disputed border areas. Russia. Disputed territories

Abstract on the topic:

"Disputed Territories"

Pupil 8 "A" class

linguistic gymnasium №13

Korostyleva Vladimir

Scientific adviser: Lokteva Galina Ivanovna

I.Introduction…………………………………………p.1

II.History of the discovery and development of the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin Island……………………..page 2

III. The problem of the "Northern Territories" after the second

World War…………………………………..page 4

IV.Conclusion…………………………………..page 10

V. Bibliography…………………………………p.11

Globalization processes are beginning, countries are actively cooperating with each other, but still there are unresolved problems, territorial issues, for example, the dispute over Western Sahara between Mauritania and Morocco, over the island of Mayote (Maore) between France and the Federal Islamic Republic of the Comoros, about the Falkland (Malvinas) Islands between Great Britain and Argentina, the War of Independence of Palestine, etc. Russia is also among the disputants, Japan lays claim to the southern part of the Kuril archipelago. This is what I am going to talk about in my essay.

The Problem of the “Northern” Territories

The ancient and medieval history of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands is full of secrets. So, today we do not know (and we are unlikely to ever know) when the first people appeared on our islands. Archaeological discoveries of recent decades only allow us to say that this happened in the Paleolithic era. The ethnic affiliation of the population of the islands remains a mystery until the first Europeans and Japanese appeared here. And they appeared on the islands only in the 17th century and were caught in the Kuriles

and southern Sakhalin Ainu, in northern Sakhalin - Nivkhs. Probably even then in the central and northern regions Sakhalin lived Ulta (Oroks). The first European expedition that ended up near the Kuril and Sakhalin

coast, was the expedition of the Dutch navigator M.G. Friz. He not only explored and mapped the southeast of Sakhalin and Southern Kuriles, but also proclaimed Urup a possession of Holland, which, however, was left without

any consequences. Russian explorers also played a huge role in the study of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands. First - in 1646 - the expedition of V.D. Poyarkov discovered the north-western coast of Sakhalin, and in 1697 V.V. Atlasov learned about the existence of the Kuril Islands. Already in the 10s. 18th century the process of studying and gradually joining the Kuril Islands to the Russian state begins. The success of Russia in the development of the Kuriles became possible thanks to the entrepreneurial spirit, courage and patience of D.Ya. Antsiferov, I.P. Kozyrevsky, I.M. Evreinov, F.F. Luzhin,

M.P.Spanberg, V.Valton, D.Ya.Shabalin, G.I.Shelikhov and many other Russian explorers-explorers. Simultaneously with the Russians, who were moving along the Kuriles from the north, the Japanese began to penetrate into the South Kuriles and the extreme south of Sakhalin. Already in

second half of the 18th century. here appear Japanese trading posts and fishing, and since the 80s. 18th century - scientific expeditions begin to work. Mogami Tokunai and Mamiya Rinzo played a special role in Japanese research.

At the end of the XVIII century. research off the coast of Sakhalin was carried out by a French expedition under the command of J.-F. Laperouse and an English expedition under the command of V.R. Broughton. The emergence of the theory about the peninsular position of Sakhalin is connected with their work. The Russian

navigator I.F. Kruzenshtern, who in the summer of 1805 unsuccessfully tried to pass between Sakhalin and the mainland. G.I. Nevelskoy put an end to the dispute, who in 1849 managed to find a navigable strait between the island and the mainland. The discoveries of Nevelskoy were followed by the accession of Sakhalin to Russia. Russian military posts and villages appear one after another on the island. In 1869-1906. Sakhalin was the largest penal servitude in Russia. Since the beginning of the XIX century. Sakhalin and the Kuriles become the object of the Russian-Japanese territorial dispute. In 1806-1807. on South Sakhalin and Iturup, Russian sailors defeated Japanese settlements. The answer to this was the capture by the Japanese of the Russian navigator V.M. Golovnin on Kunashir. Over the past two centuries, Russian-Japanese

the border has changed several times. In 1855, in accordance with the Shimodsky Treaty, the border passed between the islands of Urup and Iturup, while Sakhalin was left undivided. In 1875, Russia handed over to Japan the Northern Kuriles that belonged to it, receiving in return all rights to Sakhalin. Early 20th century Sakhalin and Kurile Islands met in different states. Sakhalin was part of Russian Empire, Kuril Islands - part of the Japanese Empire. Question about territorial affiliation islands was decided by the Russian-Japanese

an agreement signed in 1875 in St. Petersburg. In accordance with the St. Petersburg Treaty, Japan ceded to Russia all its rights to Sakhalin. Russia, in exchange for this, ceded the Kuril

islands. As a result of Russia's defeat in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905. Japan managed to seize South Sakhalin from her. In 1920-1925. Northern Sakhalin was under Japanese occupation.

The last time the Russian-Japanese border changed was in 1945, when our country regained South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands as a result of victory in World War II. In August-September 1945, with US approval, the Soviets occupied all the Kuriles, and in 1946 the US Occupation Administration announced to the Japanese government that the entire Kuril chain, including Habomai, was excluded from Japanese territory. In 1951, Japan began peace negotiations with the United States and its allies. Moscow participated at first, but then withdrew from the talks under the pretext of disagreements over US actions in the Cold War. Despite this, the final text of the San Francisco Peace Treaty establishes quite unambiguously that Japan "renounces all rights, claims and claims to the Kuril Islands."

At that time, Prime Minister Shigeru Yoshida, who was negotiating on the Japanese side, publicly stated that Japan was unhappy with this wording, especially with regard to the southern part of the islands. Administratively, Habomai and Shikotan under Japanese rule

always referred to Hokkaido, and not to the Kuriles. As for Iturup and Kunashir, the historical fate of these two islands differs from the fate of the rest of the Kuriles, the rights of Russia to which were recognized by Japan back in 1855.

Nevertheless, Yoshida signed the treaty. All he could get from the Americans, represented by the ardent anti-communist Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, was that if Japan had such strong feelings for Habomai, it might try

apply to the International Court of Justice. Regarding the Japanese claims to the rest of the islands, the answer was very loud silence.

In 1955, Japan began trying to negotiate a separate peace treaty with Moscow. Japan understood the weakness of its position regarding the islands. But she hoped that there was an opportunity to get at least some

concessions regarding Habomai and Shikotan and to ensure that the United States, France and Britain recognize that at least these islands do not belong to the Kuril Islands, which Japan abandoned in 1951.

To Tokyo's surprise, the Soviets agreed to this demand: they wanted to stop Tokyo from moving closer to the US. But the conservatives in the Foreign Ministry, fearing any Japanese-Soviet reconciliation, immediately intervened and included Iturup and Kunashir in the list of territorial claims. Moscow said no, and the conservatives calmed down.

Nevertheless, in 1956, Prime Minister Ichiro Hatoyama decided to try to break the stalemate and sent his conservative foreign minister, Mamoru Shigemitsu, to Moscow with the authority to negotiate peace.

Shigemitsu started with the already standard Japanese requirements of Iturup and Kunashir - - was immediately refused. However, the Soviets again offered to return Shikotan and Habomai on the condition that a peace treaty be signed.

contract. Shigemitsu decided to accept this offer. However, when news of a possible deal leaked out, the Tokyo anti-communist

The Conservatives are back in action.

Shigemitsu was recalled and on the way home he was "intercepted" by the same John Foster Dulles, who just five years earlier forced the Japanese to abandon the Kuril Islands, including most what is now called the Northern Territories. Dulles warned that if Japan stopped claiming all of the Northern Territories, the US would not

will return Okinawa to the Japanese. Tokyo immediately broke off negotiations with Moscow.

Scientists argued a lot about how Dulles managed to make such a 180-degree turn. One theory claims that the US knew in 1951 that if it did not abide by the Yalta Accords over the Kuriles, Moscow might cease to abide by the Yalta Accords.

agreements on Austria - the problem had all but disappeared by 1956. Another interesting theory put forward by Professor Kimitada Miwa of Sophia University in Tokyo claims that the 1951 American position was the result of a deal with the Soviets that secured Micronesia to the United States by decision of the UN Security Council three years earlier.

And, finally, there is such a theory that the insidious Dulles thought everything over and planned in advance. His intention from the very beginning was to force Japan to give up the Kuriles in 1951 and, knowing that the Japanese would later try to return the islands, to include in the peace treaty an article

Allowing the US to turn in its favor any concession that the Japanese might make to the Russians in the future. In short, if Japan allows the Soviets to hold even part of the Kuriles, the US is holding Okinawa. Today's Japanese position completely ignores all the subtleties described above. She simply states that the Northern Territories are ancestral Japanese lands ("koyu no ryodo") and as such must be returned. As far as the San Francisco Treaty is concerned, Tokyo puts forward two highly controversial arguments. The first is that, since the treaty does not say who exactly should receive the very Kuriles that Japan refused, then anyone, including Japan itself, can claim them. Another argument is that the Northern Territories do not belong to those Kuril Islands that Japan refused, and indeed cannot be treated, being, again, "original Japanese lands." With the last argument, however, not everything is in order. If Japan had not really given up the Northern Territories in 1951, then why would Yoshida have declared to the whole world in 1951 that he was devastated by the loss of the Northern Territories? Upon his return from San Francisco, he appeared before Parliament and was asked whether the term "Kuril Islands" used in the San Francisco Treaty included Iturup and Kunashir. The Office of Treaties of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, responding officially to this request on behalf of the Prime Minister, replied to Parliament on October 19, 1951: "Unfortunately, yes, it includes." Over the following years, Foreign Ministry officials commented on this key point in the following way: that the answer to parliament on October 19 was: a) misunderstood, b) outdated, and, finally, c) was "kokunai flour", that is, "for internal use" , - in other words, foreigners like me should not stick their nose into such matters. Foreign Ministry officials also like to indicate vigorous support from the United States, which, since 1956, has officially stated that Iturup and Kunashir definitely do not belong to the territories, which Japan abandoned in San Francisco. It is clear that the US, saying exactly the opposite of what it said in 1951, is simply using a little Cold War-style ploy to keep Tokyo and Moscow at bay - but such an assumption is politely ignored. But not only the United States participated in this process. In 1951, Britain played a major role in forcing Japan to give up the Kuriles, and the British embassy in Tokyo has in its archives a report from 1955, where the unexpected demand by the Japanese of Iturup and Kunashir was called "amusing and naive." Today Britain supports the same demand as perfectly reasonable. Australia, which in 1951 made efforts to prevent any concessions to Yoshida on territorial issues (for fear that post-war Japan would use any border uncertainty as an excuse for militarization), today also unequivocally supports the Japanese position. In short, what began as an exercise in punishing Japan for wartime aggression turned into the most successful operation of the Cold War to keep Japan in the West's camp. I am not suggesting that the Japanese position be completely abandoned. If Tokyo would refer to the reluctance with which Yoshida abandoned the Kuriles, and especially from their southern part in San Francisco, and would present some secret documents demonstrating what exactly the United States forced him to surrender, this would constitute a good legal basis for that. to push for a revision of this part of the peace agreement. But today Japan is trapped in its own claims that it never gave up the Northern Territories, so it no longer dares to tell the truth about what exactly happened in 1951. It is easier for her to blame everything on the former Soviet Union than on the United States. It vainly insists on the return of these "primordial lands" by Moscow, not realizing that in the face of precisely such a demand, Moscow cannot yield, even if it wanted to, for fear of setting a precedent that would allow its other neighbors to lay claim to the former "primordial lands". ". Hashimoto's suggestion that Moscow can control the territories for a few more years, provided it recognizes Japanese sovereignty over them, shows how inadequate Tokyo perceives both the laws of international diplomacy and the Russian mentality. Meanwhile, most Japanese, even educated ones, have completely forgotten what exactly happened back then, in the 50s, and are convinced that Tokyo's demands are absolutely legal. The government is being urged to continue negotiations in a hard-line manner and ignore Moscow's regular hints that it is still ready to return Shikotan and Habomai. Such a dispute is doomed to eternal extension. And John Foster Dulles is giggling to himself in his coffin.

I believe that the Kuriles should belong to Russia, because. Japan abandoned them in 1951 and it is too late to abandon their decisions, she lost the war and must endure the hardships associated with this. After all, if all peoples demand their lands, then there will be no such states as the USA, Great Britain, Russia, etc. And secondly, Russia and Japan are still at war, and from the beginning it is necessary to sign a peace treaty, and only then talk about territorial disputes.

What territories can be taken away from Russia in the coming years.

Last Monday, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said that he would like to resolve the issue of ownership of the Kuril Islands with Russia and sign a peace treaty. According to him, "the solution of the issue of the northern territories is a long-standing desire of the Japanese people." How Japan intends to resolve the issue, Abe did not specify. Countries have not been able to sign a peace treaty since the end of World War II.

We decided to recall the history of the Kuril Islands, and at the same time other disputed territories, which in the future may cause a conflict between Russia and its neighbors.

Kurile Islands

The dispute between Russia and Japan over the Kuril Islands can be traced back to the 18th century. At that time, the islands were inhabited by the Ainu people and there was no permanent Russian or Japanese population on them yet. Expeditions to the Kuriles were carried out by both Russians and Japanese, but the parties did not exercise any real control over the territories until the 19th century.

The first full-fledged delimitation treaty was signed by Russia and Japan in 1855 - it recognized the right of the Japanese to the Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan islands, as well as to the Habomai group of islands. The remaining islands of the Kuril chain remained with Russia. It is on the basis of this treaty that Japan today puts forward claims to the territory of the southern Kuriles.

Subsequently, the islands changed hands more than once - in 1875, Russia, in exchange for South Sakhalin, gave Japan all Kuril ridge, and in 1905, after the defeat in the Russo-Japanese war, she also gave up South Sakhalin. In 1945, the USSR entered the war with Japan at the request of the United States on the terms of the subsequent return of the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin.

After the victory in the war, Soviet troops occupied the agreed territories, but Japan did not recognize the transfer of Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and the Habomai Islands to the USSR. The reason was that, according to Japanese cartography, they do not belong to the Kuril Islands, being the historical Japanese province of Chisima.

At the same time, the Soviet Union agreed to transfer the islands of Habomai and Shikotan to Japan in exchange for the recognition of the remaining territories for the USSR, but these conditions did not suit Japan and the peace treaty between the countries was never signed.

In the USSR, the very fact of contesting the territories was not recognized until 1991, so there were no political negotiations on this topic. The active political phase in the issue of the Kuril Islands resumed already between Japan and the Russian Federation.

In 2007, Russia was asked to return to the terms of the 1955 armistice with the transfer of Habomai and Shikotan, but Japan refused and preferred to continue to consider all of the southern Kuriles as its "northern territories".

In 2010 and 2012 disputed territories visited by Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, along with other high-ranking officials, which caused a disapproving reaction from Japan. A new attempt by the Japanese authorities to come closer in resolving the territorial dispute has not yet received a response from the Russian side.

Amur Islands and Altai

The eastern part of the border between Russia and China runs along the Amur River and its tributary, the Ussuri. In the channels of these rivers there are a huge number of islands, the territorial status of which was repeatedly disputed by the two sides throughout the 20th century.

So, in 1969, an armed conflict broke out between the troops of the USSR and the PRC over Damansky Island, as a result of which control over it actually passed from the Soviet side to the Chinese. In 1991, the island was finally assigned to the PRC by signing an agreement.

In 2005, Russia and China signed another ​border demarcation agreement between the two states, according to which 337 square kilometers were assigned to the PRC. island territories, previously in fact under the control of Russia. Part of Bolshoi Ussuriysky Island, Tarabarov Island and also other, smaller islands located near Khabarovsk, in the place where the Ussuri flows into the Amur, went to China.

According to the Russian authorities, the transfer of disputed territories to China was made in order to normalize relations between the two countries and avoid a possible military conflict in the future. At the same time, already in 2012, China demanded that a section of the border in the Altai Mountains be moved deep into the Russian Federation.

The PRC hoped to get 17 hectares of land, through which, perhaps in the future, a gas pipeline will pass to the country rising sun. Thus, by transferring the disputed territories to China in 2005, the Russian authorities by no means got rid of Chinese claims to our land, but rather created a dangerous precedent.

At the same time, in China itself, the mood for the return of the former imperial borders is quite strong. The local press does not hesitate to publish maps on which the lands of Siberia and Far East designated as historical Chinese territory.

Pytalovo

In 1920 between Soviet Russia and Latvia signed a peace treaty, according to which the parties recognized the sovereignty of the two states. At the same time, the state border was also drawn. As a result, part of the Ostrovsky district of the former Russian Empire became part of Latvia.

In 1940, Stalin brought Soviet troops into Latvia, and in 1944 the territory of the former Ostrovsky district again returned to the RSFSR, and it became the Pytalovsky district of the Pskov region.

After the collapse of the USSR, Latvia recognized its presence as part of the USSR as an occupation and, on this basis, put forward territorial claims to the Pytalovsky region. At the same time, the Russian authorities, regarding this issue, categorically refused to transfer the disputed territories to the Baltic country.

In 2007, the Latvians made concessions and the border was finally fixed the way it remained after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Latvia decided that the claims were not worth the deterioration of relations with Russia, in addition, the country needed to resolve territorial disputes in order to join NATO.

Saatsessian boot

Estonia also had territorial claims against Russia. However, they were not connected with the historical right of Estonia to certain Russian territories, but with a banal inconvenience.

The fact is that one of the Estonian highways, built back in the USSR, partly passes through the territory of the Pechora district of the Pskov region, protruding into the lands of Estonia and resembling boots in shape. To drive along this road, one has to cross the state border twice.

Russia has introduced a special regime in this area, according to which Estonian vehicles have the right to pass the Russian section of the road without border inspection, but it is forbidden to stop and walk there.

The Russian authorities intended to resolve these inconveniences in 2005 by transferring the Saatses boot to Estonia in exchange for almost 100 hectares of forest land. But the signing of the already finished agreement fell through due to the introduction by the Estonian side of the text of amendments that did not suit the Russian Federation.

As a result, in 2014, the countries signed another demarcation agreement recognizing operating borders left over from the collapse of the USSR. Estonia, like Latvia, at a certain stage was forced to curtail the issue of transferring borders due to the rules for joining NATO.

Karelia

During its history, Karelia has become a disputed territory more than once. It belonged to the Novgorod Republic, Sweden and the Russian Empire. In 1920, after civil war and the first Soviet-Finnish war, West Side Karelia was transferred to Finland.

The territory was returned after the Second World War, although part of the historical region of Karelia remained part of Finland - the administrative units of North and South Karelia still exist there. Since the end of World War II, the Russian-Finnish border has not changed and has never been challenged by the official Finnish government.

However, in Lately, moods are growing in Finland for the return of Karelian lands - according to opinion polls, at least a third of the population is in favor of uniting Karelia under the Finnish flag. Recently, several political organizations have emerged advocating the return of the disputed territory.

Svalbard

The Svalbard Islands were first visited in the 12th century by the Pomors who inhabited Rus'. Finally opened they were famous Dutch navigator Willem Barents in 1596. Since then, whaling and walrus hunting have been regularly carried out on the island, until by XIX the animals were completely exterminated.

On Russian maps at that time, this territory was designated as part of the Russian Empire, although Denmark and Great Britain also had claims to it. At the same time, in fact, the islands remained without any control until the beginning of the 20th century.

In 1920, Norway, taking advantage of the collapse of the Russian Empire, declared its rights to Svalbard. After that, an international treaty was signed on the special legal status of Svalbard, according to which the archipelago was recognized as the territory of the Norwegian crown.

At the same time, all countries that signed the treaty had the right to conduct commercial and research activities on the islands. Svalbard was also recognized as a demilitarized zone.

Between the world wars, coal mining was actively carried out on the archipelago, in addition, Svalbard became one of the centers of polar aviation. During the war, many mines were destroyed, but after mining resumed - mainly thanks to the efforts of Norway and the USSR.

By the time the Soviet Union collapsed, Svalbard's coal reserves had run out and the Norwegian settlements on the island refocused their economy on Arctic tourism. The Norwegian authorities took a position of protecting the ecological situation in the archipelago, introducing new laws in the 2000s that severely limited the activities of organizations on the islands.

The Russian part of Svalbard could not adapt to the new realities and currently lives on government subsidies. However, Russian population Svalbard is no more than 500 people, most of whom live in the village of Barentsburg. At the same time, about two thousand Norwegians live on the islands.

Russia and Norway have not officially disputed the ownership of Svalbard, although the countries have recently had territorial claims against each other. They concerned primarily the drawing of the border in the waters of the Barents Sea. The Russian side drew the border along the coast of the island of Spitsbergen, while the Norwegians insisted that the border should pass at an equal distance from Spitsbergen and Franz Josef Land.

The dispute entered an active phase when hydrocarbon reserves were discovered in this sea area. In addition, there is a brisk fishing industry, and Russian and Norwegian border guards often arrested fishing boats here. In 2010, the dispute was resolved by the signing of a demarcation agreement, which was drawn up on a compromise basis.

Alaska

Alaska was discovered by Russian navigators in the 18th century and until 1867 was controlled by the so-called Russian-American company. However, after the unsuccessful Crimean War, it became clear that Russia was simply not able to protect such a remote and undeveloped territory as Alaska.

In addition, after Alexander II carried out large-scale reforms, the treasury was very short of money, and the government decided to sell the peninsula. The amount of the deal with the US authorities amounted to 7.2 million dollars, that is, 4.74 dollars per square kilometer.

Almost immediately after the sale, gold was discovered in Alaska, but the mining industry began to develop actively only towards the end of the 19th century, when a gold rush occurred in America. In 1959, Alaska became a state, and now there is extensive mining, including oil.

Since the sale of the peninsula, official Russia has never expressed its rights to it, although a reminder of the Russian past of Alaska keeps popping out of the lips of politicians. Of course, in the wake of these sentiments is Vladimir Zhirinovsky, who has long been proposing to demand Alaska back from the United States. After the events in Ukraine and the annexation of Crimea to the Russian Federation, talk about the return of Alaska resumed with renewed vigor, although for the most part they are more of a comic nature.

There are quite a lot of territorial disputes over the nationality of certain islands and territories, and, as practice shows, it is rather difficult to resolve them.

Relations between Russia and Japan have been overshadowed by the issue of unsettled status for half a century four islands Kuril ridge. Solution Kuril problem postponed indefinitely, but relations between Russia and Japan only suffer from this.

Often the islands of discord become a pretext for political and diplomatic battles and sometimes lead to bloody armed conflicts. As a rule, the reason for the battles is not the islands themselves, but what is next to them - oil, commercial fishing areas, etc. The possession of one or another island gives the state the right to economic control over a vast area of ​​the ocean. At the same time, sometimes the claims of the powers on a piece of land forgotten by God are sometimes perceived as a political curiosity.

One of the textbook examples of the successful settlement of a territorial dispute is the dispute over uninhabited island Clipperton, which were led by France and Mexico. At the beginning of the 18th century, the British pirate Clipperton discovered the island, in 1855 France declared it its territory on the basis that Clipperton had been a privateer in the service of the King of France for some time. In 1897, the island was captured by Mexico, which declared it its property on the grounds that it was located near its territorial waters and was actively used by Mexican fishermen and sailors. In 1935, international arbitration awarded the right to the island to France.

In the 1970s, compromises were reached between Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, Bahrain and Qatar (the Hawar Islands). In 2000 Saudi Arabia and Yemen decided on jurisdiction over the Farasan Islands, while Yemen and Eritrea, through international mediation, agreed on the fate of the Hanish Islands.

Falkland (Malvinas) Islands. South Atlantic

Two large islands and about 100 small ones. The islands were discovered by the British navigator Francis Drake back in the era of the Great Geographical Discoveries (regardless of him, these islands were discovered by the Spaniards). And since then, the UK considers that they are under British jurisdiction. However, they are located near the Argentine coast and about 16 thousand km from London. Disputes between Argentina and Great Britain about the ownership of the islands began in the early 19th century, when the first British settlers appeared on the islands. In 1980, about 1.8 thousand people permanently lived on the islands.

In 1982, Argentine troops captured the Falklands. These actions were condemned by the UN Security Council. The British Expeditionary Force, which arrived at the islands, pushed back the Argentines. During the fighting, 250 British and 750 Argentine soldiers were killed. Argentina has not given up its rights to the islands. The conflict is unlikely to be resolved in the near future, as large deposits of oil have been discovered in the Falklands region.

Machias Seal Island. North Atlantic, Gulf of Maine near US and Canadian coasts

The two-hectare island is claimed by the United States and Canada. Machias Seal Island was first landed by an American captain in 1826. However, in 1828 a British guard post was established on it (Canada was part of the British Empire). Diplomatic battles over the ownership of a piece of land were fought in the middle of the 19th century, but gradually lost their intensity. Now this question periodically pops up in the press. The diplomatic departments of both states prefer not to raise it. Now there is a lighthouse on the island and two caretakers - Canadians - live permanently. In addition to them, several million sea birds live on the island. American and Canadian tourists are free to visit the island.

Islands in Corisco Bay. Coast of West Africa

Several tiny patches of land, the largest of which is the islands of Bagne, with an area of ​​several hundred square meters, are the subject of a dispute between Equatorial Guinea and Gabon. The reason for the dispute is the unsettled state borders that were formed back in the colonial era. Skirmishes between the police, military and civilians of both states have been ongoing for about 20 years, since it is in this area that fishermen from both countries have been intensively fishing. Attempts by the Organization of African Unity to resolve the conflict, undertaken in the mid-1980s, did not lead to concrete results. In the 1990s, oil fields were discovered in the area, which makes the settlement of the dispute even more difficult.

Hans Island. North Atlantic, near Greenland

Little island is not indicated at all geographical maps. Denmark claims that the island was discovered by the Vikings, geographically closer to Greenland than to Canada and therefore belongs to it. Canada refers to the fact that the island once belonged to the UK. Fishing is actively carried out near the island, and the Eskimos use it for migration. At the end of 2002, Denmark sent a patrol ship to the island to demonstrate its priority. The move sparked outrage in Canada. The parties are now negotiating the fate of the island.

San Andres and Providencia Islands. caribbean sea

A group of islands and coral reefs off the coast of Nicaragua. They have a number of resorts. The islands are the subject of a dispute between Nicaragua and Colombia. In 1928, the two countries entered into a treaty recognizing Nicaragua's sovereignty over the Mosquito Coast and Colombia's sovereignty over the islands. In 1979, after the victory of the Sandinista revolution in Nicaragua, Managua announced that it would denounce the 1928 treaty under the pretext that in 1928 Nicaragua was under the control of US troops. The islands have been declared integral part Nicaragua.

This territorial dispute is extremely difficult to resolve, because the ownership of the islands depends maritime boundaries not only Nicaragua and Colombia, but also Costa Rica, Honduras, Jamaica and Panama. Through the mediation of the Organization of American States, the parties agreed not to use force in resolving this conflict - all military formations and warships withdrawn from the disputed area.

Sapodilla Caeis Islands. caribbean sea

The islands are part of the barrier reef. Nobody lives on them. The government of Belize declared its sovereignty over the islands, which caused protests from neighboring Honduras and Guatemala, which also claimed their rights to these pieces of land. The subject of the dispute is, first of all, the fish stocks of this area, as well as their tourism opportunities (9 thousand tourists visit them annually). The parties exchanged notes of protest and are now preparing lawsuits for filing in international courts.

Navassa Island. caribbean sea

The island, with an area of ​​approximately 10 km², is located between the coasts of Haiti, Cuba and Jamaica and is now the subject of a dispute between the United States and Haiti. In 1857, American entrepreneurs began to develop guano reserves on the island, and the United States declared it its territory. In 1858, the Empire of Haiti made a similar announcement. There were no armed conflicts between the parties to the dispute. In 1898, the development of guano was completed, and the island lost its permanent population. A lighthouse operates on it and Haitian fishermen periodically land. The United States intends to create a nature reserve on it.

Perejil Islands, Veles de la Gomera, Penon, Chafarinas and others. Strait of Gibraltar, Mediterranean Sea

These uninhabited islands are the subject of a dispute between Spain and Morocco (formerly - Spanish colony). Small islands are constantly used by drug dealers, smugglers and illegal immigrants. In addition, they are located in a busy shipping area.

In July 2002, Moroccan troops captured the island of Perejil and left behind a six-man garrison. Spain first tried to resolve the conflict through diplomacy, and then landed rangers and returned the island. Neither side suffered losses. Morocco, which managed to declare Perekhil its territory, called the actions of Spain a declaration of war, but did not take any retaliatory steps. The parties refused direct negotiations, so the conflict was resolved with the help of mediators. Now, no state flags or other signs of nationality have been installed on the territory of the island, and there are no permanent military posts.

Imia Island (Kardak). Aegean Sea

In December 1996, the rocks of Imia ( Greek name) or Kardak (Turkish) became a pretext for conflict between Greece and Turkey. The history of the islands is very confused. They were part of Ottoman Empire before Greece gained independence in the 18th century. After that, no one claimed the islands until the Dodecanese archipelago, which includes Imia, was occupied by Italy at the beginning of the 20th century. In 1923, the islands were transferred by Italy to Greece. In the 1970s, Turkey made a number of statements proving that Italy, which seized these islands from Turkey, did not have the right to transfer them to Greece.

In 1996, a Turkish ship wrecked off the coast of Imia, which turned for help not to the Greeks, but to the Turks. This was the beginning of the conflict, because Greece perceived the entry of Turkish military rescuers into its territorial waters as an act of aggression. A week later, a correspondent for the leading Turkish newspaper Hürriyet landed on the island, tore Greek flag, fluttering on the island, and set Turkish. A few hours later, Greek sailors landed on the island and restored the status quo. Near Imia, military squadrons of both states began to cruise.

The conflict was stopped by the international community, but both countries did not give up their claims. Attempts to resolve the issue in an international court are rejected by Turkey, which believes that its historical rights to these territories do not need to be confirmed, and the agreements referred to by the Greeks were not approved by the League of Nations (the forerunner of the UN).

Bassas da India, Europe, Juan de Nova and Gloriose Islands. Indian Ocean near the African coast of Madagascar

The islands of strategic importance (the largest has an area of ​​200 m²) are the subject of a dispute between France and Madagascar (a former French colony). The conflict did not go beyond the exchange of diplomatic notes. Now controlled by France.

Tromelin Island. Indian Ocean, near the east coast of Madagascar

Dispute between France and Mauritius. The conflict did not go beyond the exchange of diplomatic notes. Now controlled by France.

Chagos Archipelago (practically, the geographical center of the Indian Ocean)

65 islands, the largest of which is Diego Garcia, with an area of ​​40 km². The subject of the dispute between Mauritius and Great Britain. Diego Garcia has a large air base of great strategic importance. From it, in particular, American bombers made sorties during military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Once Mauritius and Chagos were a colony of France and were under a single control. Then these colonies were captured by Great Britain. After it was decided in 1965 to grant independence to Mauritius, Great Britain tore away the Chagos from it. In 1972, when the decision was made to create a military base, the UK resettled approximately 2,000 indigenous people of the archipelago (mostly descendants of black slaves) to Mauritius. Now they demand the return of their lands. The conflict did not go beyond the exchange of diplomatic notes and protest demonstrations.

South Talpatty Island (New Moor). Indian Ocean, Ganges Delta

The "new" island - South Talpatti - the Bangladeshi name, New Moore - the Indian - arose as a result of land reclamation by the waters of the Ganges and Brahmaputra rivers. The island has importance, because from it you can control the process of navigation in a busy delta. In addition, significant oil reserves have been explored nearby. So far, the conflict has not entered an active stage, since it is not clear what India and Bangladesh should share - now there are not even accurate maps islands.

Abu Musa Island and Tanb Islands. Indian Ocean, Persian Gulf, Strait of Hormuz

Dispute between Iran and the United Arab Emirates. The islands are now controlled by Iran, which took control of them in 1971. The history of ownership of the islands is complicated: at first they were part of Persia and Iran, in the 19th century the British drove the Iranians away and created their own naval base there to fight pirates, and when the UAE was granted independence, they transferred the rights to these islands to the new state. The Iranians captured these territories two days before the withdrawal of British troops and the formal declaration of independence of the UAE. The conflict between Iran and the UAE periodically flares up and turns into a phase of an exchange of harsh statements.

Spratly archipelago. Pacific Ocean

A group of about 100 islets and reefs in the South China Sea. Approximately 7 billion tons of high-quality oil have been discovered nearby. Oil is shallow, but international energy companies refuse to develop these deposits until issues of the nationality of the islands are resolved. The subject of dispute between China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Malaysia and the Philippines - these powers have placed their garrisons on 45 islands. Brunei has also claimed part of the archipelago since 1984, but there are no Brunei soldiers in the conflict zone yet. The struggle for these islands has repeatedly led to armed conflicts. In particular, in 1974, a naval battle took place between the navies of China and South Vietnam. In 1988, the Chinese sank a Vietnamese transport carrying soldiers.

Paracel Islands. Pacific Ocean. South China Sea

dispute between China and Vietnam. China took over the islands in 1974 after a fierce battle with the South Vietnamese garrison. Today, several hundred people live on the islands, who mainly fish and maintain a large air force base built by China. The islands are of great strategic importance - they are a kind of "key" to South China Sea. In addition, the waters adjacent to them are rich in fish.

Pedra Blanca Island (Pulau Batu Puteh) and two small islands. Indian Ocean, Singapore Strait

The islet is a disputed territory between Singapore and Malaysia. Singapore built a lighthouse on the island, prompting Malaysian protests. The island has no economic value and can only be used as a navigational landmark. The parties perceive their rights to these territories as a matter of national honor. Singapore and Malaysia are constantly negotiating the fate of the islands, and the naval exercises of both countries are taking place near them.

Matthew and Hunter Islands. Pacific Ocean, roughly midway between Australia and South America

Once the islands were jointly owned by France and Great Britain and administratively belonged to the New Hebrides archipelago. In 1975, France officially declared the islands its territory. In 1980, the New Hybrids gained independence, became the Republic of Vanuatu and laid claim to the islands. In 1982, the islands were officially declared part of Vanuatu (under the names Unaenag and Umaenupane). There is a small French garrison on the islands. Sovereignty over the islands gives the right to claim control over a large part of the Pacific Ocean.

Takeshima Islands (Tok-Do, Liancourt). Pacific Ocean, between South Korea and Japan

uninhabited islands ( total area about 250 meters²) were discovered by French sailors, and since 1904 they have been declared part of Japan. They were under the administrative control of Korea, which at that time was part of the Japanese Empire. After Korea gained independence, it laid claim to the island. In 1952, South Korea officially declared Takeshima its territory and planted its own flag. In response, Japanese sailors landed on the island, arrested six Koreans, and hoisted the flag of Japan. A few hours later, superior Korean forces recaptured the islands. For six decades, South Korea has built a radio station and a lighthouse on the island and constantly keeps a garrison of 12 people on it. All these acts provoked notes of protest sent by the Japanese Foreign Ministry. Negotiations about the fate of the island have been ongoing since 1965.

In Japan, there is the Takeshima Society, which demands the return of ancestral Japanese lands. She organizes many actions together with the "Society of the Northern Territories", demanding the transfer of four islands of the Kuril chain to Japan. Control over Takeshima gives the right to control over 20 thousand km² of ocean rich in fish.

Senkaku Islands. Pacific Ocean, East China Sea

Eight islets, with a total area of ​​7 km². Oil reserves have been discovered near them. The islands were discovered by Chinese navigators, but in 1895 Japan declared them their property, to which the then Chinese government did not pay attention. Now the islands are the subject of a dispute between Japan, China and Taiwan, but are controlled by the Japanese Navy. Periodically extremist demonstrators from Japan, China and Taiwan go to the islands and try to plant national flags on them. Sometimes these actions turn into violent fights with representatives opposite camp or the Japanese military. In 1996, one person died as a result of a similar collision. In 2003, the Japanese government announced that it intended to lease three of the islands to a Japanese entrepreneur. Taiwan and China immediately issued strong statements condemning the decision.

View of Balaklava, TASS

Territorial claims against Russia, as the largest country on the planet, are not a new phenomenon, and Russia's reaction to this issue is a real reason for pride. For each "disputed" territory, calmly and politely, with sympathy and understanding, he tries to explain that all the lands belonging to Russia and the Russian people will forever remain with Russia. But the leaders of a number of countries do not want to reckon with this obvious position, continually making a fuss about the so-called "disputed" Russian territories.

But the most interesting thing is that Russia does not make territorial claims against any country in the world, and as it happened historically, it happened. After all, if we start to present, we will have to remember the powerful Russian Empire, whose territory in the 19th century was 21.8 million km² (that is, 1/6 of the land) - it ranked second in the world, after british empire. And this is without taking into account the territory of Alaska, which was part of it from 1744 to 1867 and occupied an area of ​​1,717,854 km², excluding the Aleutian Islands, as well as parts of the Pacific coast of the USA and Canada ... Russia does not recall all this, but it could …

So, what countries have territorial claims to Russia?

The Republic of Korea: Noktundo island

Noktundo has belonged to the Korean Joseon Dynasty since the 15th century. In 1587, a battle took place on its territory between detachments of Jurchen nomads and the local garrison under the command of Li Sunsin, the national hero of Korea.

During the shallowing of the northern branch of Tumannaya, the riverbed changed from time to time, as a result of which Noktundo sometimes connected with the land of Primorye. Despite this, the territory of the island continued to be under Korean jurisdiction.

In 1860, without the consent of the Korean side, Noktundo was ceded to the Russian Empire in accordance with the Beijing Treaty between Qing China and Russia. Throughout the 20th century, the territory of the island was part of the Khasansky district of Primorsky Krai.

In 1990, the USSR and the DPRK signed an agreement on the establishment of a line state border along the fairway of Tumannaya, thanks to which the territory former island was recognized as Soviet. This deal was not recognized by South Korea, which continues to consider the territory of Noktundo its own.

Japan: Kuril Islands

Perhaps the most relevant today are Japan's claims to Russia regarding the southern Kuril Islands: Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and the Habomai archipelago. These territories first appeared on the map of Russia in the middle of the 18th century, when the captain of the Russian fleet Martyn Petrovich Shpanberg plotted the Lesser Kuril Ridge on it. Catherine II secured these accessions by decree of 1786, calling them "lands acquired by Russian sailors."

However, already in 1855, they were transferred to Japan according to the Shimoda Treaty as a guarantee of "permanent peace and sincere friendship between Russia and Japan." This agreement was followed by the St. Petersburg Treaty, according to which all the Kuriles passed to Japan in exchange for the Japanese part of Sakhalin. The latter was subsequently lost during the Russo-Japanese War.

The chance to return the lost territories presented itself after the Yalta Conference on February 11, 1945, at which an agreement was reached on the entry of the USSR into the war against Japan, subject to the transfer of South Sakhalin and all the Kuril Islands to it. In accordance with this agreement, General of the Allied Forces Douglas MacArthur in 1946, by a special Memorandum, excluded the Kuril Islands (Tishima Islands), the Habomai (Khabomadze) island group and Sikotan Island from the territories of the Land of the Rising Sun.

However, the peace treaty between Russia and Japan was never signed. Japan refused to recognize a number of the Kuril Islands, which had passed to Russia, as "Kuril Islands". According to the official position of the Land of the Rising Sun, the islands of Iturup, Shikotan, Kunashir and Khabomai (Southern Kuriles) were not part of the Kuriles and Japan did not refuse them.

The territorial dispute only intensified in the conditions of " cold war". In 1956, the USSR, according to the naval declaration, was ready to cede the islands of Habomai and Shikotan to Japan, leaving behind the strategically important Kunashir and Iturup. However, in the event of such a compromise, the United States threatened the Land of the Rising Sun with the deprivation of the Ryukyu archipelago with the island of Okinawa, which was then under the control of America.

The failed compromise was, in fact, the last precedent in history when Kuril issue could get off the ground. The "Interaction and Security Treaty between the United States and Japan" adopted shortly after that legalized the presence of American troops on Japanese territory, which was naturally regarded by the USSR as a threat to its own interests. The dispute "about the northern territories" has reached a complete dead end.

To date, the four islands of the South Kuriles, as well as the status of the Northern Islands and South Sakhalin, remain the main stumbling block in Russian-Japanese relations, which prevents the summing up of the Second World War and the signing of a peace treaty. According to the position of Russia, all the Kuril Islands, including Iturup, Shikotan, Kunashir and Khabomai, as well as the whole of Sakhalin, belong to the Russian Federation legally, following the results of the Second World War.

Russia is ready, as before, to make concessions in the form of the islands of Habomai and Shikotan. Japan, whose position is consistently supported by the United States, considers all the Southern Kuriles to be its original lands, illegally occupied by Russia, and the Northern Kuriles and Southern Sakhalin, territories with an indefinite status. On her part, a peace treaty is possible only with the return of all four disputed islands. At the same time, there is a third force - the indigenous people of the Ainu, who insist on their sovereign rights to southern islands.

The situation sometimes reaches the point of absurdity. Thus, in 2012, the Japanese government officially expressed regret in connection with the visit of Russian President Dmitry Medvedev to the island of Kunashir, calling it "serious obstacles in bilateral relations."

The return of the Kuriles is the cornerstone of the foreign policy of the current Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. Today, the Japanese media adhere to the position that the territorial issue has finally moved off the dead center, in connection with Vladimir Putin's statement that the absence of a peace treaty with Japan is abnormal.

Latvia: claims to Pytalovo

The legacy of the revolution and the subsequent division of the Russian Empire was the long-term territorial dispute between Russia and Latvia over the Pytalovsky district of the Pskov region. This territory was the last to be transferred under the terms of the Riga Peace Treaty between Soviet Russia and Latvia of 1920. According to the official Latvian version, the ethnographic principle was applied when defining the border in 1920. According to other sources, Latvia insisted on transferring this area to it, since it had an important railway junction. In any case, Pytalovo became part of the breakaway Latvia, and was soon renamed Jaunlatgale.

But the lost territories were returned twenty years later, in 1940, after the inclusion of Latvia into the USSR as the Latvian SSR. And in 1944, Pytalovo and the surrounding area became part of the RSFSR, after the liberation from the Nazi occupation. After the collapse of the USSR, Latvia refused to recognize these territorial changes, calling its inclusion in the Union of Socialist Republics an occupation, and Pytalovo an illegally annexed territory, insisting on the return of the 1920 borders. Area with speaking name Pytalovo became a source of irritation in relations between Moscow and Riga for a long time.

He disrupted the signing of the Russian-Latvian border treaty when Latvia unexpectedly included in the draft a unilateral, "explanatory" declaration with claims to these territories. According to Latvian politicians, the fact that Pytalovo was owned by Russia violated the Latvian constitution, according to which the border (of course, corresponding to the border of 1920) cannot be changed without the consent of citizens in a referendum. In response to this, Vladimir Putin uttered his famous phrase: "From a dead donkey, their ears, and not the Pytalovsky district."

Latvia could have insisted for a long time on its undoubted ownership of the "five kilometers" of the Pskov region, if not for its desire to join the European Union, one of the main requirements of which are clearly defined borders. In 2007, the President of Vike-Freiberga renounced her territorial claims, expressing the hope that this would: "help unfreeze the really frozen relations with the eastern neighbor."

Finland: the Karelian question

While Latvia has given up its territorial claims, there is a growing number of public organizations in Finland advocating the return of Karelia and other territories lost during the Second World War. The upcoming public discussion on hypothetical ways of returning Karelia, which may take place in the very near future, was reported by Vesti Karelia. According to them, among the initiators are the revanchist organization ProKarelia, the Karelia club, and the magazine Karjalan kuvalehti.

During its history, Karelia was both a Swedish duchy, and Korelsky district, and Olonets vicegerency. This land has become controversial more than once.

The Karelian question arose as a result of the conditions of the Tartu Peace Treaty of 1920, at the end of the civil war in Finland and the Soviet-Finnish war. Under its terms, Western Karelia became the property of Finland. The territories were returned during World War II, and the Karelian-Finnish population was evacuated to Finland. In 1956, the Karelian-Finnish SSR was transformed into autonomy within the RSFSR.

Despite the fact that Finland does not officially raise the issue of revising the borders, in the country, according to recent polls, 38% of respondents are in favor of returning Western Karelia. In 2011, the leader of the ProKarelia movement already known to us, Veikko Saksi, came up with a similar initiative, saying that the return of Karelia to Finland complies with all EU standards. However, the President of Finland, Sauli Niiniste, during his working visit to Moscow in 2013, denied this information, saying that he had never heard such a proposal among the Finnish legislators.

China: dispute over 17 hectares

Today, China has territorial claims on almost all of its neighbors. Russia is no exception. More recently, in 2005, the Russian-Chinese border has undergone changes in the form of 340 square kilometers: a plot of land near Bolshoi Island and two plots near Tarabarov and Bolshoi Ussuriysky Islands, at the confluence of the Amur and Ussuri rivers, came under the jurisdiction of the PRC. However, this was not the end of China's territorial claims against Russia.

In 2012, when checking the state border between the countries, China announced the need to move it deep into Russia, putting forward a claim to the "originally Chinese" 17 hectares of the Altai mountainous area. It is worth noting that the dispute arose because of a small area of ​​hard-to-reach territory, located at an altitude of 2500-3000 meters, and not equipped, at the moment, with checkpoints. As a result, the Chinese side was unable to provide any documents in support of its claims to the Altai 17 hectares, which turned overnight into disputed territories.

Ukraine Crimea

The Crimean peninsula, on which the Republic of Crimea and the federal city of Sevastopol are located, became part of Russia on March 18, 2014, following the results of a referendum held on its territory, in which the vast majority of Crimeans voted for reunification with Russia.

When secession from Ukraine, Crimea used the same grounds as it did in 1991 when secession from the USSR, namely:

• The right of peoples to self-determination
• Security threat due to coup d'état
• Continuation of centuries-old historical traditions

Ukraine, of which Crimea had previously been a part, had already lost its previously existing statehood at the time of the referendum, since the coup, during which the incumbent president was deposed by parliament in clear violation of constitutional procedures, automatically placed all power in the country outside the constitution and legally destroyed the state as such.

The results of the referendum are not openly recognized by Ukraine and the West, the rest of the world for the most part simply bypasses the issue. In any case, the topic will remain open for some time, among other things, because in 1954 Crimea was transferred to Ukraine with other borders - since then Northern part Arabat Spit with the village of Strilkove still remain in the Kherson region. In general, the issue is closely connected with the future fate of Novorossiya.

Most of all, the attention of states is attracted by the disputed territories, which may have military value. Shelves and sea areas, rich in fish, are a tasty morsel. Not on last place in terms of importance, those places where you can successfully develop. Such economically important objects are most often the subject of state disputes. The Russian border has a length of 60,000 kilometers, and with the United States - the longest maritime border.

Claims against Russia by Asian states

The Kuril Islands are today a stumbling block for the signing of a peace treaty between Russia and Japan. Since the end of the Second World War between these countries, it has not been signed, although Japan finally capitulated on September 6, 1945. Today, these two states are in a state of truce, the Japanese demand to give them part of the Kuril ridge.

The border with China is demarcated, but it has claims against Russia. And today Tarabarov and the Big Ussuri Islands on the Amur River are controversial. Here the borders are not even delimited. But China follows a different path, it systematically populates the territory of the Russian Federation with its citizens. body of water and the shelves of the Caspian Sea are separated by Russian-Iranian agreements. The states that have reappeared in the political world, and these are Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan, demand to divide the bottom of the Caspian Sea in a new way. Azerbaijan is not waiting, it is already developing the subsoil.

European claims

Today, Ukraine has a territorial claim to Russia, it does not want to accept the loss of Crimea. Previously there were disputes about Kerch Strait and the Sea of ​​\u200b\u200bAzov, which Russia proposed to consider internal between the two countries, while Ukraine demanded their separation. There are problems, and they are very difficult to solve. Latvia tried to make claims about the Pytalovsky region, but for the sake of the possibility of joining the EU, it refused.

Despite the fact that rumors are circulating in the media about Estonian claims to the Ivangorod region, official Tallinn did not make any claims. Kaliningrad region plans to annex Lithuania, but it is unlikely that she will want a war with Russia.

Norway is not satisfied with the Russian border between the islands of the Arctic Ocean. Norway demands to establish a border exactly in the middle between the islands belonging to the two countries, it wants to revise the boundaries of Russian polar possessions. In 1926, the All-Russian Central Executive Committee established the border of the polar possessions of the USSR, including in the state all the islands in the north of the Eastern Hemisphere, including the North Pole. Today, many countries consider this document illegal.