Disputes about the four South Kuril Islands, which currently belong to the Russian Federation, have been going on for quite some time. As a result of agreements and wars signed at different times, this land changed hands several times. Currently, these islands are the cause of an unresolved territorial dispute between Russia and Japan.

Discovery of the islands

The issue of the discovery of the Kuril Islands is controversial. According to the Japanese side, the Japanese were the first to set foot on the islands in 1644. A map of that time with the designations “Kunashiri”, “Etorofu” and others marked on it is carefully preserved in the National Museum of Japan. And Russian pioneers, the Japanese believe, first came to the Kuril ridge only during the time of Tsar Peter I, in 1711, and on the Russian map of 1721 these islands are called “Japanese Islands”.

But in reality the situation is different: firstly, the Japanese received the first information about the Kuril Islands (from the Ainu language - “kuru” means “a person who came from nowhere”) from the local Ainu residents (the oldest non-Japanese population of the Kuril Islands and the Japanese Islands) during an expedition to Hokkaido in 1635. Moreover, the Japanese did not reach the Kuril lands themselves due to constant conflicts with the local population.

It should be noted that the Ainu were hostile to the Japanese, and initially treated the Russians well, considering them their “brothers”, due to the similarity in appearance and methods of communication between the Russians and small nations.

Secondly, the Kuril Islands were discovered by the Dutch expedition of Maarten Gerritsen de Vries (Fries) in 1643, the Dutch were looking for the so-called. "Golden Lands" The Dutch did not like the lands, and they sold their detailed description and map to the Japanese. It was on the basis of Dutch data that the Japanese compiled their maps.

Thirdly, the Japanese at that time did not control not only the Kuril Islands, but even Hokkaido; only their stronghold was in its southern part. The Japanese began conquering the island at the beginning of the 17th century, and the fight against the Ainu continued for two centuries. That is, if the Russians were interested in expansion, then Hokkaido could become a Russian island. This was made easier by the good attitude of the Ainu towards the Russians and their hostility towards the Japanese. There are also records of this fact. The Japanese state of that time did not officially consider itself the sovereign of not only Sakhalin and the Kuril lands, but also Hokkaido (Matsumae) - this was confirmed in a circular by the head of the Japanese government, Matsudaira, during Russian-Japanese negotiations on the border and trade in 1772.

Fourthly, Russian explorers visited the islands before the Japanese. In the Russian state, the first mention of the Kuril lands dates back to 1646, when Nekhoroshko Ivanovich Kolobov gave a report to Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich about the campaigns of Ivan Yuryevich Moskvitin and spoke about the bearded Ainu inhabiting the Kuril Islands. In addition, Dutch, Scandinavian and German medieval chronicles and maps report about the first Russian settlements in the Kuril Islands at that time. The first reports about the Kuril lands and their inhabitants reached the Russians in the middle of the 17th century.

In 1697, during the expedition of Vladimir Atlasov to Kamchatka, new information about the islands appeared; the Russians explored the islands as far as Simushir (an island in the middle group of the Great Ridge of the Kuril Islands).

XVIII century

Peter I knew about the Kuril Islands; in 1719, the tsar sent a secret expedition to Kamchatka under the leadership of Ivan Mikhailovich Evreinov and Fyodor Fedorovich Luzhin. Marine surveyor Evreinov and surveyor-cartographer Luzhin had to determine whether there was a strait between Asia and America. The expedition reached the island of Simushir in the south and brought local residents and rulers to swear allegiance to the Russian state.

In 1738-1739, the navigator Martyn Petrovich Shpanberg (Danish by origin) walked along the entire Kuril ridge, put all the islands he encountered on the map, including the entire Small Kuril ridge (these are 6 large and a number of small islands that are separated from the Great Kuril ridge in the South -Kuril Strait). He explored the lands as far as Hokkaido (Matsumaya), bringing the local Ainu rulers to swear allegiance to the Russian state.

Subsequently, the Russians avoided voyages to the southern islands and developed the northern territories. Unfortunately, at this time, abuses against the Ainu were noted not only by the Japanese, but also by the Russians.

In 1771, the Lesser Kuril Ridge was removed from Russia and came under the protectorate of Japan. The Russian authorities sent the nobleman Antipin with the translator Shabalin to rectify the situation. They were able to persuade the Ainu to restore Russian citizenship. In 1778-1779, Russian envoys brought more than 1.5 thousand people from Iturup, Kunashir and even Hokkaido into citizenship. In 1779, Catherine II freed those who had accepted Russian citizenship from all taxes.

In 1787, the “Extensive Land Description of the Russian State...” contained a list of the Kuril Islands up to Hokkaido-Matsumaya, the status of which had not yet been determined. Although the Russians did not control the lands south of Urup Island, the Japanese were active there.

In 1799, by order of seii-taishogun Tokugawa Ienari, he headed the Tokugawa Shogunate, two outposts were built on Kunashir and Iturup, and permanent garrisons were placed there. Thus, the Japanese secured the status of these territories within Japan by military means.

Satellite image of the Lesser Kuril Ridge

Treaty

In 1845, the Empire of Japan unilaterally declared its power over all of Sakhalin and the Kuril ridge. This naturally caused a violent negative reaction from the Russian Emperor Nicholas I. But the Russian Empire did not have time to take action; the events of the Crimean War prevented it. Therefore, it was decided to make concessions and not bring matters to war.

On February 7, 1855, the first diplomatic agreement was concluded between Russia and Japan - Treaty of Shimoda. It was signed by Vice Admiral E.V. Putyatin and Toshiakira Kawaji. According to Article 9 of the treaty, “permanent peace and sincere friendship between Russia and Japan” were established. Japan ceded the islands from Iturup and to the south, Sakhalin was declared a joint, indivisible possession. Russians in Japan received consular jurisdiction, Russian ships received the right to enter the ports of Shimoda, Hakodate, and Nagasaki. The Russian Empire received most favored nation treatment in trade with Japan and received the right to open consulates in ports open to Russians. That is, in general, especially considering the difficult international situation of Russia, the agreement can be assessed positively. Since 1981, the Japanese have celebrated the day of signing the Shimoda Treaty as “Northern Territories Day.”

It should be noted that in fact, the Japanese received the right to the “Northern Territories” only for “permanent peace and sincere friendship between Japan and Russia,” most favored nation treatment in trade relations. Their further actions de facto annulled this agreement.

Initially, the provision of the Shimoda Treaty on joint ownership of Sakhalin Island was more beneficial for the Russian Empire, which was actively colonizing this territory. The Japanese Empire did not have a good one, so at that time it did not have such an opportunity. But later the Japanese began to intensively populate the territory of Sakhalin, and the question of its ownership began to become increasingly controversial and acute. The contradictions between Russia and Japan were resolved by signing the St. Petersburg Treaty.

St. Petersburg Treaty. It was signed in the capital of the Russian Empire on April 25 (May 7), 1875. Under this agreement, the Empire of Japan transferred Sakhalin to Russia as full ownership, and in exchange received all the islands of the Kuril chain.

St. Petersburg Treaty of 1875 (Japanese Foreign Ministry Archives).

As a result of the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905 and Treaty of Portsmouth On August 23 (September 5), 1905, the Russian Empire, according to Article 9 of the agreement, ceded southern Sakhalin to Japan, south of 50 degrees north latitude. Article 12 contained an agreement to conclude a convention on Japanese fishing along the Russian shores of the Japanese, Okhotsk and Bering Seas.

After the death of the Russian Empire and the beginning of foreign intervention, the Japanese occupied Northern Sakhalin and participated in the occupation of the Far East. When the Bolshevik Party won the Civil War, Japan did not want to recognize the USSR for a long time. Only after the Soviet authorities canceled the status of the Japanese consulate in Vladivostok in 1924 and in the same year the USSR was recognized by Great Britain, France and China, the Japanese authorities decided to normalize relations with Moscow.

Beijing Treaty. On February 3, 1924, official negotiations between the USSR and Japan began in Beijing. Only on January 20, 1925, the Soviet-Japanese convention on the basic principles of relations between countries was signed. The Japanese pledged to withdraw their forces from the territory of Northern Sakhalin by May 15, 1925. The declaration of the USSR government, which was attached to the convention, emphasized that the Soviet government did not share with the former government of the Russian Empire political responsibility for the signing of the Portsmouth Peace Treaty of 1905. In addition, the convention enshrined the agreement of the parties that all agreements, treaties and conventions concluded between Russia and Japan before November 7, 1917, except for the Portsmouth Peace Treaty, should be revised.

In general, the USSR made great concessions: in particular, Japanese citizens, companies and associations were granted the rights to exploit natural raw materials throughout the Soviet Union. On July 22, 1925, a contract was signed to grant the Japanese Empire a coal concession, and on December 14, 1925, an oil concession in Northern Sakhalin. Moscow agreed to this agreement in order to stabilize the situation in the Russian Far East, since the Japanese supported the White Guards outside the USSR. But in the end, the Japanese began to systematically violate the convention and create conflict situations.

During the Soviet-Japanese negotiations that took place in the spring of 1941 regarding the conclusion of a neutrality treaty, the Soviet side raised the issue of liquidating Japan's concessions in Northern Sakhalin. The Japanese gave their written consent to this, but delayed the implementation of the agreement for 3 years. Only when the USSR began to gain the upper hand over the Third Reich did the Japanese government implement the agreement that had been given earlier. Thus, on March 30, 1944, a Protocol was signed in Moscow on the destruction of Japanese oil and coal concessions in Northern Sakhalin and the transfer of all Japanese concession property to the Soviet Union.

February 11, 1945 at the Yalta conference three great powers - the Soviet Union, the United States, Great Britain - reached a verbal agreement on the USSR's entry into the war with the Japanese Empire on the terms of the return of South Sakhalin and the Kuril ridge to it after the end of World War II.

In the Potsdam Declaration dated July 26, 1945, it was stated that Japanese sovereignty would be limited only to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku and other smaller islands, which would be designated by the victorious countries. The Kuril Islands were not mentioned.

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

According to San Francisco Peace Treaty dated September 8, 1951, the Japanese side renounced all rights to South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands. But the Japanese claim that Iturup, Shikotan, Kunashir and Habomai (islands of the Lesser Kuril Islands) were not part of the Chishima Islands (Kuril Islands) and they did not abandon them.

Negotiations in Portsmouth (1905) - from left to right: from the Russian side (far part of the table) - Planson, Nabokov, Witte, Rosen, Korostovets.

Further agreements

Joint Declaration. On October 19, 1956, the Soviet Union and Japan adopted a Joint Declaration. The document ended the state of war between the countries and restored diplomatic relations, and also spoke of Moscow’s consent to the transfer of the islands of Habomai and Shikotan to the Japanese side. But they were supposed to be handed over only after the signing of a peace treaty. However, later Japan was forced to refuse to sign a peace treaty with the USSR. The United States threatened not to give up Okinawa and the entire Ryukyu Archipelago to the Japanese if they renounced their claims to the other islands of the Lesser Kuril chain.

After Tokyo signed the Cooperation and Security Treaty with Washington in January 1960, extending the American military presence on the Japanese Islands, Moscow announced that it refused to consider the issue of transferring the islands to the Japanese side. The statement was justified by the security issue of the USSR and China.

In 1993 it was signed Tokyo Declaration about Russian-Japanese relations. It stated that the Russian Federation is the legal successor of the USSR and recognizes the 1956 agreement. Moscow expressed its readiness to begin negotiations regarding Japan's territorial claims. In Tokyo this was assessed as a sign of impending victory.

In 2004, the head of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Sergei Lavrov, made a statement that Moscow recognizes the 1956 Declaration and is ready to negotiate a peace treaty based on it. In 2004-2005, this position was confirmed by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

But the Japanese insisted on the transfer of 4 islands, so the issue was not resolved. Moreover, the Japanese gradually increased their pressure; for example, in 2009, the head of the Japanese government at a government meeting called the Lesser Kuril Ridge “illegally occupied territories.” In 2010 and early 2011, the Japanese became so excited that some military experts began to talk about the possibility of a new Russian-Japanese war. Only the spring natural disaster - the consequences of a tsunami and a terrible earthquake, the accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant - cooled Japan's ardor.

As a result, the loud statements of the Japanese led to Moscow declaring that the islands are the territory of the Russian Federation legally following the Second World War, this is enshrined in the UN Charter. And Russian sovereignty over the Kuril Islands, which has the appropriate international legal confirmation, is beyond doubt. Plans were also announced to develop the islands' economy and strengthen Russia's military presence there.

Strategic importance of the islands

Economic factor. The islands are economically underdeveloped, but they have deposits of valuable and rare earth metals - gold, silver, rhenium, titanium. The waters are rich in biological resources; the seas that wash the shores of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands are among the most productive areas of the World Ocean. The shelves, where hydrocarbon deposits are found, are also of great importance.

Political factor. The cession of the islands will sharply lower Russia’s status in the world, and there will be a legal opportunity to review other results of the Second World War. For example, they may demand that the Kaliningrad region be given to Germany or part of Karelia to Finland.

Military factor. The transfer of the South Kuril Islands will provide the Japanese and US naval forces with free access to the Sea of ​​Okhotsk. It will allow our potential adversaries to exercise control over strategically important strait zones, which will sharply worsen the deployment capabilities of the Russian Pacific Fleet, including nuclear submarines with intercontinental ballistic missiles. This will be a strong blow to the military security of the Russian Federation.

The dispute over the southernmost Kuril Islands - Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and Habomai - has been a point of tension between Japan and Russia since they were captured by the Soviet Union in 1945. More than 70 years later, Russian-Japanese relations are still not normal due to the ongoing territorial dispute. To a large extent, it was historical factors that prevented the solution of this issue. These include demographics, mentality, institutions, geography and economics—all of which encourage tough policies rather than compromise. The first four factors contribute to the continuation of the impasse, while the economy in the form of oil policy is associated with some hope of resolution.

Russia's claims to the Kuril Islands date back to the 17th century, resulting from periodic contacts with Japan through Hokkaido. In 1821, a de facto border was established, according to which Iturup became Japanese territory, and Russian land began with the island of Urup. Subsequently, according to the Treaty of Shimoda (1855) and the Treaty of St. Petersburg (1875), all four islands were recognized as Japanese territory. The last time the Kuril Islands changed their owner was as a result of World War II - in 1945 in Yalta, the Allies essentially agreed to transfer these islands to Russia.

The dispute over the islands became part of Cold War politics during the negotiations for the San Francisco Peace Treaty, Article 2c of which forced Japan to renounce all its claims to the Kuril Islands. However, the Soviet Union's refusal to sign this agreement left these islands in a state of uncertainty. In 1956, a joint Soviet-Japanese declaration was signed, which de facto meant the end of the state of war, but could not resolve the territorial conflict. After the ratification of the US-Japan Security Treaty in 1960, further negotiations ceased, and this continued until the 1990s.

However, after the end of the Cold War in 1991, a new opportunity to resolve this issue seemed to arise. Despite the turbulent events in world affairs, the positions of Japan and Russia on the Kuril Islands issue have not undergone much change since 1956, and the reason for this situation was five historical factors outside the Cold War.

The first factor is demographic. Japan's population is already declining due to low birth rates and aging, while Russia's population has been declining since 1992 due to excess alcohol consumption and other social ills. This shift, coupled with the weakening of international influence, has led to the emergence of backward-looking trends, and both nations are now largely trying to resolve the issue by looking back rather than forward. Given these attitudes, it can be concluded that the aging populations of Japan and Russia are making it impossible for Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and President Vladimir Putin to negotiate due to their deeply entrenched views on the Kuril Islands issue.

Context

Is Russia ready to return the two islands?

Sankei Shimbun 10/12/2016

Military construction in the Kuril Islands

The Guardian 06/11/2015

Is it possible to agree on the Kuril Islands?

BBC Russian Service 05/21/2015
All this also plays into the mentality and perceptions of the outside world, which are shaped by how history is taught and, more broadly, by how it is presented by the media and public opinion. For Russia, the collapse of the Soviet Union was a severe psychological blow, accompanied by a loss of status and power, as many former Soviet republics seceded. This significantly changed Russia's borders and created significant uncertainty about the future of the Russian nation. It is well known that in times of crisis, citizens often exhibit stronger feelings of patriotism and defensive nationalism. The Kuril Islands dispute fills a void in Russia and also provides an opportunity to speak out against perceived historical injustices committed by Japan.

The perception of Japan in Russia was largely shaped by the issue of the Kuril Islands, and this continued until the end of the Cold War. Anti-Japanese propaganda became common after the Russo-Japanese War of 1904–1905, and it was intensified by Japanese intervention during the Russian Civil War (1918–1922). This led many Russians to believe that as a result, all previously concluded treaties were annulled. However, Russia's victory over Japan in World War II ended the previous humiliation and strengthened the symbolic significance of the Kuril Islands, which came to represent (1) the irreversibility of the results of World War II and (2) Russia's status as a great power. From this point of view, the transfer of territory is seen as a revision of the outcome of the war. Therefore, control of the Kuril Islands remains of great psychological importance for the Russians.

Japan is trying to define its place in the world as a “normal” state, located next to an increasingly powerful China. The issue of the return of the Kuril Islands is directly related to the national identity of Japan, and these territories themselves are perceived as the last symbol of defeat in World War II. The Russian offensive and seizure of Japan's "inalienable territory" contributed to the victim mentality that became the dominant narrative after the end of the war.

This attitude is reinforced by Japan's conservative media, which often supports the government's foreign policies. In addition, nationalists often use the media to viciously attack academics and politicians who hint at the possibility of compromise on the issue, leaving little room for maneuver.

This, in turn, influences the political institutions of both Japan and Russia. In the 1990s, President Boris Yeltsin's position was so weak that he feared possible impeachment if the Kuril Islands were transferred to Japan. At the same time, the central Russian government was weakened as a result of the growing influence of regional politicians, including two governors of the Sakhalin region - Valentin Fedorov (1990 - 1993) and Igor Fakhrutdinov (1995 - 2003), who actively opposed the possible sale of the Kuril Islands to Japan. They relied on nationalist feelings, and this was enough to prevent the completion of the treaty and its implementation in the 1990s.

Since President Putin came to power, Moscow has brought regional governments under its influence, but other institutional factors have also contributed to the stalemate. One example is the idea that a situation must mature before some issue or problem can be resolved. During the initial period of his rule, President Putin had the opportunity, but did not have the desire, to negotiate with Japan over the Kuril Islands. Instead, he decided to spend his time and energy trying to resolve the Sino-Russian border conflict through the issue of the Kuril Islands.

Since returning to the presidency in 2013, Putin has become increasingly dependent on the support of nationalist forces, and it is unlikely that he will be willing to cede the Kuril Islands in any meaningful sense. Recent events in Crimea and Ukraine clearly demonstrate how far Putin is willing to go to protect Russia's national status.

Japanese political institutions, although they differ from Russian ones, also support a tough course of action in negotiations regarding the Kuril Islands. As a result of reforms carried out after the end of World War II, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) occupies a dominant position in Japan. With the exception of the period from 1993 to 1995 and from 2009 to 2012, the LDP has had and continues to have a majority in the national legislative assembly, and in fact its party platform on the return of the four southern islands of the Kuril chain has been an integral part of national policy since 1956.

Moreover, as a result of the 1990-1991 real estate crash, the Liberal Democratic Party has produced only two effective prime ministers, Koizumi Junichiro and Shinzo Abe, both of whom rely on nationalist support to maintain their positions. Finally, regional politics plays an important role in Japan, and elected politicians on the island of Hokkaido are pushing the central government to take an assertive stance in the dispute. Taken together, all these factors are not conducive to reaching a compromise that would include the return of all four islands.

Sakhalin and Hokkaido emphasize the importance of geography and regional interests in this dispute. Geography influences how people see the world and how they observe policy formation and implementation. Russia's most important interests are in Europe, followed by the Middle East and Central Asia, and only after that Japan. Here is one example: Russia devotes a significant part of its time and effort to the issue of NATO expansion to the east, into the eastern part of Europe, as well as the negative consequences associated with the events in Crimea and Ukraine. As for Japan, for it the alliance with the United States, China and the Korean Peninsula have a higher priority than relations with Moscow. The Japanese government must also heed public pressure to resolve issues with North Korea over kidnapping and nuclear weapons, which Abe has promised to do several times. As a result, the issue of the Kuril Islands is often relegated to the background.

Probably the only factor contributing to a possible resolution of the Kuril Islands issue is economic interests. After 1991, both Japan and Russia entered a period of prolonged economic crisis. The Russian economy hit its lowest point during its currency crisis in 1997, and is currently facing serious difficulties due to the collapse of oil prices and economic sanctions. However, the development of oil and gas fields in Siberia, during which Japanese capital and Russian natural resources are combined, contributes to cooperation and the possible resolution of the issue of the Kuril Islands. Despite the sanctions imposed, 8% of Japan's oil consumption in 2014 was imported from Russia, and the increase in oil and natural gas consumption is largely due to the consequences of the disaster at the Fukushima nuclear power plant.

Taken together, historical factors largely determine the continued stagnation in resolving the issue of the Kuril Islands. Demographics, geography, political institutions, and the attitudes of Japanese and Russian citizens all contribute to a tough negotiating position. Oil policy provides some incentives for both nations to resolve disputes and normalize relations. However, this has not yet been enough to break the deadlock. Despite the possible change of leaders around the world, the main factors that have driven this dispute to an impasse will most likely remain unchanged.

Michael Bacalu is a member of the Council on Asian Affairs. He received a master's degree in international relations from Seoul University, South Korea, and a bachelor's degree in history and political science from Arcadia University. The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author as an individual and do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization with which he has an association.

InoSMI materials contain assessments exclusively of foreign media and do not reflect the position of the InoSMI editorial staff.

Illustration copyright RIA Image caption Before Putin and Abe, the issue of signing a peace treaty between Russia and Japan was discussed by all their predecessors - to no avail

During a two-day visit to Nagato and Tokyo, the Russian president will agree with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on investments. The main question - the ownership of the Kuril Islands - will, as usual, be postponed indefinitely, experts say.

Abe became the second G7 leader to host Putin after Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014.

The visit was supposed to take place two years ago, but was canceled due to sanctions against Russia, supported by Japan.

What is the essence of the dispute between Japan and Russia?

Abe is making progress in a long-standing territorial dispute in which Japan claims the islands of Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan, as well as the Habomai archipelago (there is no such name in Russia; the archipelago and Shikotan are united under the name of the Lesser Kuril Ridge).

The Japanese elite understands perfectly well that Russia will never return the two large islands, so they are ready to take the maximum - two small ones. But how can we explain to society that they are abandoning large islands forever? Alexander Gabuev, expert at the Carnegie Moscow Center

At the end of World War II, in which Japan fought on the side of Nazi Germany, the USSR expelled 17 thousand Japanese from the islands; A peace treaty was never signed between Moscow and Tokyo.

The San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1951 between the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition and Japan established the sovereignty of the USSR over South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands, but Tokyo and Moscow never agreed on what to mean by the Kuril Islands.

Tokyo considers Iturup, Kunashir and Habomai to be its illegally occupied “northern territories”. Moscow considers these islands part of the Kuril Islands and has repeatedly stated that their current status is not subject to revision.

In 2016, Shinzo Abe flew to Russia twice (to Sochi and Vladivostok), and he and Putin also met at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Lima.

In early December, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that Moscow and Tokyo have similar positions on the peace treaty. In an interview with Japanese journalists, Vladimir Putin called the lack of a peace treaty with Japan an anachronism that “must be eliminated.”

Illustration copyright Getty Images Image caption Migrants from the “northern territories” still live in Japan, as well as their descendants who do not mind returning to their historical homeland

He also said that the foreign ministries of the two countries need to resolve “purely technical issues” between themselves so that the Japanese have the opportunity to visit the southern Kuril Islands without visas.

However, Moscow is embarrassed that if the southern Kuril Islands are returned, US military bases may appear there. The head of the National Security Council of Japan, Shotaro Yachi, did not rule out this possibility in a conversation with Secretary of the Russian Security Council Nikolai Patrushev, the Japanese newspaper Asahi wrote on Wednesday.

Should we wait for the Kuriles to return?

The short answer is no. “We should not expect any breakthrough agreements, or even ordinary ones, on the issue of ownership of the southern Kuril Islands,” says former Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Georgy Kunadze.

“The expectations of the Japanese side, as usual, are at odds with Russia’s intentions,” Kunadze said in an interview with the BBC. “President Putin, in the last days before leaving for Japan, repeatedly said that for Russia the problem of belonging to the Kuril Islands does not exist, that the Kuril Islands are , in essence, a military trophy following the results of the Second World War, and even that Russia’s rights to the Kuril Islands are secured by international treaties.”

The latter, according to Kunadze, is a controversial issue and depends on the interpretation of these treaties.

“Putin is referring to the agreements reached in Yalta in February 1945. These agreements were of a political nature and required appropriate legal formalization. It took place in San Francisco in 1951. The Soviet Union did not sign a peace treaty with Japan at that time. Therefore “, there is no other consolidation of Russia’s rights in the territories that Japan renounced under the San Francisco Treaty,” the diplomat sums up.

Illustration copyright Getty Images Image caption The Russians, like the Japanese, do not expect concessions from their authorities on the Kuril Islands

“The parties are trying to deflate the public’s mutual expectations as much as possible and show that a breakthrough will not happen,” comments Carnegie Moscow Center expert Alexander Gabuev.

“Russia’s red line: Japan recognizes the results of World War II, renounces claims to the southern Kuril Islands. As a gesture of goodwill, we are transferring two small islands to Japan, and on Kunashir and Iturup we can make visa-free entry, a free zone for joint economic development - everything that whatever," he believes. "Russia cannot give up two large islands, because it would be a loss, these islands are of economic importance, a lot of money has been invested there, there is a large population, the straits between these islands are used by Russian submarines when they go out to patrol the Pacific Ocean" .

Japan, according to Gabuev’s observations, has softened its position on the disputed territories in recent years.

“The Japanese elite understands perfectly well that Russia will never return two large islands, so they are ready to take a maximum of two small ones. But how can they explain to society that they are abandoning the large islands forever? Japan is looking for options in which it takes the small ones and retains its claim to large. For Russia this is unacceptable, we want to resolve the issue once and for all. These two red lines are not yet so close that a breakthrough can be expected,” the expert believes.

What else will be discussed?

The Kuril Islands are not the only topic that Putin and Abe discuss. Russia needs foreign investment in the Far East.

According to the Japanese publication Yomiuri, trade turnover between the two countries has decreased due to sanctions. Thus, imports from Russia to Japan decreased by 27.3% - from 2.61 trillion yen ($23 billion) in 2014 to 1.9 trillion yen ($17 billion) in 2015. And exports to Russia increased by 36.4% - from 972 billion yen ($8.8 billion) in 2014 to 618 billion yen ($5.6 billion) in 2015.

Illustration copyright RIA Image caption As head of the Russian state, Putin last visited Japan 11 years ago.

The Japanese government intends, through the state oil, gas and metals corporation JOGMEC, to acquire part of the gas fields of the Russian company Novatek, as well as part of the shares of Rosneft.

It is expected that dozens of commercial agreements will be signed during the visit, and the working breakfast of the Russian President and the Japanese Prime Minister will be attended, in particular, by the head of Rosatom Alexey Likhachev, the head of Gazprom Alexey Miller, the head of Rosneft Igor Sechin, the head of the Russian Direct Fund investments Kirill Dmitriev, entrepreneurs Oleg Deripaska and Leonid Mikhelson.

So far, Russia and Japan are only exchanging pleasantries. Based on whether at least part of the economic memoranda is implemented, it will become clear whether they can still agree on something.

The question of ownership of the Kuril Islands is as ancient as Russian-Japanese relations themselves, however, despite its age, it still remains relevant. “First Unofficial” figured out how the Kuril issue developed throughout its history.

The problem of ownership of the Kuril Islands is no less than 230 years old. During this time, the disputed territories were part of both states claiming them, and for some time they were in joint ownership. At the moment, the situation is this: the entire Kuril ridge is part of Russia, but the Japanese side does not agree with this state of affairs.

The Kuril Islands are valuable primarily for the minerals that are hidden in their depths. There are deposits of rare earth metals, which are practically irreplaceable in the chemical, nuclear, steel and oil industries, mechanical engineering and radio electronics, as well as the production of explosives. For example, in the Kuril Islands there is a rich deposit of rhenium, a metal that is extremely refractory and resistant to chemicals. Rhenium is used in the manufacture of high-octane commercial gasoline, self-cleaning electrical contacts and jet engines. Being part of the alloy, rhenium increases the strength of the part, so its use is necessary in the manufacture of everything that needs to be super strong: space satellites, rockets, airplanes. The total gold resources on the Kuril Islands are estimated at 1867 tons, silver at 9284 tons, titanium at 39.7 million tons, and iron at 273 million tons.

The waters surrounding the Kuril Islands are home to a large number of commercial fish, crabs, shellfish and squid, which form the basis of the Japanese diet.

The geopolitical significance of the South Kuril Islands as points for monitoring the situation in the Pacific Ocean is especially important for Russia. The ice-free straits between the islands of the southern ridge are very valuable for our fleet.

A long time ago

In 1707, Peter the Great, together with the announcement of the annexation of Kamchatka to Russia, issued a decree on the exploration of nearby areas - the Kuril Islands and Japan. On August 1, 1711, Danila Antsiferov and Ivan Kozyrevsky with a detachment of 50 Cossacks and one Japanese guide, who had once been shipwrecked, left Bolsheretsk and headed to the Kuril Islands. They examined the island of Shumshu and Paramushir. Two more expeditions took place in 1713 and 1721. In total, five islands of the Kuril ridge were examined. Then, after Peter’s death, members of the Bering expedition carried out a topographic survey of the Kuril Islands and the northern coast of Japan, the Sea of ​​Okhotsk and Kamchatka.

For some time, the Russians and Japanese managed not to notice each other’s presence on the islands: Russian and Japanese merchants “entered” the future disputed territory from different ends and established trade contacts with the local population - the Ainu.

On May 4, 1786, Tokunai (a representative of the Japanese principality of Matsumae), arriving in the Kuril Islands, met with the Russian expedition and asked who they were and where they were from. One of the Russians, whose surname in Japanese sources is rendered as “Ijuyo” (which most likely corresponds to the Russian surname “Ezhov” written in katakana), replied that he and 60 other people arrived on the island of Urup to engage in fishing and hunting. Tokunai then asked if the Russians knew that the Japanese government prohibited foreigners from entering the country. Ijuyo answered him: “We know. However, this is not Japan. There are no Japanese government agencies on either Iturup or Urup.”

In 1798, a Japanese expedition installed pillars with the inscription “possession of great Japan” on Iturup, overturning the Russian border pillars already standing there. In 1800, government official Kondo arrived in Iturup and established a kind of Japanese prefecture there. Since the Russians preferred to make Urup their site, the strait between the two islands became a kind of dividing line between the two states. But in 1807, the Russians also left Urup, and since then a Japanese garrison consisting of 30 Japanese soldiers has always been on the island.

For some time, the Kuril issue lost its relevance: the Russian Empire was busy with events in Europe. Negotiations resumed only in 1855 with the conclusion of the first official diplomatic agreement between Russia and Japan - the Shimoda Treaty. The second article of the treaty stated that “from now on, the borders between Russia and Japan will pass between the islands of Urup and Iturup. The entire island of Iturup belongs to Japan, while the island of Urup and the other Kuril Islands to the north are the possession of Russia.” Sakhalin remained in joint ownership of the two countries.

The problem of post-war settlement

On February 11, 1945, the USSR, USA and Great Britain signed an agreement according to which the USSR pledged, after the surrender of Germany, to enter the war with Japan on the side of the allies that had already fought with it. Stalin agreed to wage war with Japan only on condition of compensation for all Russian losses under the Portsmouth Peace. The return of the southern part of Sakhalin Island and the transfer of the Kuril Islands to the Soviet Union was agreed upon.

On July 26, 1945, China, the USA, and Great Britain adopted the Potsdam Declaration outlining the terms of Japan's surrender. One of its conditions was the implementation of the Cairo Declaration of December 3, 1943, which provided for the limitation of Japanese sovereignty to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, and Shikoku.

In its act of surrender on September 2, 1945, Japan unconditionally accepted the Potsdam Declaration and the Cairo Declaration mentioned therein. It would seem that a solution to the issue has been found and there is nothing more to argue about here.

However, during the preparation of the peace treaty with Japan, relations between the allies in the anti-Hitler coalition cooled, and at the insistence of the United States, the text of the San Francisco Peace Treaty was as general as possible and contained very little specificity. For example, Japan was supposed to renounce all rights to the Kuril Islands, but under whose jurisdiction they should go was not specified in the agreement.

In 1956, the USSR and Japan were again at the negotiating table, which resulted in the Soviet-Japanese Declaration of October 19, 1956, according to which the state of war ended between the two states (more than 10 years after the end of hostilities!) and good neighborly relations were established. The USSR, demonstrating its desire to establish relations with its eastern neighbor as quickly as possible, offered Japan two of the disputed four islands - Shikotan and Habomai. Unfortunately, the signing of a peace agreement never took place: one of the conditions for the transfer of the islands was the withdrawal of all foreign troops from the territory of the Japanese state. However, the American military base is still located on the island. Okinawa has no plans to move yet.

Current state of affairs

Since 1956, there has been no significant progress in resolving the Kuril issue. Russia and Japan periodically hold bilateral meetings at different levels, during which they decide to “continue to negotiate.” For Russia, the concept of 1956 is currently working - the transfer of two islands in exchange for reciprocal concessions. Not long ago, a representative of the Japanese government spoke about the potential possibility of the Japanese side agreeing with this scenario, but no official statements were made. Moreover, Japan’s main line on the issue of the Kuril Islands remains very strict: the islands of the South Kuril chain are considered “illegally occupied” and must be returned to Japan as its “ancestral territories.”

Most likely, in the next few years the problem of ownership of the Kuril Islands will not be resolved. The outcome of negotiations on this issue will depend on the geopolitical situation in the Far Eastern region. It is likely that the emergence of a new strong player will force the parties to unite and come to a common denominator as soon as possible.

In preparing this article, materials from the following monographs were used:

1. Nakamura Shintaro Japanese and Russians. From contact history. M. 1983
2. Ponomarev S.I. Starting point – 1945 // Collection of documents for parliamentary hearings on the issue “The Soviet-Japanese Declaration of 1956 and the problems of national security of the Russian Federation.” Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk. 2001
3. Territorial question in the Afro-Asian world. / Ed. D.V. Streltsova. M. 2013 (Chapter 1, 1.2)

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.