Will the Japanese hold a referendum on the Kuril Islands?
On the first day of the new year, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe made a curious statement. In an interview with Asahi, he announced that the transfer of the southern part of the Kuriles to Japan would be carried out taking into account the wishes of the Russian inhabitants of the territories that Tokyo considers controversial.
He stressed that there is no talk of deportation or other forced eviction in the event of the transfer of the islands of Japan, and negotiations "initially do not go from the position of" get out of here. "
“This should be done in such a way that the Russians living there agree with the transition of belonging to Japan,” Abe quoted TASS.
By achieving the positions of Kurilians desirable for Tokyo, the Japanese Prime Minister considers the implementation of the concept of joint economic activity. Obviously, we are talking about the involvement of residents in the work of Japanese enterprises on particularly favorable conditions and the granting of citizenship to the country of the rising sun. Or the organization of resettlement is not willing to go under the authority of Tokyo to other Russian territories with good lifting.
Well, or some other variant of the actual bribery of Russians living on the islands. How they should agree to change the nationality of their small homeland, in the form of a referendum or otherwise, Abe did not explain.
Speech by the Japanese leader caused immediate feedback in Moscow. In particular, Russian Senator Franz Klintsevich expressed astonishment at Abe’s speech.
“The transfer of the so-called northern territories to Japan is out of the question. And the point is not only that the US missile defense can appear on the islands overnight, which have not only a defensive purpose. The question is much more important, "- wrote the senator on Facebook, recalling that we are talking about the inviolability of the borders of Russia and its security in the broadest terms.
A little earlier, Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Defense Committee, Yuri Shvytkin, declared that the Japanese claims were insolvent.
“We need to once again designate that the Kuril Islands are the territory of the Russian Federation. At the same time, we have the right to dispose of our territory as we see fit, ”said the parliamentarian.
But how, then, to understand Shinzo Abe’s public reflections on the topic “how to arrange the Southern Kuriles” and what will be the fate of Russian citizens on the islands? Judging by the text of his speech, he does not even admit that at least Shikotan Island and the Habomai Ridge will go to Japan in the foreseeable future. Is the Japanese prime minister, like the notorious head of another country neighboring Russia, functioning in a different reality?
However, this is not at all the inadequacy of the Japanese leader. Recall that last December, the head of the Foreign Ministry of Russia explicitly stated that he allowed the transfer of Russian territories to Japan under certain circumstances.
Sergei Lavrov said that Russia is ready to transfer part of the Kuril Islands to Japan, subject to recognition of the outcome of the Second World War. And this speech of the head of the foreign ministry was disavowed or not refuted.
On the contrary, presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov noted that a compromise would be required on the Southern Kuriles issue (before the Kremlin rejected the very existence of such a “question”). However, he ruled out the possibility of "automatic transfer of the islands to the Japanese side." That is, the transfer is not automatic, so to speak, in manual mode, yet allowed?
Is it any wonder that after such statements Abe, as they say, rolled his lip? Moreover, it is possible that this is only the visible part of the “iceberg” - those negotiations that are going (may be going) in this direction.
However, this raises the suspicion that the state organism of our country suffers from a dissociative identity disorder, or more simply, a split personality. In fact, a representative of the executive branch speaks of the reality of the transfer of the islands, while lawmakers categorically reject such a possibility. What's the matter?
The right hand does not know what the left one is doing? Or is someone deliberately deceiving: the minister of the Japanese, or the senator - the electorate?
Misleading the Russian public would be completely understandable. After all, the absolute majority of our fellow citizens are categorically against any territorial concessions, and consider the transfer of part of the Kuriles to be a betrayal.
But to drive the nose of the Japanese hardly makes any sense. Suppose that Sergey Lavrov “feeds breakfast” in Tokyo in order to reduce the activity of Japanese participation in aggressive programs directed against our country.
If so, then it can be argued that the trick did not work. Since in the same December 2018, Tokyo adopted a national defense strengthening program, according to which our country is regarded as the main potential adversary.
“The United States remains the strongest power, however, competition between states is increasing, and we recognize the importance of strategic rivalry with Russia and China, which challenge the regional order,” the program says.
It is also indicated that in the context of solving this task, two Aegis Ashore missile defense complexes are being deployed in the country, which Vladimir Putin rightly called suitable for launching ground-to-ground missiles. One of them will be located in the northern prefecture of Akita, that is, it is aimed against us.
That is, the version regarding Tokyo’s deliberately misleading is unlikely, especially since such steps in international politics are more detrimental than good.
According to Sergey Lavrov, during the negotiations in Singapore, the parties decided to conclude a peace treaty on the basis of the Soviet-Japanese agreement 1956 of the year, according to which Russia should hand over Japan to Habomai and Shikotan Island. Lavrov noted that Moscow always follows international law, but the details of the deal have yet to be discussed.
However, in connection with this, it is not bad to remember why it was in 1956’s year that Khrushchev didn’t manage to turn this treacherous combination, with which he hoped to wrest Japan from American influence.
Contrary to his hopes that after such a generous concession, the Japanese would quickly complete the negotiations (until the Russians changed their minds), they presented a new draft treaty. It envisaged the “return” of Japan to all the Kuriles, right up to Kamchatka, and to South Sakhalin. Moreover, the Japanese government made claims on certain “rights” to fishing in the areas adjacent to the territorial waters of the USSR.
That is, the unjustified decision of Khrushchev to make territorial concessions to Japan led to the opposite result. As it happened before in the Russian-Japanese relations, Tokyo perceived the proposed compromise not as a generous gesture of goodwill, but as a signal to toughen the territorial requirements imposed on the Soviet Union. Especially since this tightening was supported by the Americans.
“N.S. Khrushchev reject sovereignty over part of the Kuril Islands in favor of Japan was a rash, voluntaristic act ... Japan’s concession to part of Soviet territory, to which Khrushchev went without permission of the USSR Supreme Soviet and Soviet people, destroyed the international legal basis of the Yalta and Potsdam agreements and contradicted the San Francisco to the peace treaty in which Japan’s refusal from South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands was recorded, ”a member of the Soviet delegation wrote later to London x talks Academician Sergei Tikhvin.
As you know, Alaska and the Russian possessions in California sold for a certain amount (the gold rush has not yet begun there). And what does the Russian Foreign Minister expect to receive today from this dubious deal?
Japan is no less interested in economic cooperation with Russia than we are. Regardless of whether a peace treaty is concluded or not. Guided, as before, the Japanese will only benefit. To count on gratitude is highly naive: there is no such thing in world politics.
Earlier, Abe said that the conclusion of a peace treaty between Tokyo and Moscow is necessary for regional stability. However, for regional stability, we need not so much some kind of agreement, which at any moment may turn out to be a piece of paper, but the real demilitarization of Japan and the removal from its territory of American bases that threaten not only our country, but also China and the DPRK.
The head of the Russian Foreign Ministry noted that it was important that for Japan the conclusion of a peace treaty would mean recognition of the outcome of the Second World War. This is an "integral step" in any negotiations on the Kuril Islands, according to Lavrov, who, it must be assumed, considers such recognition so important that he is ready to give the Russian islands for him.
Recall that this recognition has already taken place. After the signing of the so-called Petersburg treatise 1875, the Kuril Islands, in exchange for recognition of Sakhalin by the Russian territory, passed to Japan.
Alexander II naively believed that Japan would become Russia's peaceful and calm neighbor. When the Japanese, justifying their claims, refer to the 1875 contract of the year, for some reason they forget about his first article: "... the eternal peace and friendship between the Russian and Japanese empires will be established in the future." This point, as we see, is contradicted even by the national defense strengthening program adopted by Tokyo last December and defining our country as the main enemy.
Be that as it may, but after the deal of Alexander II, Russia actually lost access to the Pacific Ocean. Japan had the opportunity at any time to begin a sea blockade of Sakhalin and the whole of Far Eastern Russia (it will receive the same opportunity today if the islands are handed over to it).
As is known, in the 1904 year, Japan treacherously attacked Russia, and when concluding a peace treaty in Portsmouth in 1905, the Japanese side demanded that Sakhalin Island be indemnified from Russia.
To the indication that this requirement is contrary to the 1875 agreement of the year, the Japanese replied: "The war cancels all the treaties, you were defeated and let us proceed from the current situation."
But even without historical excursions, the value and inviolability of treaties in today's world are demonstrated by the main friends of Tokyo - the Americans. And I would not place high hopes on the recognition of the results of World War II. Today the Japanese recognize them, but tomorrow they won't.
Moreover, the war against our country, for which the Japanese, in alliance with the Americans, are intensively preparing today, will once again "cancel all treaties."
So is it worth exchanging for a scrap of paper the most important in the military, geopolitical and economic sense of the island, inhabited by Russian people?
He stressed that there is no talk of deportation or other forced eviction in the event of the transfer of the islands of Japan, and negotiations "initially do not go from the position of" get out of here. "
“This should be done in such a way that the Russians living there agree with the transition of belonging to Japan,” Abe quoted TASS.
By achieving the positions of Kurilians desirable for Tokyo, the Japanese Prime Minister considers the implementation of the concept of joint economic activity. Obviously, we are talking about the involvement of residents in the work of Japanese enterprises on particularly favorable conditions and the granting of citizenship to the country of the rising sun. Or the organization of resettlement is not willing to go under the authority of Tokyo to other Russian territories with good lifting.
Well, or some other variant of the actual bribery of Russians living on the islands. How they should agree to change the nationality of their small homeland, in the form of a referendum or otherwise, Abe did not explain.
Speech by the Japanese leader caused immediate feedback in Moscow. In particular, Russian Senator Franz Klintsevich expressed astonishment at Abe’s speech.
“The transfer of the so-called northern territories to Japan is out of the question. And the point is not only that the US missile defense can appear on the islands overnight, which have not only a defensive purpose. The question is much more important, "- wrote the senator on Facebook, recalling that we are talking about the inviolability of the borders of Russia and its security in the broadest terms.
A little earlier, Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Defense Committee, Yuri Shvytkin, declared that the Japanese claims were insolvent.
“We need to once again designate that the Kuril Islands are the territory of the Russian Federation. At the same time, we have the right to dispose of our territory as we see fit, ”said the parliamentarian.
But how, then, to understand Shinzo Abe’s public reflections on the topic “how to arrange the Southern Kuriles” and what will be the fate of Russian citizens on the islands? Judging by the text of his speech, he does not even admit that at least Shikotan Island and the Habomai Ridge will go to Japan in the foreseeable future. Is the Japanese prime minister, like the notorious head of another country neighboring Russia, functioning in a different reality?
However, this is not at all the inadequacy of the Japanese leader. Recall that last December, the head of the Foreign Ministry of Russia explicitly stated that he allowed the transfer of Russian territories to Japan under certain circumstances.
Sergei Lavrov said that Russia is ready to transfer part of the Kuril Islands to Japan, subject to recognition of the outcome of the Second World War. And this speech of the head of the foreign ministry was disavowed or not refuted.
On the contrary, presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov noted that a compromise would be required on the Southern Kuriles issue (before the Kremlin rejected the very existence of such a “question”). However, he ruled out the possibility of "automatic transfer of the islands to the Japanese side." That is, the transfer is not automatic, so to speak, in manual mode, yet allowed?
Is it any wonder that after such statements Abe, as they say, rolled his lip? Moreover, it is possible that this is only the visible part of the “iceberg” - those negotiations that are going (may be going) in this direction.
However, this raises the suspicion that the state organism of our country suffers from a dissociative identity disorder, or more simply, a split personality. In fact, a representative of the executive branch speaks of the reality of the transfer of the islands, while lawmakers categorically reject such a possibility. What's the matter?
The right hand does not know what the left one is doing? Or is someone deliberately deceiving: the minister of the Japanese, or the senator - the electorate?
Misleading the Russian public would be completely understandable. After all, the absolute majority of our fellow citizens are categorically against any territorial concessions, and consider the transfer of part of the Kuriles to be a betrayal.
But to drive the nose of the Japanese hardly makes any sense. Suppose that Sergey Lavrov “feeds breakfast” in Tokyo in order to reduce the activity of Japanese participation in aggressive programs directed against our country.
If so, then it can be argued that the trick did not work. Since in the same December 2018, Tokyo adopted a national defense strengthening program, according to which our country is regarded as the main potential adversary.
“The United States remains the strongest power, however, competition between states is increasing, and we recognize the importance of strategic rivalry with Russia and China, which challenge the regional order,” the program says.
It is also indicated that in the context of solving this task, two Aegis Ashore missile defense complexes are being deployed in the country, which Vladimir Putin rightly called suitable for launching ground-to-ground missiles. One of them will be located in the northern prefecture of Akita, that is, it is aimed against us.
That is, the version regarding Tokyo’s deliberately misleading is unlikely, especially since such steps in international politics are more detrimental than good.
According to Sergey Lavrov, during the negotiations in Singapore, the parties decided to conclude a peace treaty on the basis of the Soviet-Japanese agreement 1956 of the year, according to which Russia should hand over Japan to Habomai and Shikotan Island. Lavrov noted that Moscow always follows international law, but the details of the deal have yet to be discussed.
However, in connection with this, it is not bad to remember why it was in 1956’s year that Khrushchev didn’t manage to turn this treacherous combination, with which he hoped to wrest Japan from American influence.
Contrary to his hopes that after such a generous concession, the Japanese would quickly complete the negotiations (until the Russians changed their minds), they presented a new draft treaty. It envisaged the “return” of Japan to all the Kuriles, right up to Kamchatka, and to South Sakhalin. Moreover, the Japanese government made claims on certain “rights” to fishing in the areas adjacent to the territorial waters of the USSR.
That is, the unjustified decision of Khrushchev to make territorial concessions to Japan led to the opposite result. As it happened before in the Russian-Japanese relations, Tokyo perceived the proposed compromise not as a generous gesture of goodwill, but as a signal to toughen the territorial requirements imposed on the Soviet Union. Especially since this tightening was supported by the Americans.
“N.S. Khrushchev reject sovereignty over part of the Kuril Islands in favor of Japan was a rash, voluntaristic act ... Japan’s concession to part of Soviet territory, to which Khrushchev went without permission of the USSR Supreme Soviet and Soviet people, destroyed the international legal basis of the Yalta and Potsdam agreements and contradicted the San Francisco to the peace treaty in which Japan’s refusal from South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands was recorded, ”a member of the Soviet delegation wrote later to London x talks Academician Sergei Tikhvin.
As you know, Alaska and the Russian possessions in California sold for a certain amount (the gold rush has not yet begun there). And what does the Russian Foreign Minister expect to receive today from this dubious deal?
Japan is no less interested in economic cooperation with Russia than we are. Regardless of whether a peace treaty is concluded or not. Guided, as before, the Japanese will only benefit. To count on gratitude is highly naive: there is no such thing in world politics.
Earlier, Abe said that the conclusion of a peace treaty between Tokyo and Moscow is necessary for regional stability. However, for regional stability, we need not so much some kind of agreement, which at any moment may turn out to be a piece of paper, but the real demilitarization of Japan and the removal from its territory of American bases that threaten not only our country, but also China and the DPRK.
The head of the Russian Foreign Ministry noted that it was important that for Japan the conclusion of a peace treaty would mean recognition of the outcome of the Second World War. This is an "integral step" in any negotiations on the Kuril Islands, according to Lavrov, who, it must be assumed, considers such recognition so important that he is ready to give the Russian islands for him.
Recall that this recognition has already taken place. After the signing of the so-called Petersburg treatise 1875, the Kuril Islands, in exchange for recognition of Sakhalin by the Russian territory, passed to Japan.
Alexander II naively believed that Japan would become Russia's peaceful and calm neighbor. When the Japanese, justifying their claims, refer to the 1875 contract of the year, for some reason they forget about his first article: "... the eternal peace and friendship between the Russian and Japanese empires will be established in the future." This point, as we see, is contradicted even by the national defense strengthening program adopted by Tokyo last December and defining our country as the main enemy.
Be that as it may, but after the deal of Alexander II, Russia actually lost access to the Pacific Ocean. Japan had the opportunity at any time to begin a sea blockade of Sakhalin and the whole of Far Eastern Russia (it will receive the same opportunity today if the islands are handed over to it).
As is known, in the 1904 year, Japan treacherously attacked Russia, and when concluding a peace treaty in Portsmouth in 1905, the Japanese side demanded that Sakhalin Island be indemnified from Russia.
To the indication that this requirement is contrary to the 1875 agreement of the year, the Japanese replied: "The war cancels all the treaties, you were defeated and let us proceed from the current situation."
But even without historical excursions, the value and inviolability of treaties in today's world are demonstrated by the main friends of Tokyo - the Americans. And I would not place high hopes on the recognition of the results of World War II. Today the Japanese recognize them, but tomorrow they won't.
Moreover, the war against our country, for which the Japanese, in alliance with the Americans, are intensively preparing today, will once again "cancel all treaties."
So is it worth exchanging for a scrap of paper the most important in the military, geopolitical and economic sense of the island, inhabited by Russian people?
Information