The history of the problem of the Kuril Islands briefly. Sushi question. Why Russia will never give Japan the South Kuriles. Who wants to go to Japan

Statement Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe about the intention to resolve the territorial dispute over the Kuril Islands and 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— 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 status quo, but refused to recognize “political responsibility” for the Treaty of Portsmouth.

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.

Kurile Islands. Photo: www.russianlook.com

They took the Kuriles, they could have taken Hokkaido

On August 22, Commander-in-Chief of the Soviet Forces in the Far East, Marshal Alexander 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 capitulated completely, 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

On 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 (Khabomadze) island group and Sikotan Island 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 US revision of previous agreements with the USSR reached in the Yalta Agreement of 1945 - now official Washington believed that the Soviet Union had no rights not only to the 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 the cessation of 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, there has been no progress 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 Russian President Boris Yeltsin, generous with gifts, would give away 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 of Shinzo Abe to solve the problem is undoubtedly commendable, but completely unrealistic.

The problem of the Kuril Islands

group 03 History

The so-called "disputed territories" include the islands of Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and Khabomai (the Lesser Kuril Ridge consists of 8 islands).

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

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

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

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

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. The USSR, and with it Poland and Czechoslovakia, refused to sign the treaty. However, Article 2 of this treaty states that Japan waives all rights and title to Sakhalin Island and the Kuril Islands. Thus, Japan itself renounced its territorial claims to our country, backing it up with its signature.

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

1956, Soviet-Japanese negotiations 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 Joint Declaration. The declaration assumed first the conclusion of a peace treaty and only then the "transfer" of the two islands. The transfer is an act of goodwill, a willingness to dispose of one's own territory "in accordance with the wishes of Japan and taking into account the interests of the Japanese state." Japan, on the other hand, insists that the “return” precede the peace treaty, because the very concept of “return” is the recognition of the illegality of their belonging to the USSR, which is a revision not only of the results of the Second World War, but also the principle of the inviolability of these results. American pressure 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.

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

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

A worthy answer about the territorial claims to us from Japan gave in his time: "The borders between the USSR and Japan should be considered as the result of the Second World War."

In the 90s, at a meeting with the Japanese delegation, he also strongly opposed the revision of borders, while emphasizing that the borders between the USSR and Japan were "legal and legally justified." Throughout the second half of the 20th century, the issue of belonging to the southern group of the Kuril Islands Iturup, Shikotan, Kunashir and Khabomai (in the Japanese interpretation - the issue of the "northern territories") remained the main stumbling block in Japanese-Soviet (later Japanese-Russian) relations.

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

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

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

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

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

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

To be sure, Tokyo's position on Russia has undergone some changes. She abandoned the principle of "inseparability of politics and economics," that is, the rigid linkage of the territorial problem with cooperation in the field of the economy. Now the Japanese government is trying to pursue a flexible policy, which means gently promoting economic cooperation and solving the territorial problem at the same time.

The main factors to be taken into account when solving the problem of the Kuril Islands

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

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

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

The Kuril Islands are of great geopolitical and military-strategic importance for Russia and affect the national security of Russia. The loss of the Kuril Islands will damage the defense system of the Russian Primorye and weaken the defense capability of our country as a whole. With the loss of the islands of Kunashir and Iturup, the Sea of ​​Okhotsk ceases to be our inland sea. The Kuril Islands and the water area adjacent to them is the only ecosystem of its kind that has the richest natural resources, primarily biological ones. The coastal waters of the South Kuril Islands, the Lesser Kuril Islands are the main habitats of valuable commercial fish and seafood species, the extraction and processing of which is the basis of the economy of the Kuril Islands.

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

Notes:

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

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

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

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

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

Then it became known that the Ainu called the Russians "brothers" because of their resemblance. “And those bearded people call Russians de people brothers,” the Yakut Cossack Nehoroshko Ivanovich Kolobov, the conductor of Moskvitin’s expeditions, reported in the “skazka” presented by Moskvitin in January 1646 to Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich about serving in the Moskvitin detachment, when he spoke about the bearded Ainu inhabiting the islands. The first Russian settlements of that time are evidenced by Dutch, German and Scandinavian medieval chronicles and maps. The first information about the Kuril Islands and their inhabitants reached the Russians in the middle of the 17th century.

New information about the Kuril Islands appeared after the campaign of Vladimir Atlasov to Kamchatka in 1697, during which the islands were examined up to Simushir in the south.

18th century

Map of Japan and Korea published by the US National Geographic Society, 1945. Detail. The signature in red under the Kuril Islands reads: "In 1945, it was agreed in Yalta that Russia would return Karafuto and the Kuril Islands."

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

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

original text(English)

(c) Japan renounces all right, title and claim to the Kurile Islands, and to that portion of Sakhalin and the islands adjacent to it over which Japan acquired sovereignty as a consequence of the Treaty of Portsmouth of 5 September 1905.

Post-war agreements

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

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

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

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

June 11, 2009. The lower house of the Japanese Parliament approved amendments to the law "On special measures to facilitate the resolution of the issue of the Northern Territories and similar ones", which contain a provision on the ownership of the four islands of the South Kuril ridge by Japan. The Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement calling such actions by the Japanese side inappropriate and unacceptable. On June 24, 2009, a State Duma statement was published in which, in particular, the opinion of the State Duma was stated that under the current conditions, efforts to solve the problem of a peace treaty, in fact, had lost both political and practical perspectives and would only make sense in case of disavowal of the amendments adopted by the Japanese parliamentarians. On July 3, 2009, the amendments were approved by the Upper House of the Japanese Diet.

September 14, 2009. Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama hopes to make progress in negotiations with Russia on the southern Kuriles "over the next six months or a year." .

September 23, 2009. At a meeting between Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, Hatoyama spoke of his desire to resolve the territorial dispute and conclude a peace treaty with Russia.

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

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

On November 1, 2010, Dmitry Medvedev arrived on Kunashir Island, until that moment the heads of Russia had never visited the disputed southern Kuril Islands (in 1990, the chairman of the Supreme Council of the RSFSR, Boris Yeltsin, came to the Kuriles). Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan expressed "extreme regret" in this regard: "The four northern islands are the territory of our country, and we consistently take this position. The President's trip there is extremely regrettable. I am clearly aware that territories are the basis of national sovereignty. The areas into which the USSR entered after August 15, 1945, are our territories. We consistently adhere to this position and insist on their return.” Japanese Foreign Minister Seiji Maehara confirmed the Japanese position: “It is known that these are our ancestral territories. The trip there by the President of Russia hurts the feelings of our people, causes extreme regret. The Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement in which the Japanese side stated that “its attempts to influence the choice by the President of the Russian Federation D.A. years". At the same time, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov sharply criticized the Japanese side's reaction to President Medvedev's visit, calling it unacceptable. Sergey Lavrov also emphasized that these islands are the territory of Russia.

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

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

Basic position of Russia

Moscow's principled position is that the southern Kuril Islands became part of the USSR, of which Russia became the legal successor, are an integral part of the territory of the Russian Federation on legal grounds following the results of the Second World War and enshrined in the UN Charter, and Russian sovereignty over them, which has a corresponding international -legal confirmation, no doubt. In 2012, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation stated that the problem of the Kuril Islands could be resolved in Russia only through a referendum. Subsequently, the Russian Foreign Ministry officially refuted the raising of the question of any referendum: “This is a rude distortion of the minister's words. We regard such interpretations as provocative. No sane politician would ever put this issue to a referendum." In addition, the Russian authorities once again officially confirmed the unconditional indisputability of the belonging of the islands to Russia, stating that in connection with this, the question of any referendum cannot be by definition.

Base position of Japan

Base position of Japan

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

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

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

(4) The Government of Japan has called on the people of Japan not to visit the Northern Territories outside of the visa-free procedure until the territorial dispute is resolved. Likewise, Japan cannot allow any activity, including economic activity by third parties, that could be considered subject to Russian “jurisdiction”, nor allow activity that would imply Russian “jurisdiction” over the Northern Territories. Japan has a policy of taking appropriate measures to prevent such activities.

original text(English)

Japan's Basic Position

(1) The Northern Territories are inherent territories of Japan that continues to be illegally occupied by Russia. The Government of the United States of America has also consistently supported Japan's position.

(2) In order to solve this issue and to conclude a peace treaty as soon as possible, Japan has energetically continued negotiations with Russia on the basis of the agreements and documents created by the two sides so far, such as the Japan-Soviet Joint Declaration of 1956, the Tokyo Declaration of 1993, the Irkutsk Statement of 2001 and the Japan-Russia Action Plan of 2003.

(3) Japan's position is that if the attribution of the Northern Territories to Japan is confirmed, Japan is prepared to respond flexibly to the timing and manner of their actual return. In addition, since Japanese citizens who once lived in the Northern Territories were forcibly displaced by Joseph Stalin, Japan is ready to forge a settlement with the Russian government so that the Russian citizens living there will not experience the same tragedy. rights, interests and wishes of the Russian current residents on the islands.

(4) The Japanese government has requested the Japanese people not to enter the Northern Territories without using the non-visa visit frameworks until the territorial issue is resolved. Similarly, Japan cannot allow any activities, including economic activities by a third party, which could be regarded as submitting to Russian “jurisdiction,” nor allow any activities carried out under the presumption that Russia has “jurisdiction” in the Northern Territories. Japan is of the policy to take appropriate steps to ensure that this does not happen. .

original text(jap.)

日本の基本的立場

（１）北方領土は、ロシアによる不法占拠が続いていますが、日本固有の領土であり、この点については例えば米国政府も一貫して日本の立場を支持しています。政府は、北方四島の帰属の問題を解決して平和条約を締結するという基本的方針に基づいて、ロシア政府との間で強い意思をもって交渉を行っています。

（２） 北方 領土 問題 の に 当たって 、 我 が 国 は 、 、 、） 北方 領土 の へ の 帰属 が さ れる のであれ ば 、 の 返還 時期 及び 態様 について は 、 に する 、 、 2） 領土 北方 北方 北方 北方 北方 北方 北方 北方 北方 北方 北方 北方 北方 AH に 現在 居住 し て いる 人 住民 について は その 人 権 、 利益 及び 希望 は 、 領土 返還 後 十分 尊重 し て いく こと し て い。。。。 ます

（３） 我 が 国固 有 の である 北方 領土 に対する ロシア による 占拠 が 続い て いる 状況 の 中 、 第 三 国 の 民間 人 当該 で 経済 活動 行う こと " 管轄 権 」に 服し た か の 行為 を 行う こと 、 または あたかも あたかも 北方 に対する ロシア の「 管轄 」を 前提 と し た か ごとき を 行う こと は 、" れ ず 、 容認 でき ませ ん。 て 、 日本 国 政府 は 広く 日本 国民 に対して 、 、 1989 年 平成 元年） の 閣議 了解 で 、 領土 の 解決 まで 間 、 ロシア の 不法 の 下 で に 領土 領土 領土 領土 領土 領土 領土 領土 領土 領土 領土 領土 領土 AH 入域することを行わないよう要請しています。

（４）また、政府は、第三国国民がロシアの査証を取得した上で北方四島へ入域する、または第三国企業が北方領土において経済活動を行っているという情報に接した場合、従来から、しかるべく事実関係を確認の上、申入れを行ってきています 。

Defense aspect and danger of armed conflict

In connection with the territorial dispute over the ownership of the southern Kuriles, there is a danger of a military conflict with Japan. Currently, the Kuriles are defended by a machine-gun and artillery division (the only one in Russia), and Sakhalin is defended by a motorized rifle brigade. These formations are armed with 41 T-80 tanks, 120 MT-LB transporters, 20 coastal anti-ship missile systems, 130 artillery systems, 60 anti-aircraft weapons (Buk, Tunguska, Shilka complexes), 6 Mi-8 helicopters. The armed forces of Japan include: 1 tank and 9 infantry divisions, 16 brigades (about 1,000 tanks, more than 1,000 infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers, about 2,000 artillery systems, 90 attack helicopters), 200 F-15 fighters, 50 F-2 fighter-bombers and up to 100 F-4s. The Russian Pacific Fleet has 3 nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs), 4 nuclear-powered cruise missile submarines (SSGNs), 3 multi-purpose nuclear submarines, 7 diesel boats, 1 cruiser, 1 destroyer, 4 large anti-submarine ships, 4 landing ships, 14 missile boats, about 30 warships of other types (minesweepers, small anti-submarine, etc.). The Japanese fleet has 20 diesel submarines, a light aircraft carrier, 44 destroyers (6 of them with the Aegis system), 6 frigates, 7 missile boats, 5 landing ships and about 40 more auxiliary ones.

In the event of an armed conflict, Japan's goal will be to block sea and air communications to the southern Kuriles.

Political-economic and military-strategic value of the issue

Island ownership and shipping

It is often stated that the only Russian ice-free straits of Ekaterina and Friza from the Sea of ​​Japan to the Pacific Ocean lie between the islands, and thus, in the event of the transfer of the islands to Japan, the Russian Pacific Fleet in the winter months will experience difficulties in entering the Pacific Ocean:

The head of the Federal Main Directorate "MAP Sakhalin" of the Ministry of Transport of the Russian Federation Egorov M. I. during the report specifically warned that in the event of a concession to the territorial requirements of Japan, Russia would lose the non-freezing Friza Strait and the Ekaterina Strait. Thus, Russia will lose free access to the Pacific Ocean. Japan will definitely make the passage through the straits paid or limited.

As written in the Law of the Sea:

The state has the right to temporarily suspend peaceful passage through certain sections of its territorial waters, if this is urgently required by the interests of its security.

However, the restriction of Russian shipping - except for warships in case of conflict - in these straits, and even more so the introduction of fees, would be contrary to certain provisions of the generally recognized in international law (including those recognized in

Ministry of Education of the Republic of Belarus
educational institution
“Vitebsk State University named after P.M. Masherova"
History department
Department of General History and World Culture
Course work
The problem of belonging to the southern
Kuril Islands
Student 24 gr.
K.N. Lebedev
Scientific adviser:
Senior Lecturer
E.V. Gapionok

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 3
CHAPTER 1 BACKGROUND OF THE TERRITORIAL DISPUTES 5
CHAPTER 2 THE PROBLEM OF TERRITORIAL DIVISION IN THE PERIOD 1950s - 2000s. ten
CHAPTER 3 THE QUESTION OF DISPUTED TERRITORIES IN THE XXI CENTURY BASIC POSITIONS OF THE PARTIES. fifteen
CHAPTER 4 SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND MILITARY-STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT OF THE SOUTHERN KURIL ISLANDS. DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION WITH JAPAN
ISLANDS. twenty
CONCLUSION 23
LIST OF USED SOURCES 25

INTRODUCTION

The global crisis at the beginning of the 21st century exacerbated unresolved problems in international relations, one of which is the issue of "disputed territories" between Russia and Japan. This problem has existed for more than a dozen years and specifically concerns the ownership of the southern Kuril Islands. The unresolved issue of territorial delimitation hinders the development of bilateral relations across the entire spectrum of cooperation, from the economy to issues of cultural ties, which is also manifested in relations within the G8, one of the most authoritative organizations of our time, in which both states are members. Until recently, the diplomatic conflict risked moving into a more acute phase and thus attracted the attention of the entire world community, since the Russian Federation and Japan are key states not only in Asia, but also in the world. The tragic events of March 2011, associated with the strongest earthquake and tsunami in the history of Japan, as well as the subsequent accident at the Fukushima-1 nuclear power plant, stopped the growth of tension between the states, however, made the urgency of the "territorial issue" more than ever.
During the period of its existence, this problem has gone through the following stages: 1) first discovery, first development, first ownership of free territories (from the end of the 17th century to the middle of the 19th century); 2) search for mutually acceptable solutions through the negotiation process with the conclusion of agreements without the direct use of military force (1855 - early twentieth century); 3) settlement of territorial disputes with the help of military force (1904-1945); 4) search for a compromise on the issue of territorial delimitation.
Kuril Islands - islands in the Pacific Ocean from the south of Kamchatka to about. Hokkaido (Japan). The Great Kuril Ridge is about
30 islands, including the largest Paramushir, Onekotan, Simushir, Urup, Iturup, Kunashir. The Lesser Kuril Ridge lies southeast of about. Kunashir. In its composition, Fr. Shikotan and a group of small islands - Shards, Mayachny, Polonsky, Zeleny, Antsiferova and others - called by the Japanese by the common word Habomai. Administratively, the Kuril Islands are part of the Sakhalin Region. RF. Before the arrival of the Russians and the Japanese, the islands were inhabited by the Ainu. It is believed that the name of the archipelago came from their self-name "kuru" ("man"). According to another version, the name goes back to the Russian “to smoke”, that is, to smoke - there are about 160 volcanoes on the islands, including 39 active ones. To date, four southern islands are “disputed”: Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and the Habomai group of islands. In Japanese interpretation - "northern territories".
The aim of the work is to consider the history of the problem of belonging to the southern Kuril Islands, based on these sources and views on their significance in the studies of historians.
To achieve the set goal, the following tasks were set before the work:

Consider the history of the territorial dispute. This includes the period from the XVII - p.p. XX centuries, including the history of the development and subsequent division of the islands between Japan and Russia (in the XX century - the USSR).
To study the dynamics of the problem of territorial delimitation in the period ser. 1950s - 2000s; trace changes in the positions of the parties and the factors that influenced these changes.
To study the state of the issue of disputed territories that has developed in the 21st century. Show the basic positions of the parties on this issue.
Consider the socio-economic and military-strategic development of the southern Kuril Islands. Show the problems of cooperation with Japan in the development and use of the economic potential of the islands.

When writing the work, mainly documentary sources were used. In addition, the materials of information resources of the state bodies of the Russian Federation and Japan were widely used: the website of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, the website of the Japanese Embassy in Russia, the website of the President of the Russian Federation, and the website of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan. Also, materials of periodicals and monographic studies of Russian and Japanese authors were taken to describe the issue.

CHAPTER 1
BACKGROUND
TERRITORIAL DISPUTES

A description of the history of the conflict should begin with the first mention of the islands. The Japanese, during an expedition to Hokkaido in 1635, received information about the Kuriles inhabited by the Ainu, but they did not reach the islands themselves. In 1643, the Kuril Islands were surveyed by the Dutch expedition of Maarten Gerritsen de Vries, who compiled the first detailed map of the Small Ridge. Not finding the "Golden Lands" here, Fries sold the map of the Empire of Japan. Based on the data of Dutch researchers, a map was compiled, where the islands were designated under the collective name "Thousand Islands". In 1644, a map was published in the Empire of Japan with the toponyms "Kunashiri", "Etorofu", confirming that the Japanese set foot on the land of the Kuril Islands in this very year, the map is stored in the National Museum of Japanese History.

Map of Japan of the Shoho era in 1644. The Kuril Islands are not shown as a ridge, but are interconnected into one whole.
The first information about the islands was brought to Russia by Ivan Yuryevich Moskvitin, a explorer, the first European to reach the shores of the Sea of ​​Okhotsk, the ataman of foot Cossacks. In his notes, he mentioned the "bearded" Ainu who inhabited these territories. Moskvitin's campaigns opened the way to the Far East for subsequent Russian explorers. One of the outstanding pioneers is Atlasov Vladimir Vladimirovich (c. 1652 - 1711). In his "Tales" you can also find information about the Kuriles. He explored the islands up to Simushir in the south. Further expeditions (I. Kozyrevsky in 1711, I. Evreinov and F. Luzhin in 1719, M. Spanberg in 1738–39) contributed to the systematic development of the territory.
By 1779, a significant part of the indigenous population of the Kurils, as well as Fr. Matsumai (now Hokkaido) took Russian citizenship and were exempted from all taxes by decree of Catherine II. In the "Extensive land description of the Russian state ..." in 1787, the Kuril Islands were included in the list of territories belonging to Russia, up to about. Hokkaido, whose status has not been determined, since Japan had a city in its southern part. However, the Russian government did not have real control over these territories, the Japanese were actively developing their presence on the islands.
From the instructions of the Admiralty Board to the head of the first Russian round-the-world expedition, Captain 1st Rank G.I. Mulovsky about its tasks. (April 1787)
"12. When separating the captain himself, according to the above, to describe the Kuril Islands, instructing him to prescribe the following:
1) Go around by swimming and describe all the small and large Kuril Islands from Japan to Kamchatskaya Lopatka, most likely put them on the map and formally classify everything from Matmay to that Lopatka as the possession of the Russian state, placing or strengthening coats of arms and burying medals in decent places with an inscription on Russian and Latin, meaning his journey or acquisition ... ".
In 1799, four islands (Shikotan, Habomai, Iturup and Kunashir) came under the protectorate of Japan. “... Then the principality of Nambu founded outposts in Nemuro, on Kunashir and on Iturup, and the principality of Tsugaru - in Savara and Furuibetsu on Iturup, and both of them guarded the mentioned territories. In April of the 1st year of the Bunka era (1804), two principalities were ordered to carry guards in these places constantly ... ". Thus, the status of these lands as part of the Japanese Empire was secured by military method. .
On January 26 (February 7), 1855, Japan and Russia signed the first Russian-Japanese treaty - the Shimoda Treaty on Trade and Borders. He established the border of the countries between the Iturup and Urup islands: all the Southern Kuriles (Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and Habomai) retreated to Japan. “As for the island of Crafto [Sakhalin],” the document said, “it remains undivided between Russia and Japan, as it has been until now.” The treaty was of particular importance for the Russian Empire, given the difficult situation in international relations associated with the outbreak of the Crimean War, as well as the aggressive policy of the United States, England, France and Holland in relations with Japan.
On May 7, 1875, the Treaty of St. Petersburg was signed, according to which Russia transferred to Japan the rights to 18 Kuril Islands in exchange for the refusal of the Japanese side from Sakhalin. In 1895, the Petersburg Treaty was confirmed, but since. both treaties (1855 and 1875) obligated countries to develop peaceful, good-neighbourly relations, they became invalid after Japan attacked Russia in 1904.
The history of relations between Russia and Japan in the twentieth century. It is, first of all, a history of conflicts. The first half of the last century was the years of political enmity: the Russo-Japanese war (1904-1905), Japanese intervention in Siberia to the Far East (1918-1922), armed clashes, military conflicts and local wars in the area of ​​Lake Khasan ( 1938), the Khalkhin Gol River (1939), many border conflicts and finally the Soviet-Japanese War (1945).
In 1905, as a result of the Russo-Japanese War, the Treaty of Portsmouth was signed. From the Peace Treaty between Russia and Japan of August 23 (September 5), 1905:
"Article IX
The Russian Imperial Government cedes to the Imperial Japanese Government in perpetual and complete possession the southern part of Sakhalin Island and all the islands adjacent to it, as well as all public buildings and imuments located there. The fiftieth parallel of northern latitude is taken as the limit of the ceded territory.
That is, a new border was established, along which the southern part of about. Sakhalin, as well as all the Kuril Islands, were recognized as territories of Japan.

Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands on a 1912 map.
On January 20, 1925, the Beijing Treaty was signed by the governments of the USSR and Japan. Diplomatic relations were established between the countries. "The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics agrees that the treaty concluded at Portsmouth on 5 September 1905 remains in full force", but refuses to acknowledge "political responsibility" for this treaty.
On April 13, 1941, the Neutrality Pact was signed between the USSR and Japan. On June 22, 1945, Germany attacked the Soviet Union, but despite the allied relations between the Reich and the Japanese Empire, the latter did not renounce the Neutrality Pact and did not declare war on the USSR.
On February 11, 1945, at the Yalta Conference, the leaders of the USSR, the USA and Great Britain came to an agreement that after the surrender of Germany and the end of the war in Europe, the USSR would enter the war against Japan on the side of the allies, including under such conditions as:
"2. Restoration of the rights belonging to Russia, violated by the perfidious attack of Japan, in 1904, namely: a) the return of the southern part of the island to the Soviet Union. Sakhalin and all adjacent islands ... 3. Transfer of the Kuril Islands to the Soviet Union. On April 5, 1945, the Government of the USSR issued a Statement on the denunciation of the Neutrality Pact, concluded on April 13, 1941. The reason for the denunciation was the following: “Germany attacked the USSR, and Japan, an ally of Germany, is helping the latter in its war against the USSR. In addition, Japan is at war with the United States and England, which are allies of the Soviet Union. .
On July 26, 1945, as part of the Potsdam Conference, the leaders of the United States, Great Britain and China adopted the Potsdam Declaration, which demanded the unconditional surrender of Japan and determined that “Japanese sovereignty will be limited to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku and those smaller islands that the Allies indicate ". On August 8, the USSR joined the Declaration and declared war on Japan.
The southern Kuriles were occupied by Soviet troops in August-September during the Kuril landing operation, which was finally completed on September 5, 1945, after the signing of the Japanese Surrender Act on September 2. This fact today gives the Japanese the opportunity to talk about the "illegal occupation" of territories by Soviet troops, but only at an unofficial level.
On January 29, 1946, Memorandum No. 677 of the Commander-in-Chief of the Allied Powers was issued to the Japanese Imperial Government, which proposed to wrest from Japan, among other things, the “Kuril (Chishima) Islands, the Habomai (Khabomadze) Islands Group, including the Sushio, Yuri , Akiyuri, Shibotsu and Taraku), as well as the island of Shikotan.
In accordance with the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR of February 2, 1946, it was decided "to form the South Sakhalin Region on the territory of South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands with the center in the city of Toyohara with its inclusion in the Khabarovsk Territory of the RSFSR" . However, the main thing was not done - officially (at the international level) territorial relations with Japan were not formalized.
In September 1951, the San Francisco Conference was held, at which the United States and Great Britain proposed a draft peace treaty with Japan. Speaking at a conference on September 5, the head of the Soviet delegation, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the USSR A. Gromyko, stated that the USSR considers the draft peace treaty unfair to the Soviet Union, since it is limited to mentioning Japan's renunciation of rights, titles and claims in the territory of southern Sakhalin and Kuril Islands, "silent about the historical belonging of these territories and the indisputable obligation of Japan to recognize the sovereignty of the Soviet Union in these territories of the USSR." Thus, Gromyko pointed out that the United States and Great Britain actually refused to fulfill the obligations assumed under the Yalta Agreement.
Since Soviet counter-proposals were blocked by the votes of numerous American allies, the USSR refused to sign a peace treaty with Japan on September 8 on the terms offered. Japan, having accepted these conditions, with its signature officially recorded the rejection of the Kuril Islands.
Thus, one can notice a number of facts that made the conflict possible and which today can be interpreted by the disputing parties in different ways. Particular attention should be paid to the agreement of 1855 (the Shimoda Treaty), on the provisions of which Japan's basic position in the dispute is based. On the other hand, the San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1951 occupies an important place. In their views on these documents, the parties drastically diverge, putting one of them at the forefront and at the same time recognizing the second as inferior.

CHAPTER 2
THE PROBLEM OF TERRITORIAL DIVISION IN THE PERIOD OF ser. 1950s - 2000s.

The San Francisco Peace Treaty recorded Japan's renunciation of sovereignty over the Kuril Islands, but did not define a new nationality over them. In addition, it did not provide a list of islands torn away from Japan. These factors, as well as the fact that the Soviet Union did not sign the treaty, created the ground for the emergence of a territorial dispute between Japan and the USSR.
Formally, both states continued to be at war. In an effort to resolve the situation, the USSR and Japan held separate negotiations, which took place with difficulties, interrupted and resumed, and took about a year and a half - from June 1955 to October 1956 - but did not lead to the conclusion of a peace treaty. The parties settled on an intermediate option - the Joint Declaration, which partly solved the problem of the fate of the two islands. From the Joint Declaration of the USSR and Japan of October 19
1956:
"9. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and Japan agreed to continue negotiations on the conclusion of a peace treaty after the restoration of normal diplomatic relations between the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and Japan.
At the same time, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, meeting the wishes of Japan and taking into account the interests of the Japanese state, agrees to the transfer of the Habomai Islands and the Shikotan Islands to Japan, however, that the actual transfer of these islands to Japan will be made after the conclusion of a peace treaty between the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and Japan ." .
At the same time, S. Matsumoto from the Japanese side and Deputy Foreign Minister A. Gromyko from the USSR exchanged letters expressing the consent of the parties after the restoration of diplomatic relations to continue negotiations on the conclusion of a peace treaty, including the territorial issue.
However, soon Washington intervened in relations between Moscow and Tokyo, not interested in normalizing them. US Secretary of State A. Dulles told his Japanese counterpart that if Japan renounces its claims to Kunashir and Iturup, the US will not liberate Okinawa and the entire Ryukyu archipelago, occupied as a result of World War II. This led to the fact that Japan began to openly demand the transfer of all four islands to it: Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and the Habomai Islands.
On January 19, 1960, Japan signed the "Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security Guarantees" with the United States, which regulated the presence of US troops in Japan. In response, the Soviet government stated that “... it cannot help the transfer of these islands to Japan to expand the territory used by foreign troops.<…>(And) only on the condition of the withdrawal of all foreign troops from the territory of Japan and the signing of a peace treaty between the USSR and Japan, the islands of Habomai and Shikotan will be transferred to Japan. The Japanese side responded to this statement that the Japanese-American treaty could not affect the agreements between the USSR and Japan established in 1956, since at that time foreign troops were already on the territory of Japan.
Despite the tough positions, the parties did not stop looking for ways to resolve the problem, which was reflected in the joint Japanese-Soviet statement of 1973, which expressed intentions to "continue negotiations on a peace treaty" .
Early 80s It was marked by a sharp deterioration in relations between the USSR and Japan, a close ally of the United States, which was associated with a new round of the Cold War and the entry of Soviet troops into Afghanistan. At the same time, the campaign "for the return of the northern territories" was intensified, within the framework of which the "Northern Territories Day - February 7" was established in 1981 (the day the Shimoda Treaty of 1855 was signed). Trips to inspect the "northern territories" by members of the cabinet of ministers and even by the Prime Minister of Japan became more frequent. On February 16, 1981, in a statement by the USSR Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the attention of the Japanese government was drawn to the fact that the campaign of territorial claims against the Soviet Union "has recently acquired a character bordering on hostility" and that such steps by the Japanese government "can only be qualified as deliberately aimed at worsening Soviet-Japanese relations".
The position of the USSR at that time was that there was no "unresolved territorial problem" in Soviet-Japanese relations. Tokyo's minimum task was to induce the Soviet leadership to recognize the existence of the territorial issue and go to discuss it. To this end, Japan declared the principle of "inseparability of politics and economics", according to which the development of Japanese-Soviet economic relations was made directly dependent on the resolution of the territorial issue. This led to a stagnation in economic cooperation between states.
To reduce the level of tension in the Far East, Moscow decided to resume direct dialogue with Japan. In 1986, the new Foreign Minister E. Shevardnadze paid an official visit to Tokyo. However, at that time, the Japanese direction in M. Gorbachev's policy had not yet departed from the principles of previous years. Thus, receiving the Japanese delegation, Shevardnadze stated: “As for the so-called “territorial issue”, the Soviet side considers this issue resolved on the appropriate historical and international legal basis.” .
But already in 1989-1990, when the economic situation in the USSR deteriorated sharply, the idea of ​​receiving material compensation from Japan for the transfer of the islands spread in government circles. However, she immediately met with stiff resistance among the deputies of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR. Gorbachev "disowned" the idea of ​​selling the islands, but at the same time expressed his readiness to discuss the whole range of issues, including the peace treaty and, in its context, the issue of the border.

Disputed Islands with Russian and Japanese Names.
M. Gorbachev was the first in post-war history to recognize the existence of a "territorial issue" with Japan and expressed his readiness to discuss it at official negotiations. The joint statement following his visit to Japan included a clause stating that the parties "carried out thorough and in-depth negotiations on the entire range of issues related to the development and conclusion of a peace treaty between the USSR and Japan, including the problem of territorial demarcation, taking into account the positions of the parties on ownership Habomai Islands, Shikotan Islands, Kunashir Islands and Iturup Islands. As an achievement, the promise of the President of the USSR to establish a visa-free regime for visiting the four South Kuril Islands by Japanese citizens was perceived in Tokyo, as well as to reduce the number of Soviet military contingents stationed on these islands.
One of the reasons why Gorbachev could not make the deal "Kurils for loans" was the position of B. Yeltsin. The latter sought to seize the initiative in negotiations with the Japanese government. In general, the plans of Yeltsin and his team and the plans of Gorbachev's team boiled down to one thing - to turn the South Kuriles into an object of bargaining with Japan. The only difference was that Gorbachev sought to receive Japanese assistance as soon as possible to save "perestroika", while Yeltsin persuaded the Japanese, providing financial support to Russia, to wait with obtaining the islands. This was precisely what the so-called "Yeltsin's five-stage plan" was aimed at, according to which the territorial dispute was to be resolved in favor of Japan after 15-20 years.
The meaning of Yeltsin's plan boiled down to the following. At the first stage, it was supposed to move away from the position taken by the USSR and recognize the existence of a dispute between countries. This was supposed to contribute to the establishment of the corresponding public opinion in the USSR. Then - in 3-5 years (the second stage) it was supposed to declare the islands free for Japanese business. The third stage is the demilitarization of the islands in 5-7 years. At the fourth stage, the parties must sign a peace treaty. At the same time, the following options for resolving the territorial dispute were proposed: 1. The islands will be under the common protectorate of the two countries; 2. Islands are given the status of free territories; 3. Transfer of the islands to Japan.
After the collapse of the USSR, the Russian government began to lean towards the early conclusion of a peace treaty in order to receive material assistance. However, the protest movement unfolding at that time in Russia against the transfer of the islands forced Yeltsin to change his plan of action. Therefore, his visit to Japan in the fall of 1993 did not bring radical decisions on the issue of the South Kuriles. The "Tokyo Declaration" spoke only of the recognition by the Russian government of the existence of the "territorial problem" and declared the intention of the parties to seek ways to solve it. Despite the insistence of the Japanese side, the text of the document did not include confirmation of the validity of the clause of the Soviet-Japanese joint declaration, which spoke of the possibility of transferring the two islands to Japan after the signing of the peace treaty. Thus, the position of the Russian government in the Japanese direction was inconsistent.
In November 1997, a high-level meeting was held in Krasnoyarsk between the Prime Minister of Japan R. Hashimoto and the President of the Russian Federation B.N. Yeltsin. An agreement was reached that, "based on the Tokyo Declaration, make every effort to conclude a peace treaty before the year 2000" (Krasnoyarsk agreement). At a summit meeting in Kavanagh (April 1998), Japanese Prime Minister R. Hashimoto put forward the so-called "Kavana proposal" aimed at resolving the issue of ownership of the four islands, the answer to which was the "Moscow proposal" put forward by the Russian side during a visit to Russia by Prime Minister K. Obuchi (November 1998). However, the positions of the parties did not coincide, which did not allow the implementation of the Krasnoyarsk agreement on the conclusion of a peace treaty until 2000.
In September 1999, the earlier decision on the maximum ease of visiting the islands of Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and Habomai by Japanese citizens from among their former residents and members of their families came into force.
Thus, having considered the dynamics of Soviet-Japanese (later - Russian-Japanese) relations in the second half of the twentieth century, we can conclude the following. The lack of clear, consistent and coordinated positions of the parties on the issue of territorial demarcation, the dependence of government policy on public sentiment on such a sensitive issue, as well as interference in bilateral relations by third countries, led to a delay in resolving the problem and deepening contradictions between the parties. However, despite numerous problems, positive developments in the issue of conflict settlement can be noted. Such as the official recognition by the Russian leadership of the existence of a “territorial dispute”, the adoption of joint declarations stipulating the intentions of the parties to negotiate to resolve the issue, the establishment of a visa-free regime for visiting the islands by former residents, as well as members of their families.

CHAPTER 3
THE QUESTION OF DISPUTED TERRITORIES IN THE XXI CENTURY
BASIC POSITIONS OF THE PARTIES.

New hopes for a quick solution to the "territorial issue" appeared in Japan after the arrival of the new Russian President V. Putin. Following a working meeting between Vladimir Putin and Prime Minister of Japan Y. Mori in Irkutsk on March 25, 2001, the Irkutsk Statement of the President of Russia and the Prime Minister of Japan was signed on the further continuation of negotiations on the problem of a peace treaty, which expressed mutual intention to intensify the negotiation process based on the documents adopted so far, including the Joint Declaration of the USSR and Japan in 1956 .
A new version of the "compromise" was proposed by Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori in Irkutsk. He also divided the entire process of transferring the islands into two periods, but according to a slightly different principle than in the “Yeltsin plan”. First - the conclusion of an agreement on the transfer of Shikotan and Habomai and the signing of a peace treaty between Japan and Russia, and then - negotiations on the other two islands. This would mean the actual recognition by Russia of Japanese sovereignty over all the islands, which immediately caused controversy in the media. In Japan, this option also did not suit many, since it did not involve the simultaneous transfer of all four islands. In addition, it was not clear whether the Russian side accepted the offer. But soon the situation was clarified by the harsh statement of the new Prime Minister of Japan, Junichiro Koizumi, who demanded that Russia transfer all four "disputed islands", and even before the conclusion of a peace treaty.
On November 14, 2004, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, on the eve of the visit of Russian President Vladimir Putin to Japan, stated that Russia, as the successor state of the USSR, recognizes the 1956 Declaration as existing and is ready to conduct territorial negotiations with Japan on its basis. This formulation of the question caused a lively discussion among Russian politicians. Vladimir Putin supported the Foreign Ministry's position, stipulating that Russia "will fulfill all its obligations" only "to the extent that our partners are ready to fulfill these agreements." Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi said in response that Japan was not satisfied with the transfer of only two islands: "If the ownership of all the islands is not determined, the peace treaty will not be signed." At the same time, the Japanese prime minister promised to show flexibility in determining the timing of the transfer of the islands.
In 2009-2010, the Japanese government repeatedly made harsh statements about the issue of the "northern territories", which subsequently led to an aggravation of relations between states. So on May 21, 2009, Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso, during a meeting of the upper house of parliament, called the southern Kuriles "illegally occupied territories" and said that he was waiting for proposals from Russia on approaches to solving this problem. Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Andrei Nesterenko commented on this statement as "illegal" and "politically incorrect." June 11, 2009. The lower house of the Japanese parliament approved amendments to the law "On special measures to assist in resolving the issue of the Northern Territories and similar ones", which contain a provision on the ownership of four islands of the South Kuril ridge by Japan. The Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement calling such actions by the Japanese side inappropriate and unacceptable. June 24, 2009 was published
etc.................

The Kuril Islands are represented by a series of Far Eastern island territories, they have one side, this is the Kamchatka Peninsula, and the other is about. Hokkaido in . The Kuril Islands of Russia are represented by the Sakhalin Oblast, which stretches for about 1,200 km in length with an available area of ​​15,600 square kilometers.

The islands of the Kuril ridge are represented by two groups located opposite each other - called Big and Small. A large group located in the south belongs to Kunashir, Iturup and others, in the center - Simushir, Keta and in the north are the rest of the island territories.

Shikotan, Habomai and a number of others are considered to be the Small Kuriles. For the most part, all island territories are mountainous and go up to 2,339 meters in height. The Kuril Islands on their lands have about 40 volcanic hills that are still active. Also here is the location of springs with hot mineral water. The south of the Kuriles is covered with forest plantations, and the north attracts with unique tundra vegetation.

The problem of the Kuril Islands lies in the unresolved dispute between the Japanese and Russian sides over who owns them. And it has been open since WWII.

The Kuril Islands after the war began to belong to the USSR. But Japan considers the territories of the southern Kuriles, and these are Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan with the Habomai Islands group, as its territory, without having a legal basis for that. Russia does not recognize the fact of a dispute with the Japanese side over these territories, since their ownership is legal.

The problem of the Kuril Islands is the main obstacle to a peaceful settlement of relations between Japan and Russia.

The essence of the dispute between Japan and Russia

The Japanese demand that the Kuril Islands be returned to them. There, almost the entire population is convinced that these lands are originally Japanese. This dispute between the two states has been going on for a very long time, escalating after the Second World War.
Russia is not inclined to concede to the Japanese leaders of the state in this matter. The peace agreement has not been signed to this day, and this is connected precisely with the four disputed South Kuril Islands. About the legitimacy of Japan's claims to the Kuril Islands in this video.

The meanings of the southern Kuriles

The Southern Kuriles have several meanings for both countries:

1. Military. The Southern Kuriles are of military importance, thanks to the only outlet to the Pacific Ocean for the country's fleet located there. And all because of the scarcity of geographical formations. At the moment, the ships enter the ocean waters through the Sangar Strait, because it is impossible to pass through the La Perouse Strait due to icing. Therefore, submarines are located in Kamchatka - Avachinskaya Bay. The military bases operating in the Soviet era have now been looted and abandoned.
2. Economic. Economic importance - in the Sakhalin region there is a rather serious hydrocarbon potential. And belonging to Russia of the entire territory of the Kuriles, allows you to use the waters there at your discretion. Although its central part belongs to the Japanese side. In addition to water resources, there is such a rare metal as rhenium. Extracting it, the Russian Federation is in third place in the extraction of minerals and sulfur. For the Japanese, this area is important for fishing and agricultural purposes. This caught fish is used by the Japanese to grow rice - they simply pour it into the rice fields for fertilizer.
3. Social. By and large, there is no special social interest for ordinary people in the southern Kuriles. This is because there are no modern megacities, people mostly work there and live in cabins. Supplies are delivered by air, and less often by water due to constant storms. Therefore, the Kuril Islands are more of a military-industrial facility than a social one.
4. Tourist. In this regard, things are better in the southern Kuriles. These places will be of interest to many people who are attracted by everything real, natural and extreme. It is unlikely that anyone will remain indifferent at the sight of a thermal spring gushing out of the ground, or from climbing the volcano caldera and crossing the fumarole field on foot. And there is no need to talk about the views that open to the eye.

For this reason, the dispute over the ownership of the Kuril Islands has not moved forward.

Dispute over the Kuril territory

Who owns these four island territories - Shikotan, Iturup, Kunashir and the Habomai Islands, is not an easy question.

Information from written sources indicates the discoverers of the Kuriles - the Dutch. The Russians were the first to populate the territory of Chishim. Shikotan Island and the other three are designated for the first time by the Japanese. But the fact of discovery does not yet give grounds for the possession of this territory.

The island of Shikotan is considered to be the end of the world because of the cape of the same name located near the village of Malokurilsky. It impresses with its 40-meter drop into the ocean waters. This place is called the end of the world due to the amazing view of the Pacific Ocean.
Shikotan Island translates as Big City. It stretches for 27 kilometers, has a width of 13 km, occupied area - 225 square meters. km. The highest point of the island is the mountain of the same name, rising to 412 meters. Partially its territory belongs to the state nature reserve.

Shikotan Island has a very indented coastline with many coves, headlands and cliffs.

Previously, it was thought that the mountains on the island are volcanoes that have ceased to erupt, with which the Kuril Islands abound. But they turned out to be rocks displaced by shifts in lithospheric plates.

A bit of history

Long before the Russians and the Japanese, the Kuril Islands were inhabited by the Ainu. The first information among Russians and Japanese about the Kuriles appeared only in the 17th century. A Russian expedition was sent in the 18th century, after which about 9,000 Ainu became citizens of Russia.

A treaty was signed between Russia and Japan (1855), called Shimodsky, where the boundaries were established, allowing Japanese citizens to trade on 2/3 of this land. Sakhalin remained a nobody's territory. After 20 years, Russia became the undivided owner of this land, then losing the south in the Russo-Japanese War. But during the Second World War, Soviet troops were still able to take back the south of Sakhalin land and the Kuril Islands as a whole.
Between the states that won the victory and Japan, nevertheless, a peace agreement was signed and it happened in San Francisco in 1951. And according to it, Japan has absolutely no rights to the Kuril Islands.

But then the Soviet side did not sign, which many researchers considered a mistake. But there were good reasons for this:

• The document did not indicate specifically what was included in the Kuriles. The Americans said that it is necessary to apply for this to a special international court. Plus, a member of the delegation of the Japanese state announced that the southern disputed islands are not the territory of the Kuril Islands.
• The document also did not indicate exactly who the Kuriles would belong to. That is, the issue remained controversial.

Between the USSR and the Japanese side in 1956, a declaration was signed, preparing a platform for the main peace agreement. In it, the Land of the Soviets goes to meet the Japanese and agrees to transfer to them only the two disputed islands of Habomai and Shikotan. But with a condition - only after the signing of a peace agreement.

The declaration contains several subtleties:

• The word "transfer" means that they belong to the USSR.
• This transfer will actually take place after the signing of the peace treaty.
• This applies only to the two Kuril Islands.

This was a positive development between the Soviet Union and the Japanese side, but it caused alarm among the Americans. Thanks to pressure from Washington, the ministerial chairs were completely changed in the Japanese government, and new officials who rose to high positions began to prepare a military agreement between America and Japan, which began to operate in 1960.

After that, a call came from Japan to give up not two islands proposed by the USSR, but four. America puts pressure on the fact that all agreements between the Land of Soviets and Japan are not obligatory to be fulfilled, they are supposedly declarative. And the existing and current military agreement between the Japanese and the Americans implies the deployment of their troops on Japanese territory. Accordingly, now they have come even closer to Russian territory.

Based on all this, Russian diplomats declared that until all foreign troops were withdrawn from its territory, it was impossible to even talk about a peace agreement. But in any case, we are talking about only two islands of the Kuriles.

As a result, the power structures of America are still located on the territory of Japan. The Japanese insist on the transfer of the 4 Kuril Islands, as stated in the declaration.

The second half of the 80s of the 20th century was marked by the weakening of the Soviet Union, and under these conditions, the Japanese side again raises this topic. But the dispute about who will own the South Kuril Islands, the countries remained open. The Tokyo Declaration of 1993 says that the Russian Federation is the legal successor of the Soviet Union, respectively, and previously signed papers must be recognized by both parties. It also indicated the direction to move towards the solution of the territorial affiliation of the disputed four Kuril Islands.

The 21st century, and specifically 2004, was marked by the raising of this topic again at a meeting between President Putin of the Russian Federation and the Prime Minister of Japan. And again, everything repeated - the Russian side offers its own conditions for signing a peace agreement, and Japanese officials insist that all four South Kuril Islands be transferred to their disposal.

The year 2005 was marked by the readiness of the Russian president to end the dispute, guided by the 1956 agreement and transfer two island territories to Japan, but the Japanese leaders did not agree with this proposal.

In order to somehow reduce tension between the two states, the Japanese side was offered to help develop nuclear energy, develop infrastructure and tourism, and improve the environmental and security situation. The Russian side accepted this proposal.

At the moment, for Russia there is no question - who owns the Kuril Islands. Without any doubt, this is the territory of the Russian Federation, based on real facts - following the results of the Second World War and the generally recognized UN Charter.