Historical information about the Kuril Islands. The problem of the Kuril Islands

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe announced his desire to "create a new history" of relations with Russia. Have we got a new friend? Hardly. The history of Japan's territorial claims against the Russian Federation is well known to everyone. But right now, the sanctions and the confrontation between Russia and the West give Tokyo a non-illusory chance to return the Kuriles.

Now the Japanese are looking forward to the visit of Vladimir Putin, hoping that he will bring the signing of the peace treaty closer. This puts the Russian leader in a difficult situation: the country needs allies, but such a deal could once and for all destroy his image as a collector of Russian lands. Therefore, it is quite obvious: it is impossible to return the islands before the presidential elections. And then?

What exactly Vladimir Putin and Shinzo Abe spoke about during an informal meeting in Sochi on May 6 is not known for certain. However, before the visit, the Japanese prime minister made no secret of his intention to discuss the territorial issue. And now a return visit of the President of the Russian Federation is planned soon.

In early April, the Japanese Foreign Ministry developed the so-called "Blue Book" on diplomacy for 2016. It says that strengthening relations with Russia is in the national interest and contributes to the establishment of peace and prosperity in the Asian region. Thus, Japan officially proclaimed a course towards rapprochement with Russia.

This has already caused concern in the US. Not without reason, back in February, during a telephone conversation, Barack Obama advised Prime Minister Abe to reconsider the dates of his visit to Russia and expressed concern about the softening of Japan's position towards Moscow, while Western countries imposed anti-Russian sanctions "in an attempt to restore international order."

Attraction of unprecedented generosity

Why did Tokyo suddenly decide to extend the hand of friendship to Moscow? Fyodor Lukyanov, editor of Russia in Global Affairs magazine, believes that “the Chinese factor dominates relations between Japan and Russia; both countries are trying to balance the rise of China as the most important power in the region, and this is leading to a thaw.” By the way, the Asahi Shimbun newspaper recently wrote about this: “It is important for the heads of Russia and Japan to meet more often and move towards trusting relations also in order to stabilize the situation in Northeast Asia, a region where China is gaining influence and challenges continue. from the DPRK, which conducts missile and nuclear tests.

An important milestone in cooperation can be called the construction by Japan on the Pacific coast of Russia of a terminal for receiving liquefied natural gas. The enterprise with a capacity of 15 million tons, according to the plans of Gazprom, will be launched in 2018.

Everything would be fine, but the relations between the two countries are overshadowed by an unresolved territorial dispute. After the end of World War II, the USSR annexed four islands of the Kuril chain - Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and Khabomai. In addition to fish, the islands are valuable minerals found in their bowels: gold and silver, polymetallic ores containing zinc, copper, vanadium, etc. It is not surprising that the Japanese consider them theirs and demand their return.

Back in December, the Japanese Prime Minister lamented: “70 years have passed since the end of the war, but, unfortunately, the northern territories have not been returned, the problem has not been resolved. We would like to continue persistent negotiations on the return of the northern territories, on the conclusion of a peace treaty. We will deal with this issue with all the forces of the government so that the innermost dream of the former inhabitants of the islands comes true.

Moscow's position is as follows: the islands became part of the USSR following World War II, and Russian sovereignty is beyond doubt. But is this position so irreconcilable?

In 2012, Vladimir Putin made an encouraging statement for the Japanese: the dispute must be resolved on the basis of a compromise. “Something like a hikiwake. “Hikiwake” is a term from judo when neither side managed to win,” the president said. What does it mean? Japan can return two of the four islands?

Such fears are justified. Suffice it to recall how in 2010, during the presidency of Dmitry Medvedev, Russia signed an agreement with Norway on the delimitation of maritime spaces in the Barents Sea and the Arctic Ocean. As a result, the country has lost 90 thousand square kilometers in the Arctic. In the depths of this territory, according to the estimates of the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate (NPD), there are hydrocarbon deposits with a volume of at least 300 million cubic meters - almost 1.9 billion barrels of oil. Then the Norwegians rejoiced, and other countries, including Japan, immediately remembered their territorial claims against Russia. Is there any guarantee that this attraction of unprecedented generosity will not continue?

Wait for the next leader

One way or another, but now the Japanese media are full of optimism. “Prime Minister Abe seeks to resolve the problem of the “northern territories” while he is in power. For him, this is a chance to become the political leader of Japan, who will be able to move the problem that has existed for 70 years from the dead point, ”writes the Asahi Shimbun.

Abe, by the way, has his own interests in this: parliamentary elections will be held in the country this year, and he needs to strengthen his position. Meanwhile, Toyo Keizai publishes an interview with retired diplomat Yoshiki Mine, who claims: “Russia has already declared its readiness to return Habomai and Shikotan. At the same time, she put forward certain conditions on which we can agree. Russia's goals are very clear. The problem is what to do with the islands.” Mr. Mine believes that Japan should not waste time on trifles, but demand from Russia all the territories that once belonged to Japan, including Sakhalin. But not now, but after the change of leader in Russia. "I think it's better to wait for a politically strong leader who will be determined to solve this problem," says the Japanese diplomat. But the Russian political experience tells a different story: it is the weak leaders who hand out land right and left, and the strong never.

Meanwhile, in Moscow, so far, no signs have been given that could indicate the transition of the islands under the Japanese flag. Recently it became known that the government of the Russian Federation intends to invest 5.5 billion rubles in a new territory of advanced development "Kurils". The program involves the development of fishery and mining complexes. In the period from 2016 to 2018, enterprises in the field of aquaculture, a plant for the processing of aquatic biological resources and a mining complex will be located in the Kuril Islands. All this, of course, inspires confidence that the Russian leadership is not going to give the islands to Japan. Unless he develops the territory specifically for return, in order to get more bonuses for it.

Of course, for Putin's electoral potential, the distribution of Russian territories would be extremely harmful. And the presidential elections in Russia will be held in 2018. By the way, in the matter of relations with Japan, this date pops up with enviable regularity.

The following moment is also curious: in Japan, a scenario similar to the Crimean one is being considered for the annexation of the islands. Back in 2014, former Defense Minister Yuriko Koike said that a referendum on joining Japan should be held among the population of the Kuril Islands. And recently, the head of the Japanese Daichi New Party, Muneo Suzuki, suggested that the government lift sanctions on Russia in exchange for the islands. Lure, trade. Oh well...

Sushi question.
Why Russia will never give Japan the South Kuriles

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

Statement Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe about the intention to resolve the territorial dispute over the Kuril Islands and sign a peace treaty with Russia again drew the attention of the general public to the so-called "problem of the South Kuriles" or "northern territories".

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

Land of the Ainu

The dispute over the South Kuriles has its roots in the 17th century, when there were no Russians or Japanese on the Kuril Islands yet.

The Ainu can be considered the indigenous population of the islands - a nation whose origin scientists argue to this day. The Ainu, who once inhabited not only the Kuriles, but also all the Japanese islands, as well as the lower reaches of the Amur, Sakhalin and the south of Kamchatka, today have become a small nation. In Japan, according to official figures, there are about 25 thousand Ainu, and in Russia there are just over a hundred of them left.

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

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

The Japanese also showed more and more activity in the Kuriles, but there was no line of demarcation and no agreements between the countries.

Kuriles - to you, Sakhalin - to us

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

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

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

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

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

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

Exorbitant appetites of the Land of the Rising Sun

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

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

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

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

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

Revenge for old grievances

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

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

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

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

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

The fall of Shumshu was a key event in the Kuril operation - in the future, the occupation of the islands on which the Japanese garrisons were located turned into acceptance of their surrender.

They took the Kuriles, they could have taken Hokkaido

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

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

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

So, at the end of the Second World War, Japan was completely occupied by the allied powers, and the main territories of the country fell under the control of the United States.

Kurile Islands. Photo: Shutterstock.com

January 29, 1946 by Memorandum No. 677 of the Commander-in-Chief of the Allied Powers General Douglas MacArthur The Kuril Islands (Chishima Islands), the Habomai Islands (Khabomadze) and the island of Shikotan were excluded from the territory of Japan.

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

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

Why the USSR did not sign a peace treaty with Japan

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

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

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

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

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

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

Compromise ruined Washington

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

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

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

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

The threat was truly terrible for the Japanese - it was a territory with more than a million inhabitants, which is of great historical importance for Japan.

As a result, a possible compromise on the issue of the South Kuriles vanished like smoke, and with it the prospect of concluding a full-fledged peace treaty.

By the way, control of Okinawa finally passed to Japan only in 1972. At the same time, 18 percent of the island's territory is still occupied by American military bases.

Complete stalemate

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

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

Perhaps at this point, the Japanese side made a mistake, instead of compromise options like the one discussed in 1956, insisting on the transfer of all disputed islands.

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

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

Therefore, the declared desire Shinzo Abe solve the problem, no doubt commendable, but completely unrealistic.

URUP

ITURUP

KUNASHIR

SHIKOTAN

territory of the disputed islands of the Kuril archipelago.

emperor?
].

herself

KURILE ISLANDS- a chain of volcanic islands between the Kamchatka Peninsula (USSR) and about. Hokkaido (Japan); separates the Sea of ​​Okhotsk from the Pacific Ocean. They are part of the Sakhalin Region (Russian Federation). The length is about 1200 km. The area is about 15.6 thousand km2. They consist of two parallel ridges of islands - the Greater Kuril and Lesser Kuril (Shikotan, Khabomai, etc.).

The Great Kuril Ridge is divided into 3 groups: southern (Kunashir, Iturup, Urup, etc.), middle (Simushir, Ketoi, Ushishir, etc.) and northern (Traps, Shiashkotan, Onekotan, Paramushir, etc.). Most of the islands are mountainous (height 2339 m). About 40 active volcanoes; hot mineral springs, high seismicity. On the southern islands - forests; the northern ones are covered with tundra vegetation. Fishing (chum salmon, etc.) and sea animals (nerpa, sea lions, etc.).

URUP, an island in the Kuril Islands group, territory of the Russian Federation. OK. 1.4 thousand km2. Consists of 25 volcanoes connected by bases. Height up to 1426 m. 2 active volcanoes (Trident and Berga).

ITURUP, the largest in area (6725 km2) island in the group of the Kuril Islands (Russian Federation, Sakhalin region). Volcanic massif (height up to 1634 m). Thickets of bamboo, spruce-fir forests, elfin. On Iturup - Kurilsk.

KUNASHIR, an island in the Kuril Islands group. OK. 1550 km2. Altitude up to 1819 m. Active volcanoes (Tyatya and others) and hot springs. Pos. Yuzhno-Kurilsk. Reserve Kuril.

SHIKOTAN, the largest island in the Lesser Kuril Ridge. 182 km2. Height up to 412 m. Settlements - Malokurilskoe and Krabozavodskoe. Fishing. Harvest of marine animals.

The territory of the disputed islands of the Kuril archipelago.

Borders between Russia and Japan in the Kuril Islands region.
Russian navigators Captain Spanberg and Lieutenant Walton in 1739 were the first Europeans to open the way to the eastern shores of Japan, visited the Japanese islands of Hondo (Honshu) and Matsmae (Hokkaido), described the Kuril ridge and mapped all the Kuril Islands and the eastern coast of Sakhalin. The expedition found that under the rule of the Japanese Khan [ emperor?] there is only one island of Hokkaido, the rest of the islands are not subject to it. Since the 60s, interest in the Kuriles has noticeably increased, Russian fishing vessels are increasingly mooring to their shores, and soon the local population (Ainu) on the islands of Urup and Iturup was brought into Russian citizenship. Merchant D. Shebalin was ordered by the office of the port of Okhotsk to "convert the inhabitants of the southern islands to Russian citizenship and start bargaining with them." Having brought the Ainu into Russian citizenship, the Russians founded winter huts and camps on the islands, taught the Ainu how to use firearms, breed livestock and grow some vegetables. Many of the Ainu converted to Orthodoxy and learned to read and write. At the behest of Catherine II in 1779, all fees that were not established by decrees from St. Petersburg were canceled. Thus, the fact of the discovery and development of the Kuril Islands by the Russians is undeniable.
Over time, the crafts in the Kuriles were depleted, becoming less and less profitable than off the coast of America, and therefore, by the end of the 18th century, the interest of Russian merchants in the Kuriles had weakened. In Japan, by the end of the same century, interest in the Kuriles and Sakhalin was just awakening, because before that the Kurils were practically unknown to the Japanese. The island of Hokkaido - according to the Japanese scientists themselves - was considered a foreign territory and only a small part of it was inhabited and developed. In the late 70s, Russian merchants reached Hokkaido and tried to start trading with the locals. Russia was interested in acquiring food in Japan for Russian fishing expeditions and settlements in Alaska and the Pacific Islands, but it was not possible to start trade, as it forbade the Japan isolation law of 1639, which read: "For the future, until the sun illuminates world, no one has the right to land on the shores of Japan, even if he were an envoy, and this law can never be repealed by anyone on pain of death. And in 1788, Catherine II sent a strict order to Russian industrialists in the Kuriles so that they "do not touch the islands under the jurisdiction of other powers," and a year before that, she issued a decree on equipping a round-the-world expedition to accurately describe and map the islands from Masmay to the Kamchatka Lopatka, so that they "formally rank them all as the possession of the Russian state." Blyo was ordered not to allow foreign industrialists to "trade and crafts in places belonging to Russia and to treat local residents peacefully." But the expedition did not take place due to the outbreak of the Russian-Turkish war [ refers to the war of 1787-1791].
Taking advantage of the weakening of Russian positions in the southern part of the Kuriles, Japanese fishermen first appear in Kunashir in 1799, and the next year on Iturup, where they destroy Russian crosses and illegally set up a pillar with a sign indicating that the islands belong to Japan. Japanese fishermen often began to arrive on the shores of South Sakhalin, fished, robbed the Ainu, which was the reason for frequent skirmishes between them. In 1805, Russian sailors from the frigate "Yunona" and the tender "Avos" on the shores of Aniva Bay set up a pole with the Russian flag, and the Japanese parking lot on Iturup was devastated. The Russians were warmly welcomed by the Ainu.

In 1854, in order to establish trade and diplomatic relations with Japan, the government of Nicholas I sent Vice Admiral E. Putyatin. His mission also included the delimitation of Russian and Japanese possessions. Russia demanded recognition of its rights to the island of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands, which had long belonged to it. Knowing perfectly well what a difficult situation Russia found itself in, waging a war with three powers in the Crimea at the same time, Japan put forward unfounded claims to the southern part of Sakhalin. At the beginning of 1855, in the city of Shimoda, Putyatin signed the first Russian-Japanese Treaty of Peace and Friendship, according to which Sakhalin was declared undivided between Russia and Japan, the border was established between the islands of Iturup and Urup, and the ports of Shimoda and Hakodate were opened for Russian ships and Nagasaki. The Shimoda Treaty of 1855 in Article 2 defines:
“From now on, the border between the Japanese state and Russia will be established between the island of Iturup and the island of Urup. The entire island of Iturup belongs to Japan, the entire island of Urup and the Kuril Islands to the north of it belong to Russia. As for the island of Karafuto (Sakhalin), the border between Japan and Russia is still not divided.

In our time, the Japanese side claims that this treaty comprehensively took into account the activities of Japan and Russia in the region of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands up to the time of its conclusion and was concluded as a result of negotiations between Japan and Russia in a peaceful atmosphere. The plenipotentiary representative of the Russian side at the talks, Admiral Putyatin, when signing the treaty, said: "In order to prevent future disputes, as a result of careful study, it was confirmed that Iturup Island is Japanese territory." Documents recently published in Russia show that Nicholas I considered Urup Island to be the southern limit of Russian territory.
The Japanese side considers erroneous the assertion that Japan imposed this treatise on Russia, which was in a difficult position during the Crimean War. It is completely contrary to the facts. At that time, Russia was one of the great European powers, while Japan was a small and weak country that the US, England and Russia forced to abandon the 300-year policy of self-isolation of the country.
Japan also considers erroneous the assertion that Russia allegedly has "historical rights" to the islands of Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and the Habomai ridge, confirmed by this treatise as a Japanese possession, by virtue of their discovery and expeditions. As mentioned above, both Nicholas I and Admiral E.V. Putyatin (1803-1883+) concluded a treaty on the basis of the then objective situation, realizing that the southern limit of Russia was the island of Urup, and Iturup and to the south of it were the territory of Japan. Beginning in 1855, for more than 90 years, neither Tsarist Russia nor the Soviet Union ever insisted on these so-called "historical rights."
For Japan, there was no need to discover these islands, located at the shortest distance from it and visible from Hokkaido to the naked eye. On the map of the Shoho era, published in Japan in 1644, the names of the islands Kunashir and Iturup are recorded. Japan ruled these islands before anyone else. Actually, Japan substantiates its claims to the so-called "Northern Territories" precisely by the content of the Shimodsky treatise of 1855 and by the fact that until 1946 the Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan islands and the Habomai ridge were always territories of Japan and never became territories of Russia.

The government of Alexander II made the Middle East and Central Asia the main direction of its policy and, fearing to leave its relations with Japan uncertain in the event of a new aggravation of relations with England, agreed to sign the so-called Petersburg Treaty of 1875, according to which all the Kuril Islands in exchange for the recognition of Sakhalin Russian territory passed to Japan. Alexander II, who had previously sold Alaska in 1867 for a symbolic and at that time amount of 11 million rubles, made a big mistake this time by underestimating the strategic importance of the Kuril Islands, which were later used by Japan for aggression against Russia. The tsar naively believed that Japan would become a peaceful and calm neighbor of Russia, and when the Japanese, substantiating their claims, refer to the treaty of 1875, they for some reason forget (as G. Kunadze "forgot" today) about his first article: ".. ... and henceforth eternal peace and friendship will be established between the Russian and Japanese empires."
Then there was 1904, when Japan treacherously attacked Russia... At the conclusion of the peace treaty in Portsmouth in 1905, the Japanese side demanded the island of Sakhalin from Russia as an indemnity. The Russian side then stated that this was contrary to the 1875 treaty. What did the Japanese say to this?
- The war crosses out all agreements, you have been defeated and let's proceed from the current situation.
Only thanks to skillful diplomatic maneuvers did Russia manage to keep the northern part of Sakhalin for itself, and South Sakhalin went to Japan.

At the Yalta Conference of the Heads of Powers, the countries participating in the anti-Hitler coalition, held in February 1945, it was decided after the end of the Second World War that South Sakhalin and all the Kuril Islands be transferred to the Soviet Union, and this was the condition for the USSR to enter the war with Japan - three months after end of the war in Europe.
On September 8, 1951, 49 states signed a peace treaty with Japan in San Francisco. The draft treaty was prepared during the Cold War without the participation of the USSR and in violation of the principles of the Potsdam Declaration. The Soviet side proposed to carry out demilitarization and ensure the democratization of the country. Representatives of the United States and Great Britain told our delegation that they had come here not to discuss, but to sign the treaty, and therefore they would not change a single line. The USSR, and with it Poland and Czechoslovakia, refused to sign the treaty. And interestingly, Article 2 of this treaty states that Japan waives all rights and title to Sakhalin Island and the Kuril Islands. So Japan herself renounced territorial claims to our country, backing it up with her signature.
At present, the Japanese side claims that the islands of Iturup, Shikotan, Kunashir and the Habomai ridge, which have always been Japanese territory, are not included in the Kuril Islands, which Japan abandoned. The US government, regarding the scope of the “Kuril Islands” concept in the San Francisco Peace Treaty, stated in an official document: “(They) do not include and there was no intention to include (in the Kuriles) the Habomai and Shikotan ridges, or Kunashir and Iturup, which previously have always been part of Japan proper and therefore must rightly be recognized as being under Japanese sovereignty."
1956, Soviet-Japanese negotiations on the normalization of relations between the two countries. The Soviet side agrees to cede the two islands of Shikotan and Habomai to Japan and offers to sign a peace treaty. The Japanese side is inclined to accept the Soviet proposal, but in September 1956 the United States sends a note to Japan stating that if Japan renounces its claims to Kunashir and Iturup and is satisfied with only two islands, then in this case the United States will not give up the Ryukyu Islands where the main island is Okinawa. American intervention played its part and... the Japanese refused to sign a peace treaty on our terms. The subsequent security treaty (1960) between the United States and Japan made it impossible for Japan to transfer Shikotan and Habomai. Our country, of course, could not give the islands to American bases, nor could it bind itself to any obligations to Japan on the issue of the Kuriles.

A worthy answer about the territorial claims to us from Japan was given at the time by A.N. Kosygin:
- The borders between the USSR and Japan should be considered as the result of the Second World War.

This could be put an end to, but I would like to remind you that only 6 years ago, M.S. Gorbachev, at a meeting with a delegation of the SPJ, also strongly opposed the revision of borders, while emphasizing that the borders between the USSR and Japan were "legal and legally justified" .

The conflict over the Kuril Islands began long before World War II.

The dispute over the southernmost Kuril Islands - Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and Khabomai - has been a point of tension between Japan and Russia since they were taken over 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 willingness to compromise. The first four factors contribute to the persistence of the stalemate, while the economy in the form of oil policy is associated with some hope of a resolution.

Russia's claims to the Kuriles date back to the 17th century, which occurred as a result of periodic contacts with Japan through Hokkaido. In 1821, the border was de facto established, according to which Iturup became Japanese territory, and Russian land began from Urup Island. Subsequently, according to the Shimodsky Treaty (1855) and the St. Petersburg Treaty (1875), all four islands were recognized as the territory of Japan. The last time the Kuriles changed their owner as a result of the Second World War - in 1945 in Yalta, the allies, in fact, 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 of its claims to the Kuril Islands. However, the refusal of the Soviet Union to sign this agreement left these islands in a state of limbo. In 1956, a joint Soviet-Japanese declaration was signed, which de facto meant the end of the state of war, but failed to resolve the territorial conflict. After the ratification of the US-Japan Security Treaty in 1960, further negotiations were stopped, and this continued until the 1990s.

However, after the end of the Cold War in 1991, there seemed to be a new opportunity to resolve this issue. Despite the tumultuous events in world affairs, the positions of Japan and Russia on the Kuriles have not changed much since 1956, and the reason for this situation was five historical factors that were 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 excessive drinking and other social ills. This shift, together with the weakening of international influence, has led to the emergence of retrospective tendencies, and both nations are now basically trying to resolve this issue by looking backwards rather than forwards. In the presence of such attitudes, it can be concluded that the aging populations of Japan and Russia are depriving Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and President Vladimir Putin of the opportunity to negotiate because of firmly entrenched views on the issue of the Kuriles.

Context

Is Russia ready to return two islands?

Military construction in the Kuriles

Is it possible to agree on the Kuril Islands?

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 reinforced 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 reinforced the symbolic meaning 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 over the Kuriles retains an important psychological significance 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 question of the return of the Kuril Islands is directly linked 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 the capture of Japan's "inalienable territory" helped reinforce the victim mentality that became the prevailing narrative after the end of the war.

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

This, in turn, has an impact on 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 handed over to Japan. At the same time, the central Russian government was weakened as a result of the growing influence of regional politicians, including the two governors of the Sakhalin region - Valentin Fedorov (1990 - 1993) and Igor Fakhrutdinov (1995 - 2003), who actively opposed the possible sale of the Kuriles to Japan. They relied on nationalist sentiments, 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 the situation should mature, and then some issue or problem can be solved. During the initial period of his rule, President Putin was able, but not willing, to negotiate with Japan over the Kuriles. Instead, he decided to devote his time and energy to resolving 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 ready to cede the Kuriles in any meaningful way. Recent events in Crimea and Ukraine clearly demonstrate how far Putin is willing to go to defend Russia's national status.

Japanese political institutions, while different from Russia's, also support a hard line of negotiation over the Kuriles. As a result of the reforms carried out after the end of World War II, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) dominates Japan. With the exception of the period from 1993 to 1995 and from 2009 to 2012, the LDP had and continues to have a majority in the national legislative assembly, and in fact its party platform regarding the return of the four southern islands of the Kuril chain since 1956 has been an integral part of national politics.

In addition, the real estate crash of 1990-1991 saw the Liberal Democratic Party nominate only two effective prime ministers, Junichiro Koizumi and Shinzo Abe, both of whom rely on nationalist support to maintain their positions. Finally, regional politics in Japan plays an important role, and elected politicians in Hokkaido are pushing the central government to take a assertive stance in this dispute. Taken together, all these factors do not contribute to 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 making and implementation. The most important Russian interests are in Europe, followed by the Middle East and Central Asia, and only after that Japan. To give one example, Russia devotes much of its time and effort to the issue of NATO expansion to the east, to the eastern part of Europe, as well as to the negative consequences associated with the events in Crimea and Ukraine. As far as Japan is concerned, the alliance with the United States, China, and the Korean Peninsula take precedence over relations with Moscow. The Japanese government must also consider public pressure to resolve issues with North Korea over kidnapping and nuclear weapons, which Abe has promised to do on several occasions. As a result, the issue of the Kuriles is often relegated to the background.

Probably the only factor contributing to a possible resolution of the Kuril issue is economic interests. After 1991, both Japan and Russia entered a period of prolonged economic crisis. The Russian economy reached its lowest point during the crisis of its national currency in 1997, and is currently facing serious difficulties due to the collapse in oil prices and economic sanctions. However, the development of oil and gas fields in Siberia, in the process of which Japanese capital and Russian natural resources are combined, contributes to cooperation and a possible resolution of the Kuriles issue. 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 nuclear power plant in Fukushima.

In their totality, historical factors largely determine the continued stagnation in resolving the issue of the Kuril Islands. The demographics, geography, political institutions, and attitudes of the citizens of Japan and Russia all contribute to a tough negotiating position. Oil policy provides some incentive for both nations to resolve disputes and normalize relations. However, so far this has not been enough to break the impasse. Despite the possible change of leaders around the world, the main factors that have driven this dispute to a standstill are likely to 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 ties.

The materials of InoSMI contain only assessments of foreign media and do not reflect the position of the editors of InoSMI.

TASS-DOSIER. On December 15, 2016, the visit of Russian President Vladimir Putin to Japan begins. It is assumed that one of the topics during his talks with Prime Minister Shinzo Abe will be the question of ownership of the Kuril Islands.

Currently, Japan is putting forward territorial claims to the Russian islands of Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and a group of small islands of the Lesser Kuril Ridge (the Japanese name is Habomai).

The TASS-DOSIER editors have prepared material on the history of this problem and attempts to solve it.

background

The Kuril archipelago is a chain of islands between Kamchatka and the Japanese island of Hokkaido. It is formed by two ridges. The largest of the islands of the Great Kuril ridge are Iturup, Paramushir, Kunashir. The largest island of the Lesser Kuril Ridge is Shikotan.

Initially, the islands were inhabited by the Ainu tribes. The first information about the Kuril Islands was received by the Japanese during the expedition of 1635-1637. In 1643 they were surveyed by the Dutch (led by Martin de Vries). The first Russian expedition (led by V.V. Atlasov) reached the northern part of the Kuriles in 1697. In 1786, by decree of Catherine II, the Kuril archipelago was included in the Russian Empire.

On February 7, 1855, Japan and Russia signed the Shimodsky Treaty, according to which Iturup, Kunashir and the islands of the Lesser Kuril Ridge were transferred to Japan, and the rest of the Kuriles were recognized as Russian. Sakhalin was declared a joint possession - an "undivided" territory. However, some unsettled questions about the status of Sakhalin led to conflicts between Russian and Japanese merchants and sailors. The contradictions of the parties were resolved in 1875 with the signing of the St. Petersburg Treaty on the exchange of territories. In accordance with it, Russia transferred all the Kuril Islands to Japan, and Japan renounced claims to Sakhalin.

On September 5, 1905, as a result of the Russo-Japanese War, the Treaty of Portsmouth was signed, according to which part of Sakhalin south of the 50th parallel passed into the possession of Japan.

return of the islands

At the final stage of the Second World War, during the Yalta Conference in February 1945, the USSR named the return of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands among the conditions for the start of hostilities against Japan. This decision was enshrined in the Yalta Agreement between the USSR, the USA and Great Britain of February 11, 1945 ("Crimean Agreement of the Three Great Powers on the Far East"). On August 9, 1945, the USSR entered the war against Japan. From August 18 to September 1, 1945, Soviet troops carried out the Kuril landing operation, which led to the surrender of the Japanese garrisons in the archipelago.

On September 2, 1945, Japan signed the Act of Unconditional Surrender, accepting the terms of the Potsdam Declaration. According to the document, Japanese sovereignty was limited to the islands of Honshu, Kyushu, Shikoku and Hokkaido, as well as the smaller islands of the Japanese archipelago.

On January 29, 1946, the Commander-in-Chief of the Allied Forces in Japan, American General Douglas MacArthur, notified the Japanese government of the exclusion of the Kuril Islands from the territory of the country. On February 2, 1946, by decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, the Kuril Islands were included in the USSR.

According to the San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1951, concluded between the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition and Japan, Tokyo renounced all rights, titles and claims to the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin. However, the Soviet delegation did not sign this document, since it did not stipulate the question of the withdrawal of the occupying troops from the territory of Japan. In addition, the treaty did not spell out which particular islands of the Kuril archipelago were discussed and in whose favor Japan refuses them.

This was the main reason for the existing territorial problem, which is still the main obstacle to the conclusion of a peace treaty between Russia and Japan.

The essence of the disagreement

The principal position of the USSR and Russia was and is that "the belonging of the southern Kuril Islands (Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and Khabomai) to the Russian Federation is based on the generally recognized results of the Second World War and the unshakable post-war international legal basis, including the UN Charter. Thus, Russian sovereignty over them has a corresponding international legal form and is beyond doubt" (statement of the Russian Foreign Ministry dated February 7, 2015).

Japan, referring to the Shimodsky Treaty of 1855, claims that Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and a number of small islands never belonged to the Russian Empire and considers their inclusion in the USSR illegal. In addition, according to the Japanese side, these islands are not part of the Kuril archipelago and therefore they do not fall under the term "Kuril Islands", which was used in the San Francisco Treaty of 1951. Currently, in Japanese political terminology, the disputed islands are called " northern territories.

Declaration of 1956

In 1956, the USSR and Japan signed a Joint Declaration that formally declared the end of the war and restored bilateral diplomatic relations. In it, the USSR agreed to transfer the island of Shikotan and the uninhabited islands to Japan (reserving Iturup and Kunashir) after the conclusion of a full-fledged peace treaty. The declaration was ratified by the parliaments of the two states.

However, in 1960, the Japanese government agreed to sign a security treaty with the United States, which provided for the maintenance of the American military presence on Japanese territory. In response, the USSR annulled the obligations assumed in 1956. At the same time, the Soviet Union stipulated the transfer of the islands by the fulfillment by Japan of two conditions - the signing of a peace treaty and the withdrawal of foreign troops from the country's territory.

Until the early 1990s. the Soviet side did not mention the 1956 declaration, although Japanese Prime Minister Kakuei Tanaka tried to return to discussing it during his visit to Moscow in 1973 (the first Soviet-Japanese summit).

Intensified dialogue in the 1990s

The situation began to change with the beginning of perestroika in the 1980s, the USSR recognized the existence of a territorial problem. Following the visit of Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev to Japan in April 1991, the joint communiqué included a provision on the intention of the parties to continue negotiations on the normalization of relations and on a peaceful settlement, including territorial issues.

The presence of a territorial problem was also confirmed in the Tokyo Declaration, signed following negotiations between Russian President Boris Yeltsin and Japanese Prime Minister Morihiro Hosokawa in October 1993. The document recorded the desire of the parties to resolve the issue of territorial ownership of the disputed islands.

In the Moscow Declaration (November 1998), President Yeltsin and Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi "confirmed their determination to make every effort to conclude a peace treaty by the year 2000." At that time, for the first time, the Russian side expressed the opinion that it was necessary to create conditions and a favorable atmosphere for "joint economic and other activities" in the South Kuriles without prejudice to the legal positions of both sides.

Modern stage

In 2008, Japanese politicians began to introduce the term "illegally occupied northern territories" in relation to the islands of Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and Khabomai. In June 2009, the Japanese Diet passed amendments to the Law on Special Measures to Promote the Solution of the "Northern Territories Problem", in accordance with which Japanese government agencies are required to make every effort to return the "Japanese ancestral lands" as soon as possible.

Visits to the islands by top Russian officials provoke a negative reaction in Tokyo (Dmitry Medvedev visited the islands in 2010 as president, in 2012 and 2015 as prime minister; the first two times he was in Kunashir, the last in Iturup). Japanese leaders periodically make "inspections of the northern territories" from an airplane or boat (the first such inspection was made by Prime Minister Zenko Suzuki in 1981).

The territorial issue is regularly discussed at Russian-Japanese talks. It was especially often raised by the administration of Shinzo Abe, who again took over as prime minister in 2012. However, it has not yet been possible to finally bring positions closer together.

In March 2012, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin stated that on the territorial issue it is necessary "to achieve an acceptable compromise or something like a hikiwake" ("draw", a term from judo). In May 2016, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Prime Minister Japanese Minister Shinzo Abe agreed on the need to develop dialogue in a "constructive manner, without emotional outbursts, public controversy" and agreed on a "new approach" to solving bilateral problems, but the details of the agreements were not reported.