Military Review

Japanese professor named "guilty" for the loss of the Kuril Islands

51
Japanese professor named "guilty" for the loss of the Kuril Islands

In Japan, which is experiencing real “phantom pains” over the Kuril Islands, the search continues for the “culprits” that these territories, which there stubbornly continue to consider as their own, ended up in the hands of the USSR and subsequently Russia. Well, we can congratulate the enthusiasts there - judging by the publications in some media, they have had a real "breakthrough". Another question - what does this give Tokyo in the territorial dispute, in which Moscow clearly does not intend to concede?


As it became known, a professor at Waseda University Yuma Chefu told the world about some "declassified data of the Second World War", which he was able to get acquainted with in the framework of his research. According to such, the villain who deprived Japan of the happiness of possessing at least two of the four islands of the Kuril ridge is Alger Hiss, who in 1945 was an adviser to US President Theodore Roosevelt. It was he, according to the Japanese professor, "who deceived the head of the United States and transferred the territory of Japan to the Soviet Union."

According to the scientist, Hiss, who joined the US State Department in 1936 and by 1944 made a career there to become the director of one of the most important bureaus, in February 1945 personally accompanied President Roosevelt as an adviser to the famous Yalta conference. However, according to Chefu, at this meeting of the leaders of the USSR, the USA and Great Britain, a high-ranking State Department official acted as “Stalin's agent”. At the same time, he not only conveyed the most important information to the Soviet leader, but also lobbied the interests of the Soviet Union before his own patron.

As a result, as the Japanese researcher complains, the Soviet side "gained the upper hand in all issues in Yalta," including the transfer of the Kuriles to our country, as well as the observance of its interests in China, to the detriment of the "Chiang Kai-shek government." At the same time, referring to incomprehensible "documents" (exact sources are not indicated in any publication on this topic), the professor is trying to prove that the American "top" supposedly had an "alternative" opinion about the fate of the islands - the Soviet Union, in accordance with only the Northern Kuriles were to be withdrawn from them, and the Southern Kurils were to remain with Japan.

The culprit of the fact that this "proposal" was not even studied by Roosevelt, Chefu persistently names Hiss, who, according to his version, ultimately convinced the president "to give the Russians all the islands entirely." At the same time, those circumstances are mentioned on the basis of which the Japanese scientist, in fact, builds his own sensational hypotheses. We are talking about accusations of the "communist past" and even "espionage in favor of the USSR", which at one time were officially put forward against Alger Hiss in the United States.

"Evidence", I must say, is very shaky. Yes, in 1948, a former member of the American Communist Party, Whittaker Chambers, spoke out against this gentleman with a whole heap of "revelations" - he was not only a communist himself, but also a "Russian spy". Hiss flatly denied all charges and even sued for libel. The proceedings dragged on until 1950, when a high-ranking official, who stubbornly did not want to admit his guilt, was nevertheless brought to justice, but not for espionage, but for alleged "perjury". Hiss didn’t even serve his five-year term, and when he was released, he continued to repeat his own innocence until his death.

At present, according to the testimony of authoritative American researchers, there is neither solid evidence that he was an agent of the USSR, nor data that unequivocally refute this statement. And if we consider that the trial over Hiss took place at the time of the most terrible revelry of "McCarthyism", to this day called in the United States itself a "witch hunt" and was the peak of the celebration in the country of anti-communist and Russophobic forces, then, accordingly, the credibility of the charges raises very serious doubts. But the Japanese scientist designates Khissa as the culprit for the loss of the Kuril Islands.

Be that as it may, but either a professor from a Japanese university knows something about this more than the Americans themselves, or this pundit simply displays an increased emotionality, which is usually unusual for his compatriots. To put it more frankly, he begins to fantasize, succumbing to the temptation to find "evidence" that the Soviet Union allegedly received the Kuril Islands "incorrectly" or as a result of some unworthy intrigue. The paper will endure everything ...

What can I say? Even if we assume that Hiss really acted in the interests of the Soviet Union, then this should be considered only another example of the brilliant work of Stalin's intelligence and diplomacy. And the question of the territorial affiliation of the Kuril Islands has long been closed.
Author:
Photos used:
Wikipedia / Alger Hiss (Photo Library of Congress)
51 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Ros 56
    Ros 56 16 November 2020 08: 23
    +7
    There is a good Russian proverb on this topic - after a fight, they don't wave their fists. Let this Japanese man learn it.
    1. Finches
      Finches 16 November 2020 08: 29
      16
      Personally, I agree with this point of view of the Japanese professor, it is the Yankees who are to blame, and they also dropped a vigorous bomb on you, two ... And you lick their ass! This is who the true enemy of Japan and all progressive mankind is, here it is not necessary to be a professor in order not to know this! laughing
      1. Reptiloid
        Reptiloid 16 November 2020 08: 53
        +5
        ..... Yankees ... nuclear bob dropped, two, And you lick their ass .....
        they like to lick!
        But the fact that they do not remember their crimes committed during CF! That's what! After all, it’s as if the Germans were making some territorial claims.
        1. Uncle lee
          Uncle lee 16 November 2020 09: 48
          +4
          Dima hi Nice picture !!
          1. Reptiloid
            Reptiloid 16 November 2020 10: 08
            +1
            Greetings, Vladimir! hi
            The picture is beautiful, and not one. There is a whole book --- 300 kinds of Fuji. But admiring Fuji has nothing to do with their war crimes. They they do not plead guilty of anything! They respect and love only themselves, their culture. It should be recalled that a famous artist from Austria recognized them ... Aryans of the Far East! He also painted landscapes. Like this.
            1. Uncle lee
              Uncle lee 16 November 2020 11: 41
              +2
              Quote: Reptiloid
              .arians of the Far East
              The picture in itself is a trifle, but the text: the rehash of "Someone has come down from the hill" ... in the Japanese manner!
              1. Reptiloid
                Reptiloid 16 November 2020 12: 28
                0
                I remember this song, but I only heard it from my grandmother. She sang Soviet songs.
                By the way, the Japanese show in various ways that they are not guilty of anything. For example, in Tokyo there is a memorial to Judge Radhabinod Pal. He is the only one of 11 judges of the International Military Tribunal, 1946, who insisted that the Japanese defendants should be found innocent. Although later the Japanese government signed the decisions in 1951. And this is not the only monument of this kind. hi
    2. Hunter 2
      Hunter 2 16 November 2020 08: 30
      +5
      May he not learn, this whining will continue ...
      Warriors of the Red Army and Navy - took (returned) these islands by the right of the Victors! The question is closed.
      1. NDR-791
        NDR-791 16 November 2020 09: 30
        +2
        Japanese professor named "guilty" for the loss of the Kuril Islands
        I think the professor almost wanted to say something. Perhaps he wanted to say ONLY the Kuril Islands. Wasn't the order to land on Hokkaido canceled? Was. And the professor is simply broadcasting "in the spirit of the party's policy." It cannot be said otherwise - they will peck.
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 16 November 2020 13: 05
          0
          Quote: NDR-791
          Was there a canceled order to land on Hokkaido? Was.

          It was canceled by G.S. Truman, informing Comrade. Stalin, that the latter lost a little coast. In August, he had already begun to slowly master the reality. And MacArthur was not Eisenhower, he treated the USSR without affection.
    3. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 16 November 2020 09: 37
      +2
      Quote: Ros 56
      There is a good Russian proverb on this topic - after a fight, they don't wave their fists.

      And when there is no one alive who signed these papers, but the signatures remain, no one can protest this. Here, the distinguished professor, "Overton windows" do not pass.
  2. Reviews
    Reviews 16 November 2020 08: 28
    +1
    there is neither solid evidence that he was an agent of the USSR, nor data that unequivocally refute this statement

    By definition, such a suspicion cannot be refuted; it can only be confirmed.
  3. Yngvar
    Yngvar 16 November 2020 08: 30
    +4
    It is difficult to suspect an American of working for the USSR! I believe that this is an example of brilliant Stalinist diplomacy!
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 16 November 2020 12: 49
      +1
      )))
      Why not. The Soviet infiltration in different periods was actively forced by both sides. Even now, by the way, it is actively forcing.
  4. Russ
    Russ 16 November 2020 08: 30
    +4
    Also look ...
    Yapi, start with yourself! yes
    Not figs to meddle ...
  5. V1er
    V1er 16 November 2020 08: 42
    +1
    Good. The Japanese are beginning to wake up slowly and see who their real enemy is. So maybe they will soon find out who bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki with nuclear bombs.
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 16 November 2020 13: 24
      0
      The topic of atomic bombs has long been chewed. It was a great success for the Japanese, allowing the imp. Hirohito and Premier Suzuki carry out a coup and remove the military from power. As a result, the defeat cost Japan relatively cheap, the losses of the Japanese civilians are comparable to any Romania or Yugoslavia. The plans of the Japanese militarists for their own population were much more hardcore.
  6. Doccor18
    Doccor18 16 November 2020 08: 46
    +2
    convinced the president "to give the Russians all the islands entirely" ...

    What nonsense. The islands were liberated by Soviet troops with the help of a military operation. What can Roosevelt "give" or "not give" there? Now, if the Pacific Fleet in 1945 was the same as in 1985, it would be possible to talk with Roosevelt about the "fate of Hokkaido." I believe that Roosevelt would not have refused Stalin, observing the Soviet squadrons at Sapporo, Nemuro and Kushiro ...
    1. Avior
      Avior 16 November 2020 09: 33
      +4
      The Yalta conference took place six months earlier than Soviet troops occupied the islands after Japan's surrender.
      And even then, in Yalta, Roosevelt agreed to transfer the Kuril Islands to the USSR.
      About four islands, because of which the cheese is boron now, and which are not included in any of the known agreements on the Kuril Islands as the Kuril Islands, however, there was no talk in Yalta.
    2. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 16 November 2020 12: 57
      +1
      Quote: Doccor18
      The islands were liberated by Soviet troops with the help of a military operation.

      The Kuril Islands were occupied by the Soviet side after the surrender of Japan. The American side did not object to these measures, since the Soviet side referred to the (controversial) Yalta agreements. Although the actions of the Soviet side caused surprise - the American side expected that territorial changes would be carried out following the signing of a peace treaty, and not instead of signing it.
      Quote: Doccor18
      What can Roosevelt "give" or "not give" there?

      Some strange question. What he sees fit.
      Quote: Doccor18
      Now, if the Pacific Fleet in 1945 was the same as in 1985

      )))
      If the Pacific Fleet in 45 had been (comparatively) the same as in 85, then Roosevelt would have negotiated with Hitler, not with Stalin. Firstly, because the USSR simply would not have had a land army: the navy is not cheap entertainment.
  7. Hagen
    Hagen 16 November 2020 08: 51
    +2
    the villain ......... is Alger Hiss, who in 1945 was an adviser to US President Theodore Roosevelt.

    Mr. Kharluzhny, during the presidency of Theodore Roosevelt, Alger Hiss was very young. He was even born at the end of his first cadence. I think you are wrong. Hiss could advise his distant relative, Franklin Roosevelt. It does not change the essence of the article, but I think it is worth considering. wink As for the research of the Japanese professor, they, of course, can cause some temporary tensions in Japan's relations with the United States, but insignificant. History, as a science, is characterized by the many discussed versions of its development and an infinite number of their interpretations. Here is only a special case of this variety. Perhaps that is why this science is attractive ...
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 16 November 2020 12: 58
      +2
      Quote: Hagen
      As for the research of the Japanese professor, they, of course, can cause some temporary tensions in Japan's relations with the United States.

      Can not. The professor didn't say anything new
  8. Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 16 November 2020 09: 10
    -1
    The USSR actually won a victory in Yalta on many issues. But such "researchers" as the Japanese forget that diplomacy does not win. Basically. Dexterous chatter with the tongue is only suitable for not fighting at the table, but for continuing to try to come to an agreement at least somehow. The army wins. As far as the army has won, diplomats can also "win". Diplomats can only lose, not achieving everything they can, thanks to the blood and sweat shed by the army.
    There have been many cases in history when one enemy had a victorious army, while the other had excellent intelligence. And the army has always won the victory ... Though I remember the same Cromwell. Found the "reason", hehe ...
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 16 November 2020 13: 14
      +2
      Quote: Mikhail3
      The army wins. As far as the army has won, diplomats can also "win". Diplomats can only lose

      Quite the opposite. Only diplomats win wars. The army may or may not lose, this improves or worsens the position of diplomats, but does not fully determine the conditions of peace. Victory in a war is completely beyond the capabilities of the army.
      1. Mikhail3
        Mikhail3 16 November 2020 13: 48
        +1
        I love formal logic. Maybe let's get straight to counting the angels that fit on the tip of the needle?)
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 16 November 2020 14: 24
          +1
          What other formal logic do you need?
          The classic case of a diplomatic victory after a military defeat is the Congress of Vienna and Talleyrand's activities. It is also widely known that the Reichswehr did not lose WWI, but this did not help Germany very much. On the material of WWII, one should pay attention to such winners as France and China. It is not entirely clear, for example, how the victory of France differs so much from the defeat of the Italian kingdom.

          There are also plenty of cases when military victories could not be (or managed for a very short time) to be consolidated diplomatically, as a result of which the war is considered lost. Classics - Vietnam and Soviet Afghanistan.

          With regard to the USSR, these are two different events. One thing, conditionally, Berlin, the second - that after Berlin the USSR was not convincingly asked to return to the border of 39. These are two different events, one military, the second diplomatic.
          1. Mikhail3
            Mikhail3 16 November 2020 16: 44
            0
            ABOUT! So you are a pro? Another thing. I meant the following. In order to begin to negotiate with you at all, you must have impressive strength. If your purely power capabilities are insufficient to achieve your goal, no amount of diplomatic success will help you get what you want.
            Talleyrand's activities - relied on enormous strength and military genius. What the war is "considered" is not important. Academic definitions do not affect reality. The same goes for the rest of the casuistry. It happened that the victory was taken away from the Russian Empire. But not by the art of diplomacy, but simply by threats. Moreover, the threats are extremely real.
            Fortunately, everything that is written on paper is far from what happens in life. Otherwise ...
  9. steelmaker
    steelmaker 16 November 2020 09: 19
    +7
    The Japanese cannot calm down, because Putin and Lavrov themselves raised the issue of transferring the two islands in exchange for a peace treaty! Society revolted, so the bargaining failed! Get two islands for signing on a piece of paper. When our top management has such thoughts in their heads, why shouldn't the Japanese dream big?
  10. Daniil Konovalenko
    Daniil Konovalenko 16 November 2020 09: 24
    +3
    Found the culprit, now what? laughing Will be dug from the grave and hanged.? laughing And all the same, the wind of history will blow away a mountain of garbage from the grave of Khiss.
  11. cniza
    cniza 16 November 2020 09: 26
    +4
    However, according to Chefu, at this meeting of the leaders of the USSR, the USA and Great Britain, a high-ranking State Department official acted as “Stalin's agent”.


    Can't you think of something smarter?
  12. K-50
    K-50 16 November 2020 09: 56
    0
    Japanese professor named "guilty" for the loss of the Kuril Islands

    Well, this is the beginning of the twentieth century to be addressed.
    "Thank you" tell those who advised you to attack the Russian Empire, with the subsequent loss of us Port Arthur With the city of Dalniy and their peninsula, the Kuril Islands and half of Sakhalin.
    We just got ours back !!! Well, maybe where and the table is a profit, well, so the "interest" came running! fellow fellow fellow laughing
    1. Avior
      Avior 16 November 2020 13: 00
      +2
      The Kuril Islands at that time were Japanese for a long time, transferred by Russia under the Petersburg Treaty of 1875.
      1. K-50
        K-50 16 November 2020 13: 40
        0
        Quote: Avior
        The Kuril Islands at that time were Japanese for a long time, transferred by Russia under the Petersburg Treaty of 1875.

        Here they are under "interest" and got.
        The country must acquire something for the participation of our grandfathers in ending the war in the east. fellow hi
        1. Avior
          Avior 16 November 2020 13: 44
          0
          The Cairo and Potsdam Declarations stipulated the surrender of Japan that she would lose the lands it had seized.
          It was the Kuril Islands, as well as 4 disputed islands that did not fit this definition.
          The USSR also signed up to Potsdam.
          1. Sanichsan
            Sanichsan 20 November 2020 16: 52
            0
            Quote: Avior
            The Cairo and Potsdam Declarations stipulated the surrender of Japan that she would lose the lands it had seized.

            Japan lost all territories other than the large islands of the metropolis.
            moreover, if the operation of the USSR against the Kwantung grouping would drag on, then the USSR, after the surrender of Japan, also received Hokaido.
            Quote: Avior
            It was the Kuril Islands, as well as 4 disputed islands that did not fit this definition.
            The USSR also signed up to Potsdam.

            this is nonsense from Shimoda's notes, which have been preserved in the archives in the form of drafts, and even in these drafts this paragraph is deleted.
            stupid to pass off the attempts of the Japanese Foreign Ministry before surrender as a document of legal significance wink
            1. Avior
              Avior 20 November 2020 17: 26
              0
              It is impossible to understand you.
              Read the Cairo Declaration and the Petersburg Treaty of 1875
              1. Sanichsan
                Sanichsan 22 November 2020 01: 06
                0
                Quote: Avior
                It is impossible to understand you.

                oh .. I missed that I correspond with the Ukrainian. probably need something simpler and more specific.
                so...
                "On the Potsdam Conference of Allied States on July 26, 1945 it was decided on the terms of the surrender of Japan and the limitation of its territory.

                Under the terms of the San Francisco Treaty in Article 2 Japan renounced all rights and legal grounds to South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands ("Chishimo Ratto") and in Article 8 recognized "the full validity of all treaties and agreements currently concluded by the Allied States to end the state of war started by the Allied States on September 1, 1939, as well as all agreements that will be concluded in the future to restore peace or in connection with the restoration the world ".

                Thus, Japan is deprived of the right to vote in determining the ownership of the Kuril Islands, which were lawfully seized from it."

                Quote: Avior
                Read the Cairo Declaration and the Petersburg Treaty of 1875

                considering the results of the Potsdam conference 1945 years, contracts and agreements of 1875 have legal value equal to zero request
  13. aleks neym_2
    aleks neym_2 16 November 2020 09: 58
    0
    The beauty! It will soon become known that the Americans dropped atomic bombs by order of Stalin! Yapeny, by the way, basically think so (especially young people).
  14. iouris
    iouris 16 November 2020 11: 25
    0
    Quote: "And the question of territorial affiliation of the Kuril Islands has long been closed." End of quote.
    Are we ready to die for territorial integrity? Today the land is sold as private property. In addition, some states are constantly falling apart. But I think so: it's not just that the Japanese pay Erdogan.
  15. The comment was deleted.
  16. evgen1221
    evgen1221 16 November 2020 12: 43
    0
    The East is a delicate matter - they even think differently. The common population wanted to spit on these games for the most part. And the politicians' job is to create difficulties and heroically overcome them. But the Japanese are economically taking revenge on amers.
  17. Cherry Nine
    Cherry Nine 16 November 2020 13: 02
    +1
    If the position of the Japanese is stated correctly, it looks like complete nonsense.

    The concept of Yalta betrayal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_betrayal) has long been known and was raised by political opponents of the FDR during his lifetime. The only innovation of the professor is that for some reason he reduced this gigantic catastrophe, which affected hundreds of millions of people in Europe and Asia, to a couple of spits in the ocean.
  18. BAI
    BAI 16 November 2020 13: 02
    +1
    the search for the "culprits" of the fact that these territories, which there stubbornly continue to consider their own, ended up in the hands of the USSR and subsequently Russia.

    Japan itself is to blame for this.
  19. Fedorovich
    Fedorovich 16 November 2020 17: 51
    0
    Looks like yo anime guy revisited ...
  20. ZEMCH
    ZEMCH 17 November 2020 00: 00
    0
    Japanese professor named "guilty" for the loss of the Kuril Islands

    To blame for the loss of the islands, as well as independence as a state, only Japan itself and its militaristic leadership, continuing the theme and aggravating the situation, as a result, you can and what more can you lose wink
    And the landing on Hokkaido was canceled personally by Stalin, still trusting Truman, although the plan to partition Japan following the example of Germany was discussed
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 17 November 2020 00: 39
      +1
      Quote: ZEMCH
      And the landing on Hokkaido was canceled personally by Stalin, still trusting Truman, although the plan to partition Japan following the example of Germany was discussed

      )))
      To put it differently, Comrade By August Stalin was already openly sneering at the Missouri idiot and discussed "the plan to partition Japan following the example of Germany" in a letter dated August 16 in the following expressions:
      2. To include in the area of ​​the surrender of the Japanese armed forces to the Soviet troops the northern half of the island of Hokkaido, adjacent in the north to the La Perouse Strait, located between Karafuto and Hokkaido. Draw the demarcation line between the northern and southern half of Hokkaido Island along a line running from the mountains. Kushiro on the east coast of the island to the city of Rumoe on the west coast of the island, with the inclusion of these cities in the northern half of the island.

      This last sentence is of particular importance for Russian public opinion. As you know, the Japanese in 1919-1921 kept the entire Soviet Far East under the occupation of their troops. Russian public opinion would be seriously offendedif the Russian troops did not have an area of ​​occupation in any part of Japanese territory proper.


      To which Truman, who by that time had already begun to get sick of the peacefulness of the Soviet regime, replied "you were not standing here."
      As for your proposal regarding the surrender of the Japanese armed forces on the island of Hokkaido to the Soviet armed forces, I mean - and in this regard, measures were taken - that the Japanese armed forces surrendered to General MacArthur on all the islands of Japan proper: Hokkaido, Honshu , Shikoku and Kyushu.
  21. Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat 17 November 2020 07: 02
    -1
    As it became known, Professor of Waseda University Yuma Chefu told the world about some "declassified data of the Second World War", which he managed to compose, and which clearly show the urgent need to isolate the professor from society in a specialized medical institution. As well as most of the guardians for the "return of the Kuriles"
  22. AB
    AB 17 November 2020 16: 34
    0
    Is it okay that Japan lost the war? Is it okay that the USSR could carry out the landing of troops on the island of Hokkaido? In vain, Joseph Vissarionovich refused this ...
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 18 November 2020 04: 50
      +2
      Quote: AB
      Is it okay that Japan lost the war?

      Japan accepted the terms of the Potsdam Declaration, in which Japan's sovereignty over the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, and Shikoku was consolidated.
      Quote: AB
      the landing of troops on the island of Hokkaido? In vain, Joseph Vissarionovich refused this ...

      Actually, this issue was considered above. Truman rejected Iosif Vissarionovich's ideas about Hokkaido.

      Or do you think it was worth the Americans for a kid / not a kid to check?
  23. Cynic
    Cynic 18 November 2020 10: 24
    0
    Interestingly, they keep quiet about Sakhalin, but Yuzhny was returned along with the Kuriles ...
  24. vvp2412
    vvp2412 18 November 2020 11: 50
    0
    Another Kremlin agent! :)
    It seems that at least half of the World are agents of the Kremlin! :)
    Just like Agents Smith in the Matrix! :)
  25. lelik613
    lelik613 20 November 2020 05: 17
    0
    Offer the poor fellow to undergo treatment. Your choice: Kashchenko, Serpy or Kazan ...