems, 130 artillery systems, 60 anti-aircraft weapons (Buk, Tunguska, Shilka complexes), 6 Mi-8 helicopters.

The Japanese armed forces consist of: 1 tank and 9 infantry divisions, 16 brigades (about 1,000 tanks, more than 1,000 infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers, about 2,000 artillery systems, 90 attack helicopters), 200 F-15 fighters, 50 F-2 fighter-bombers and up to 100 F-4.

The Russian Pacific Fleet consists of 3 nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs), 4 nuclear-powered cruise missile submarines (SSGNs), 3 multi-purpose nuclear submarines, 7 diesel boats, 1 cruiser, 1 destroyer, 4 large anti-submarine ships, 4 landing ships, 14 missile boats, about 30 warships of other types (minesweepers, small anti-submarine ships, etc.).

The Japanese fleet consists of 20 diesel submarines, a light aircraft carrier, 44 destroyers (6 of them with the Aegis system), 6 frigates, 7 missile boats, 5 landing ships and about 40 auxiliary ships.

Political-economic and military-strategic value of the issue[edit | edit wiki text]
Ownership of the islands and navigation[edit | edit wiki text]
It is often stated that the only Russian ice-free straits of Catherine and Frieza from the Sea of ​​Okhotsk to the Pacific Ocean lie between the islands, and thus, if the islands are transferred to Japan, the Russian Pacific Fleet will have difficulty entering the Pacific Ocean in the winter months:

The head of the Federal Main Directorate of the Sakhalin MAP of the Ministry of Transport of the Russian Federation, Egorov M.I., during the report, especially warned that in the event of a concession to the territorial demands of Japan, Russia will lose the ice-free Frieze Strait and the Catherine Strait. Thus, Russia will lose free access to the Pacific Ocean. Japan will definitely make passage through the straits paid or limited.

As stated in the Law of the Sea:

A state has the right to temporarily suspend peaceful passage through certain sections of its territorial waters if this is urgently required by the interests of its security.
However, restricting Russian shipping - except for warships in conflict - in these straits, and even more so introducing a fee, would contradict some provisions of the generally recognized in international law (including that recognized in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which Japan signed and ratified) the right of innocent passage, especially since Japan does not have archipelagic waters [source not specified 1449 days]:

If a foreign merchant vessel complies with these requirements, the coastal State must not impede innocent passage through its territorial waters and must take all necessary measures to ensure safe innocent passage - in particular, declare for general information all dangers to navigation known to it. Foreign vessels should not be subject to any passage charges other than fees and charges for services actually rendered, which should be collected without any discrimination.
Further, almost the entire remaining water area of ​​the Sea of ​​Okhotsk freezes and the ports of the Sea of ​​Okhotsk freeze, and, therefore, shipping without icebreakers is still impossible here; The La Perouse Strait, connecting the Sea of ​​Okhotsk with the Sea of ​​Japan, is also clogged with ice in winter and is navigable only with the help of icebreakers:

The Sea of ​​Okhotsk has the most severe ice regime. Ice appears here at the end of October and lasts until July. In winter, the entire northern part of the sea is covered with thick floating ice, which in some places freezes into a vast area of ​​stationary ice. The boundary of the stationary fast ice extends out to sea for 40-60 miles. A constant current carries ice from the western regions to the southern part of the Sea of ​​Okhotsk. As a result, an accumulation of floating ice forms near the southern islands of the Kuril ridge in winter, and the La Perouse Strait is clogged with ice and is navigable only with the help of icebreakers.
The shortest sea route from Vladivostok to Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky does not pass through the southern Kuril straits; shipping goes through the Fourth Kuril Strait (south of Paramushir Island).

Moreover, the shortest route from Vladivostok to the Pacific Ocean lies through the ice-free Sangar Strait between the islands of Hokkaido and Honshu. This strait is not covered by Japanese territorial waters, although it can be included in territorial waters unilaterally at any time.

Natural resources[edit | edit wiki text]
On the island of Iturup there is the world's largest deposit of rhenium in the form of the mineral rhenite (discovered in 1992 on the Kudryavy volcano), which is of great economic importance. According to the Institute of Volcanology and Geodynamics of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, the Kudryavy volcano releases 20 tons of rhenium every year (even though the world production of rhenium was up to 30 tons, and the price of 1 kg of rhenium was up to $3,500). Currently, the main industrial source of rhenium in the world is copper and molybdenum ores, in which rhenium is an associated component.

There are areas of possible oil and gas accumulation on the islands. Reserves are estimated at 364 million tons of oil equivalent. In addition, there may be gold on the islands. In June 2011, it became known that Russia was inviting Japan to jointly develop oil and gas fields located in the Kuril Islands area.

The islands are adjacent to a 200-mile fishing zone. Thanks to the South Kuril Islands, this zone covers the entire water area of ​​the Sea of ​​Okhotsk, with the exception of a small coastal area near the island. Hokkaido. Thus, in economic terms, the Sea of ​​Okhotsk is actually an inland sea of ​​Russia with an annual fish catch of about three million tons.

Positions of third countries[edit | edit wiki text]
Mao Zedong expressed support for Japan's position at a meeting with Japanese socialists in 1964, but later that year referred to his remarks as a "blank shot."

As of 2014, the United States believes that Japan has sovereignty over the disputed islands, while noting that Article 5 of the US-Japan Security Treaty (that an attack on either side in Japanese-administered territory is considered a threat to both sides) does not apply to these islands as not governed by Japan. The position of the Bush administration was similar. There is debate in the academic literature as to whether the US position was previously different. It is believed that in the 1950s, the sovereignty of the island was linked to the sovereignty of the Ryukyu Islands, which had a similar legal status. In 2011, the press service of the US Embassy in the Russian Federation noted that this US position has existed for a long time and individual politicians only confirm it.

See also[edit | edit wiki text]