20 January 1925 of the USSR and Japan signed the Beijing Treaty

35
20 January 1925 of the USSR and Japan signed the Beijing Treaty 20 January 1925 The USSR and Japan signed the Beijing Treaty, establishing diplomatic relations. During the Civil War in Russia, the Japanese actively participated in the international intervention in the Far East. Attempts by Moscow to somehow normalize relations with its eastern neighbor remained unsuccessful due to the extremely hostile position of the Japanese Empire.

Japan wanted to get the maximum benefit from the weakening of Russia. To maintain chaos in Russia, the Japanese helped Kolchak and Ataman Semyonov. With the defeat of the troops of Kolchak, the intervention of the Entente in the European part of Russia in 1918 — 1920. and strengthening the world position of Soviet Russia, the situation has changed for Japan. When it became clear to Americans that by the beginning of 1920, Kolchak and his regime were “waste material,” a note was sent to Japan, which indicated that the continued presence of foreign troops in Russia not only did not help, but also prevented the Russian people from reasonably arranging your life. Why is the United States preoccupied with the interests of the Russian people? The answer is simple - it was not possible to establish the pro-American regime of Kolchak in Russia, the main map of the United States was beaten, and the Americans did not want to give the Japanese a chance to be fixed on the Russian lands when leaving. It is necessary to take into account the fact that by this point American public opinion was inclined to think that Russia should be left alone, people felt that the intervention had failed. It's one thing when the Russians themselves kill each other, and the "allies" of the whites are waiting for a positive result behind their backs. Americans themselves, French and British did not want to die.

However, Japan had its own opinion regarding its presence in the Far East. The Japanese were ready to fight not only with the bayonets and sabers of Kolchak and Semenov, but themselves, if there would be a gain. And the benefit was. By the beginning of 1920, in the Russian Far East, there was a real political jumble of interventionists (mostly Japanese), short-lived "governments" of various forces and adventurers, remnants of Kolchak, Semenov, red partisans, "green" and hotbeds of Soviet power. In Vladivostok, Japanese and American troops existed at the same time, the Provisional Government of the Far East with the Bolshevik Sergei Lazo.

After the Nikolaev incident, when a large red partisan detachment under the command of anarchist Jacob Tryapitsyna destroyed a Japanese garrison in 12 - 15 in March 1920 in Nikolayevsk-on-Amur, the Japanese command decided to eliminate Soviet power in the Far East. On the night of 4 on 5 on April 1920, a well-prepared attack occurred, martial law was imposed in Vladivostok, Lazo was arrested (in the end of May, he was transferred to white and killed). The few Soviet troops retreated.

The main reason why the Japanese did not want to leave the Far East is raw materials. After that, two years the Japanese fought for Primorye and supported various anti-Soviet elements. All kinds of chieftains like Semenov could not destroy the Soviet power, but they could delay its arrival in Primorye, with external support. And all this time, the Japanese could use the riches of the Russian Far East with impunity.

The Europeans left Siberia. 16 January 1920, the Supreme Council of the Entente decided to lift the blockade from Soviet Russia and the withdrawal of troops from Siberia. 24 February 1920, the Soviet government proposes the Japanese side to begin peace negotiations. But the Japanese did not want to leave the Russian lands. Moreover, the most resolute officers dreamed of Baikal, Angara and Irkutsk. Tokyo refused to Moscow under a very ridiculous pretext: the Japanese stated that they fear for the life and property of their subjects, as well as for peace in Manchuria and Korea. And in early April, the Japanese army began a new phase of intervention, getting rid of the hotbeds of Soviet power in the Far East.

The answer of Moscow was the creation of 6 on April 1920 of the buffer Far East Republic in Transbaikalia. So, began more than two years story DVR. Ataman Semyonov, who was planted and supported by the Japanese, was sitting in Chita. But 25 July 1920, the Japanese troops left Chita, and retreated to the Amur region. The Japanese empire clung to its Far Eastern chance on Russian soil to the last. Unlike the United States, such far-eastern government policies within Japan itself were popular. The Japanese and white retreated only under the pressure of the Red Army and the red partisans.

August 26 1921 in the Japanese Dairen (formerly the Russian port of Dalny in the Chinese Liaodong Peninsula) began negotiations between representatives of the Japanese Empire and the Far Eastern Republic. They walked for a long time, the Japanese side in every possible way delayed them, and in the end tore it off - in April, 1922. Tokyo agreed to these formal negotiations with the sole purpose of being able to state to the world community that it could solve the “Siberian” problem on its own. The fact is that in Washington, from November 12 1921 to February 6, 1922 held the conference of nine great powers on the issue of Pacific and Far Eastern issues and the limitation of naval armaments.

In November, 1921 of the White forces from Primorye went on the offensive and on December 22 occupied Khabarovsk, then advanced westward to Volochaevka station of the Amur railway. In February, units of the People’s Revolutionary Army of the Far Eastern Republic under the command of Vasily Blucher launched an offensive and took the Volochayev positions by storm. February 1922 NRA occupied Khabarovsk, whites retreated under cover of Japanese troops. 14 August, the Japanese announced the impending evacuation - the force in the Far East finally passed to the Soviets. In September, the whites made another attempt to attack, but it was repelled. October 15 4, the NRA forces launched an offensive, the Maritime Operation began (October 1922 - 4 25), the last major operation of the Civil War.

However, in such circumstances, the Japanese did not want to leave just like that. They tried to bargain for something in negotiations with the DRV and the RSFSR in Changchun, China, in September 1922. Now the Japanese side was ready to accept the draft treaty with the DRV, which they had earlier rejected in Dairen, and now - taking into account the complete defeat of the whites in Primorye - the crane is advantageous for Japan. But now Moscow was not inclined to bargain.

October 19 Soviet troops reached Vladivostok, where 20 thousand Japanese military contingent was still stationed. In the course of the talks that began, the Japanese command 24 of December entered into an agreement with the government of the FER on the withdrawal of its troops from the Far East. October 25 the last Japanese and the remnants of the White Guard troops were evacuated, part of the NRA and partisans entered Vladivostok. On the same day, the People’s Assembly of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam declared the power of the Soviets throughout the Russian Far East. 15 November, 1922, the All-Russian Central Executive Committee announced the entry of the Far Eastern Republic into the RSFSR. Thus, the exceptional greed and persistence of the Japanese extended White Guard and intervention on Russian soil to 1922.

Japan was forced to think about how to establish peaceful relations with Soviet Russia. However, in this issue the Japanese government was in no hurry. But life went on, relations with a neighbor had to be adjusted. In January, 1923, the mayor of Tokyo-Goto, suggested starting negotiations between Japan and Russia to clarify the existing “misunderstandings” between them. Later, Goto became chairman of the Japanese-Soviet Society for Cultural Relations. 13 February 1924 of the year the Soviet side sent a notification to the Japanese consul in Vladivostok that the status of the consul of Japan was revoked and he would be treated as a private individual. In addition, Tokyo was influenced by the fact that Great Britain, France and China established diplomatic relations with the USSR. Therefore, Tokyo reacted positively to the next proposal of the Soviet government on the normalization of interstate relations.

14 May 1924 in Beijing began official Soviet-Japanese negotiations. Their result was an agreement from January 20 of 1925. It was the Convention on Basic Principles of Relationship, the two protocols “A” and “B” attached to it. The document restored bilateral diplomatic and consular relations. The Japanese empire undertook to withdraw by mid-May troops from the territory of Northern Sakhalin, which, according to protocol "A", passed under the sovereignty of the Soviet Union. At the same time, the same protocol confirmed that none of the powers has a secret contract or agreement with any third country that could threaten the sovereignty and security of a party to the convention.

The Japanese troops withdrawn from Sakhalin. But according to Japan’s coal and oil concessions, they were signed on July 22 and December 14 on 1925, Japan received from the local concession fields up to 200 thousand tons of oil and 130 thousand tons of coal per year.

The USSR made a number of significant concessions in favor of the Japanese empire in order to establish diplomatic relations and stabilize the situation in the Far East. Moscow was forced to recognize a number of agreements concluded before October1917 of the year, including the Portsmouth Peace Treaty of 1905. However, the declaration of the Soviet government, which was attached to the convention, emphasized that the USSR did not share with the former tsarist government the political responsibility for concluding the Portsmouth Treaty of 1905. The parties also agreed to proceed with the revision of the Russian-Japanese fishing convention approved in 1907 year. The Soviet government agreed to grant Japanese citizens, companies concessions, to use raw natural resources in the USSR. Details of the terms of contracts for concessions were given in the protocol "B".
35 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +11
    19 January 2013 10: 16
    The Japanese and now will not calm down .... if it’s good not to give them too much teeth. So they will climb for the riches of Russia and its land! And at the present time, conducting peace negotiations with them, it is worth remembering the whole history of our relations.
    1. lotus04
      +7
      19 January 2013 11: 40
      Quote: Egoza
      The Japanese and now will not calm down ..


      I don’t know why our government is shy? For a long time, it would be necessary to present an account to all those countries that "tried to instill in us democracy", at least for the last 300 years. Let them pay, as they say, for lost prospects.
      1. 0
        22 January 2013 08: 48
        That's the smaller the mongrel, the more barks. I’m not that for a war, but the Japanese should be screwed again, they still cannot understand that they are not an empire, but a spit in the ocean, which has neither resources nor land! negative
  2. Krasnoyarsk
    -14
    19 January 2013 10: 41
    The Bolsheviks are the worst in the history of Russia, the number of victims will more than surpass any tsar.
    1. +11
      19 January 2013 16: 46
      This is not a topic at all: Japan is an external threat that we have managed to eliminate. Claims to the Kuril Islands, Sakhalin and the Far East by Yapia today are a reluctance to establish good neighborly relations through peaceful negotiations. Although what kind of negotiations are there - this is our land and we will not give it to anyone! Let's goodbye! angry
      1. Beck
        -3
        19 January 2013 18: 38
        Quote: Skeleton
        This is not a topic at all: Japan is an external threat that we have managed to eliminate. Claims to the Kuril Islands, Sakhalin and the Far East


        Yeah. Before writing komenty learn history on the program of secondary education. And view information on the relations between Russia and Japan for the post-war period. Japan never claimed Sakhalin (after 1945), and the entire Kuril ridge, and any territory of the mainland Far East. They claim only four islands of the south Kuril ridge, which are located on the very shores of Japan.

        "The Japanese received the first information about the islands in 1635 year. AT 1644 year, the Japanese compiled a map on which the Kuril Islands were designated under the collective name "thousand islands". "
        "In Russia, the first mention of the Kuril Islands refers to 1646 year. "
        According to Article 2 of the Simod Treaty 1855 years, the southern islands of Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan, Habomai were included in Japan and they are the original possession of Japan.
        "In exchange for the right to own southern Sakhalin, Russia handed over to Japan in 1875 all the Kuril Islands. "
        "After the defeat in 1905 g... in the Russo-Japanese War, Russia handed over the southern part of Sakhalin to Japan "
        "After the defeat, in 1945 year, Japan does not claim Sakhalin and all 30 Kuril Islands, but only four southern islands "
        "February 2 1946. Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR on the formation of the South Sakhalin region in the territory of South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands as part of the Khabarovsk Territory of the RSFSR. "
        "1947... Deportation of the Japanese and Ainu from the Kuril Islands to Japan. 17 Japanese and an unknown number of Ainu were evicted "
        1. DeerIvanovich
          +7
          19 January 2013 19: 43
          Well, you're lying. even in Hokkaido, Russian traders were earlier. And this is documented. In those days, the inhabitants of Hokkaido were Ainu, not Japs. Subsequently, the Japs subjected the Ainu people to complete assimilation.
          At the same time, the Japs at first, even in Hokkaido, were not eager to live, but only set up one small settlement in the south and that's it. And that was after the Russians visited Hokkaido.
          What can I say, the Kuril Islands north of Hokkaido.
          In fact, even in Hokkaido, Russians have more rights than the Japs!
        2. +7
          19 January 2013 23: 13
          Beck,
          In fact, the Ainu are the indigenous inhabitants of the Kuril Islands, and even northern Japan. And they are not taken away by the Japanese - a white race.
          1. bask
            +4
            19 January 2013 23: 20
            Quote: Ross
            Ross

            Good night Ross .. The indigenous inhabitants of the Kuril Ain .. First met with Russian merchants in 1779. There were no Japanese at all ...
            1. 0
              20 January 2013 02: 29
              bask,
              Good bask! Thank you for the tip.
            2. DeerIvanovich
              -1
              22 January 2013 13: 31
              even earlier Ainu fishers met, much earlier
          2. Beck
            +1
            20 January 2013 09: 48
            Quote: DeerIvanovich
            Well, you're lying. even in Hokkaido, Russian traders were earlier. And this is documented.


            You that do not know how to read texts? Historical facts and dates are marked with slanted text and enclosed in quotation marks, which means that these are not my words, this is a quotation of historical chronology. Therefore, I personally do not lie. If you are not satisfied with the chronology I have presented, imagine other historical facts that refute mine. Here you write, unfoundedly, that the Russian fishermen had been to Hokkaido before. I will gladly believe if you provide the Historical Facts and Dates of Chronology to these words.

            Quote: bask
            Good night Ross .. The indigenous inhabitants of the Kuril Ain .. First met with Russian merchants in 1779. There were no Japanese at all ...


            You have provided the date 1779 year, then what to do with other historical facts with dates 1635 year, 1644, 1646. Where to go from Simodsky tract 1875 year signed between Russia and Japan. By your so throw it away. But in history and international relations this is not done.

            Now about the Ainu. Judging by your statements, Deerlvanovish and Ross, you vaguely imagine who the Ainu are and who the Japanese are.

            "The first signs of settlement of the Japanese archipelago appeared around 40 millennium BC. With the beginning of the Japanese Paleolithic"


            "From 12 BC, the Jomon period begins,"

            This population can be called, as it were, protoaines.

            “In the Yayoi period, which began around 500 BC, irrigated rice cultivation, a potter's wheel and a loom, the processing of metals (copper, bronze and iron) and the construction of defensive fortifications appeared in the Japanese archipelago. These innovations were introduced to Japan by immigrants from China and Korea."

            These immigrants gradually assimilated the Ainu and became actually Japanese. Settled throughout the Japanese archipelago.

            It is not necessary to overshadow history indiscriminately. Patient negotiations and compromises must be conducted with Japan. Such as the United States and Japan found on the issue of US occupation of Okinawa and the Senkaku Islands, which the United States returned to Japan in 1972. Such a compromise as the USSR and Japan found in 1956. On which the islands of Habomai and Shikotan remained Japan, and Iturup and Kunashir passed to the USSR. But unfortunately this pending agreement was not signed.
            1. DeerIvanovich
              0
              22 January 2013 13: 50
              Well, if you read the wiki and similar resources, then of course the Japs were the first laughing
              but you would at least familiarize yourself with the archives before affirming.

              The island of Hokkaido, inhabited by the Ainu, was not of interest to the Japanese for a long time, although in 1636 an approximate map was compiled. At the same time, a detachment of this expedition landed in southern Sakhalin, but no materials were preserved. Only in 1785, when the Russians showed increased activity in the North Pacific Ocean, was the first large expedition organized to explore Hokkaido. She managed to complete the shooting of the coast of the island. On the northern cape of the island, five people are left to winter; until the summer they did not live: everyone died of hunger and cold.

              Our traders with the Ainu were actively trading even before the Japs, so do not carry the blizzards, the Japs began to fuss only when the authorities of the Russian Empire became active in the Pacific Ocean.

              About the Ainu: for example, even if we take the Lisyansky-Kruzenshtern round-the-world expedition. then they wrote the following in their memoirs: the Ainu are surprisingly similar to Russians than to Japanese.

              Incidentally, the Ainu compactly lived from Hokkaido to Sakhalin
              1. Beck
                0
                22 January 2013 19: 26
                Quote: DeerIvanovich
                Well, if you read the wiki and similar resources, then of course the Japs were the first, but you would at least get acquainted with the archives before affirmatively.


                I introduced you to what I found. Now you will familiarize yourself with the archives you mention.

                Quote: DeerIvanovich
                Incidentally, the Ainu compactly lived from Hokkaido to Sakhalin


                And where are the Ainu? After all, everyone was evicted in 1947.

                Quote: DeerIvanovich
                About the Ainu: for example, even if we take the Lisyansky-Kruzenshtern round-the-world expedition. then they wrote the following in their memoirs: the Ainu are surprisingly similar to Russians than to Japanese.


                Well yes. And they spoke the Slavic language. It is in the 10th century that they came from Russia.
                1. DeerIvanovich
                  0
                  23 January 2013 13: 23
                  The main thesis was indicated above by the posts, in more detail work yourself to read the archives. Moreover, what is the point of bringing them again, but in a wider form, if you even put the memories of our first official circumnavigators in the category of nationalist ones. Where did you get such Russophobia?
                  Ainu in Japan were assimilated by the Japanese, no one evicted Ainu from the territories of the Russian Empire.

                  Ainu - the oldest population of Japan
                  islands (known there from the II millennium BC), the Kuril and
                  South Sakhalin. Racially close to Caucasians,
                  linguistic ties are not exactly identified. In the described time, the number
                  Ainu on Sakhalin amounted to 3 thousand people,
                  on the island of Hokkaido - up to one and a half million.
                  Currently, they are almost extinct. (Nikolai Pavlovich Zadornov)

                  The first Japanese colonists were runaway criminals or
                  who have traveled to a foreign land and for this have been expelled from Japan.
                  (A.P. Chekhov)

                  Aino is true and cannot be deceived.
                  Kruzenshtern was completely delighted with them;
                  listing their wonderful spiritual qualities,
                  he concludes: "Such truly rare qualities,
                  with which they owe no higher education,
                  but nature alone, aroused in me
                  the feeling that I regard this people as the best
                  of all the others that are still known to me "
                  (A.P. Chekhov)

                  A.P. Chekhov said: “Ainu are a meek people,
                  modest, good-natured, gullible, sociable,
                  polite, respecting property; on the hunt bold
                  and ... even intelligent. "

                  The Ainu accepted Russian citizenship, and their lands became part of Russia - Sakhalin, the Kuril Islands and Matsmay - Jesso - Hokkaido. In those days, Hokkaido - Matsmai was considered the largest and most southern island of the Kuril Islands.
        3. mamba
          +2
          20 January 2013 11: 45
          Quote: Beck
          "After the defeat in 1945, Japan does not claim Sakhalin and all 30 Kuril Islands, but only four southern islands."

          Kose understands that this is an attempt to create a precedent for rolling the Japanese lip to our other lands. Russia, as the legal successor of the USSR, has every right to the territories conquered in the war with Japan. This is the right of the strong, which is tacitly followed by all Asians and not only. However, the Japanese, because of their oppressed pride and heavy mentality, do not want to recognize this right for us and try to take us "weakly" not by washing, so by rolling.
          As for "legalizing" the Russian right to the disputed islands, negotiations with Japan should be conducted from the position of the strong side. Russia is obliged to force Japan to remove the linkages of the peace treaty with the requirement to abandon the disputed islands, then conclude a peace treaty in which the status of the disputed islands would be clearly spelled out only as Russian.
          Time is playing against the Japanese. They understand this very well, and that's why they get angry. And we have nowhere to rush: the current status of the "disputed islands" suits us perfectly. This does not hinder the development of economic relations between Russia and its Far Eastern neighbors. The Japanese will argue, their place in the market will be gladly taken by their numerous neighbors-competitors.
          1. Beck
            -3
            20 January 2013 12: 34
            Quote: mamba
            Kose understands that this is an attempt to create a precedent for rolling the Japanese lips to our other lands.


            Japan, in the post-war period, never claimed all the Kuril Islands. Your statement like that is just an excuse for not negotiating about the disputed four islands at all.

            Quote: mamba
            The USSR has every right to the territories conquered in the war with Japan. This is the right of the strong, which is tacitly followed by all Asians and not only


            According to international laws in force from around the 19th century, not a single winning country has a unilateral right to annex and annex annexed lands. This is possible only by mutual agreement, upon signing, after hostilities, a peace treaty. But between the USSR and Russia, a peace treaty after the end of the war in 1945 has not yet been signed.

            And your statements - from a position of strength, these are furious concepts. The world has long been moving away from this, even if the UN was created, albeit not always spectacular in various situations.

            In your. Now someone who is healthy, with a club in his hands and with fakes, will come to your house, spread his face on you and drive you out of the apartment with the words “Go wash and not moo, I give you a kick in the ass from the position of strength and capture of your apartment.”

            And what are you going to wash your face?
            1. mamba
              +2
              20 January 2013 17: 23
              Quote: Beck
              According to international laws in force from around the 19th century, not a single winning country has a unilateral right to annex and annex annexed lands. This is possible only by mutual agreement, upon signing, after hostilities, a peace treaty.

              Here are some examples of annexation, starting from the 19th century, without signing a peace treaty:
              1833 - Great Britain annexed the Falkland Islands.
              1848 - France annexed Algeria.
              1861 - Spain annexed the Dominican Republic.
              1898 - The United States annexed the Hawaiian Islands.
              1908 - Austria-Hungary annexed Bosnia and Herzegovina.
              1910 - Japan annexed Korea.
              1914 - Great Britain annexed Egypt.
              1918 - Romania annexed Bessarabia.
              1931 - Japan occupied and annexed Manchuria.
              1938 - Germany annexed Austria, which until then was an independent state.
              1947 - Pakistan annexed Kashmir.
              1950 - China annexed Tibet.
              1961 - India occupied and annexed Portuguese India.
              1967 - Israel annexed East Jerusalem and occupied the Golan Heights.
              1975 - India annexed Sikkim.
              1976 - Indonesia's annexation of East Timor.
              1981 - Israel annexed the Golan Heights.
              1990-1991 - Iraq annexed Kuwait.
              Quote: Beck
              And your statements - from a position of strength, these are furious concepts. The world has long been moving away from this, even if the UN was created, albeit not always spectacular in various situations.

              The above examples of annexation became possible only by the right of the strong, and international organizations such as the League of Nations or the UN did not play their role here at all. Similarly, the UN "slept through" the aggression against Yugoslavia, Kuwait, Iraq, Libya. Therefore, it is not me who should be accused of "lingering concepts", but the main "democratizer" in our world and his obedient mongrels.
              But you should not go over to personality. Your example is unsuccessful.
              1. Beck
                -1
                20 January 2013 17: 52
                All annexations until 1945 are colonial conquests. And annexations after 1945 are not recognized by the international community as represented by the UN.

                For example, the annexation of Tibet is not recognized. So is the annexation of East Timor. And at the moment, with the help of the world community, East Timor has gained independence.

                And the annexation of Koenigsberg is legal, since Germany itself also signed this document. Russia does not have a peace treaty with Japan just because of the southern Kuril Islands. By and large, there is only aplomb in a falsely understood greatness. What Russia lacks without these four rocky islands. There will be more for Russia to win if it signs a peace treaty with Japan.

                And I didn’t get personal. I gave an example of a possible situation.
                1. 0
                  20 January 2013 18: 21
                  Quote: Beck
                  By and large, there is only aplomb in a falsely understood greatness. What Russia lacks without these four rocky islands. There will be more for Russia to win if it signs a peace treaty with Japan.

                  From an economic point of view, a peace treaty with Japan is needed, but not on the conditions that Japan is pushing now, the conditions of 1956 would be most acceptable, and according to the statements of our Foreign Ministry for our country too.
                  1. Beck
                    -1
                    20 January 2013 20: 02
                    Quote: NEMO
                    From an economic point of view, a peace treaty with Japan is needed, but not on the conditions that Japan is pushing now, the conditions of 1956 would be most acceptable, and according to the statements of our Foreign Ministry for our country too.


                    What conditions? The only condition is to return the four rocky islands to the Japanese. And the return of these islands can be negotiated with economic, technological, scientific and technical concessions from the Japanese side. It will be much more beneficial than anything else. And at present, Russia has only greatness - "We do not need a stranger's land, but we will not give up our inch either." Although these four islands are not originally Russian lands.

                    In addition, the words of the above song were not taken into account in other territorial concessions in the modern history of Russia. Russia ceded to China many islands on the Ussuri and Amur without any economic benefits, but only for political reasons.

                    Kazakhstan lost to China about 400 square kilometers of territory (a square of 20x20 km), because it was Chinese in history. She was annexed to Kazakhstan after 1917. And the Kazakhstanis do not cry with tears of chauvinists. We have much less land than Russia, but there is enough of that. The whole region of Altai mountains with the highest peak, Mount Belukha, was given to Russia, with regular borders. And again we don’t scream, we howl like a chauvinist. But now all border issues have been resolved for centuries. And border issues do not poison our lives.
                    1. sleepy
                      +2
                      21 January 2013 02: 30
                      We do not call the South Kurils any "northern territories", "disputed territories" -
                      islands "SOUTH KURILY" OUR.
                      By simply calling (and implying) the "northern territories" of the island, we in the eyes of the Japanese recognize their claims,
                      and note that they do not say "islands", they say "territories", by which they mean
                      see list below:

                      1) O. Kunashir with islands:
                      2) Glorious or Lovtsova
                      3) O. Chaek;
                      4) O. Iturup with islands
                      5) O. Lebed
                      6) O. Kamen-Lev
                      7) O. Helmet
                      8) O. Lonely;

                      Islands of the Lesser Kuril Ridge:
                      9) O. Shikotan (aka Spanberg, aka Sikotan) with adjacent islands:
                      10) O. The Ninth Val (Camo);
                      11) O. Medium
                      12) O. Dalniy
                      13) O. Grieg
                      14) O. Aivazovsky, as well as the rest of the islands of the Lesser Kuril Ridge, sometimes called Flat
                      (in Japanese now - Habomai, and earlier Suisho):
                      15) Polonsky (Taraku) with the adjacent islands Rifovy (Amagi-sho) - 20 sq. Km
                      16) Shattered Islands
                      17) Fox Islands (Todo) with cave rocks (Kanakuso) and Parus (Hokoki)
                      18) Cones Islands (Checkers or Kabuto) with rock Candle
                      19) Green Island (Sibotsu) - 45 sq. Km
                      20) O. Yuri (Yuru) - 10 sq. Km with the islands of Demin (Harukarumosiri)
                      21) O. Anuchina (Akiyuru) with a rock Amazing (Hanare) - 5 sq. Km
                      22) O. Tanfilieva (Suisyo) - 20 sq. Km
                      23) O. Signal (Kaigara)
                      24) O. Storozheva (Khomosiri or Muyka) with the drying rock (Odoke)

                      The Japanese "broad sense" of the disputed territories includes the following (quote):
                      In the official letter of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, “Toki no ugoki” (1968, No. 11, p.22), it was stated that Kunashir, Iturup, Shikotan and Habomai form the Northern Territories in the “narrow sense”, and in the “wide sense” these all other Kuril Islands and southern Sakhalin with adjacent islands.
                      These include Moneron Island and Tyuleniy Island.


                      Since that time, Japanese ultranationalists began to include in the "northern territories" such territories of the USSR and Russia as Kamchatka, Primorye, Amur Region and Northern Sakhalin (Sukan Jiji, 1968, No. 51, p. 36).
                      1. mamba
                        -1
                        21 January 2013 08: 59
                        Thank you, colleague, for a detailed explanation of my first post. I also believe that trading in territories that we did not join our state is tantamount to a betrayal of the memory and blood of our ancestors. Moreover, at present, we barely have enough strength to hold on to what we have. And the vastness of Russia, of course, is large, but you just have to start trading them ... fool
                      2. Beck
                        +2
                        21 January 2013 12: 47
                        Quote: sleepy
                        Since that time, Japanese ultranationalists began to include in the "northern territories" such territories of the USSR and Russia as Kamchatka, Primorye, Amur Region and Northern Sakhalin (Sukan Jiji, 1968, No. 51, p. 36).


                        So the nationalists. The Japanese government has never raised the issue of returning all the Kuriles. Only about four islands. You are juggling facts, again to please your nationalism. And your guess what the Japanese mean by the word "territories" is just your guess. The former president of Russia and the current one in their speeches on this topic spoke only about the four southern islands, and did not stutter about others. Since other islands are the lands of Russia and Japan did not even mention them.

                        And nationalists are nationalists everywhere. They shout about Sakhalin. Russian nationalists cry about Manchuria, Alaska, Finland and more. That would be all in one heap and in one jar.
                      3. DeerIvanovich
                        -1
                        23 January 2013 13: 28
                        In 1945, the Japanese evicted all AINS from Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands to Hokkaido, while for some reason they left the labor army from Koreans brought by the Japanese to the Sakhalin and the USSR had to accept them as stateless persons, then the Koreans moved to Central Asia, and now RF, few are familiar with this hardworking ethnic group, even the deputy Luzhkov is a Korean.

                        The fate of the AINS in Hokkaido - Matsmai is hidden behind seven seals, like the fate of the Slavs - LUZHICHAN in Germany.
                        Information reaches us that there are about 20 thousand Ainu people left, that there is an intensified process of Ainu Japaneseization, whether young people know the Ainu language is a big question, like the Slavs - Luzhicans, about whom we know that the Slavic schools of the Slavs in Germany are closed under any pretext .

                        According to the census of the population of the Russian Empire in 1897 on Sakhalin, 1446 people indicated Ainu as their mother tongue. Ainu language does not belong to any language family (isolate); At present, the Ainu of Hokkaido have switched to Japanese, the Ainu of Russia to Russian, very few people of the older generation in Hokkaido - Matsmai still remember the language a little. By 1996, no more than 15 people were fully in Ainu. At the same time, carriers of dialects of different localities practically do not understand each other. The Ainu did not have their own writing, but there were rich traditions of oral creativity, including songs, epic poems and legends in verses and prose.

                        Russia we can recall historical examples of how the Ainu of northern Hokkaido - Matsmay at the end of the 1th – XNUMXst half of the XNUMXth centuries swore allegiance to the Russian government. And if so, then in response to the demand of the "northern territories" Russia may put up a counterclaim on the "southern territories".
                      4. Beck
                        -1
                        23 January 2013 13: 33
                        Quote: DeerIvanovich
                        And if so, then in response to the demand of the "northern territories" Russia may put up a counterclaim on the "southern territories".


                        Yes, make demands on at least all of Japan and a third of China. Small nations are assimilating and this development. Chukchi, Nenets, Mansi, Khanty and others, too, are breathing fine, but I'm not saying that the Russians are to blame for something.
                      5. DeerIvanovich
                        0
                        23 January 2013 17: 42
                        Chukchi, Nenets and other small peoples of Russia have always been few.
                        But for some reason, they are not being assimilated at such a pace as the Ainu in Japan or, for example, the Slavs of Luzhsk in Eastern Europe.
                        Despite the fact that the northern peoples as well as the Russians are drunk, the number from this does not drop sharply.
                        In addition, they remember their traditions and language, which can hardly be said about Ainu and Luzhans soon!
                      6. Beck
                        -1
                        23 January 2013 20: 03
                        Quote: DeerIvanovich
                        In addition, they remember their traditions and language, which can hardly be said about Ainu and Luzhans soon!


                        Well, it's looking into the eyes and lying. All those peoples of Russia that I have already mentioned and do not remember their national names, and almost do not speak their languages.

                        You say that to me, as if I lived in the USSR, as if I were not watching the news, as if I had come to the CIS from another continent. I can’t see, but you need to cross yourself.
                      7. DeerIvanovich
                        0
                        24 January 2013 13: 34
                        Judging by: "You tell me so, as if I lived in the USSR ..." I don't know where you lived request
                        As for me, I live in my homeland, I am a representative of small indigenous peoples, I remember my traditions, my language ... and do not say that the rest do not know and do not remember: they still know and remember! So leave your allegations.
                      8. Beck
                        0
                        24 January 2013 14: 31
                        I do not know if you are a believer or not. But fear God. Maybe you as a person and observe your traditions. But among the peoples I have listed, the overwhelming majority of names and surnames are Russian names. And when the root self-determination is lost and assimilation begins.
                      9. DeerIvanovich
                        0
                        24 January 2013 19: 32
                        Something I did not notice the overwhelming number ... and even the names of the name. in order to debate, learn to begin with accurately expressing your position, I am not a seer and cannot predict what you mean by this phrase "names and surnames are Russian names."
                        self-determination is not lost, do not be afraid for us.
                        You should worry about your south.
                    2. 0
                      22 January 2013 00: 55
                      Quote: Beck
                      What conditions? The only condition is to return the four rocky islands to the Japanese. And the return of these islands can be negotiated with economic, technological, scientific and technical concessions from the Japanese side. It will be much more beneficial than anything else. And at present, Russia has only greatness - "We do not need a stranger's land, but we will not give up our inch either." Although these four islands are not originally Russian lands.


                      In 1956, a Joint Declaration was developed, according to which the USSR agreed to cede the Shikotan island and the Habomai ridge to the Japanese, while leaving Kunashir and Iturup for themselves. On November 14, 2004, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in an interview with NTV that Moscow was ready to give Japan two of the four disputed islands of the South Kuril Ridge.
                      1. Beck
                        +1
                        22 January 2013 01: 08
                        Quote: NEMO
                        In 1956, a Joint Declaration was developed,


                        I agree Nemo. Let and so just to normalize the situation. In the end, to sign a peace treaty, how many years have passed since the end of the war. Lavrov returned to 1956 well. Now the Japanese became stubborn. But in any case, a compromise must be sought.
                      2. Misantrop
                        -1
                        22 January 2013 01: 31
                        Quote: Beck
                        I agree Nemo. Let and so just to normalize the situation.

                        Well, why the hell is this right now? Or can’t wait to give someone something? Is this a vital issue now for the Russian Federation? Or maybe the only territorial clumsy thing in that region?
                2. 0
                  22 January 2013 02: 31
                  Quote: Beck
                  By and large, there is only aplomb in a falsely understood greatness. What Russia lacks without these four rocky islands. There will be more for Russia to win if it signs a peace treaty with Japan.

                  The momentary gain (economic) will certainly be- investments, technologies, etc.
                  (more details http://russiancouncil.ru/common/upload/RIAC_russia_japan.pdf)
                  But look at the map - all the straits leading from the Sea of ​​Okhotsk to the Pacific Ocean pass through the Kuril Islands. Now, in fact, for us the Sea of ​​Okhotsk is inland, and if you transfer at least two islands to Japan (the 1956 treaty), they have their own strait, through which you can carry what you like to our military bases.
                  And one more fact about the significance of the Kuril Islands:
                  By the beginning of World War II, the conversion of the Kuril Islands into a powerful bridgehead for waging war against the USSR was completed. In addition, the Pacific Fleet of the USSR was deprived of free access to the Pacific Ocean, since the Japanese armed forces completely controlled the Kuril Straits.
                  1. Beck
                    0
                    22 January 2013 09: 52
                    NEMO.

                    Nationalists only shrillly shout, without giving arguments. - Hooray. Selected - it means mine. Try poking around on the ladies head. What story? I have the right of the strong.

                    You gently, trying to provide one or another argument, you want to somehow justify the position of strength - Took away, then mine. And your arguments are sewn with white thread.

                    Here they are four islands. And here there are only two straits - between Hokkaido and Kunashir and between Kunashir and Iturup. The rest of all the straits, between the other islands of the Kuril ridge, are free for Russian navigation. In general, all these straits, according to international law, are free for passage of any vessels. And Russia does not have the right to prohibit any vessels from passing between any islands of the Kuril ridge. In addition, if you really need to go to the military bases on Sakhalin Island, you can use the Sea of ​​Japan, through the strait between Hokkaido and Honshu.
                    1. +1
                      22 January 2013 16: 28
                      Quote: Beck
                      In general, all these straits, according to international law, are free for passage of any vessels. And Russia does not have the right to prohibit any vessels from passing between any islands of the Kuril ridge.

                      Japan, during World War II, also did not have the right to prohibit passage through the straits, however The Pacific Fleet of the USSR was deprived of free access to the Pacific Ocean, today international law is respected, but tomorrow it is not, it is not reasonable to rely on the "goodwill" of the Japanese "partners".
                    2. DeerIvanovich
                      -1
                      23 January 2013 13: 28
                      Although the Japanese organized the Ainu genocide, justifying their actions by the fact that its representatives were supposedly "ebisu" (savages) and "teki" (animals). However, the Ainu were not “barbarians”. Their culture Dzemon is one of the oldest in the world. According to various sources, it appeared 5-8 thousand years ago, when no one had heard of Japanese civilization. According to many ethnographers, it was from the Ainu that the Japanese adopted many of their customs and cultural characteristics, from the Seppuku rite to the Shinto sacred complex and imperial attributes, including jasper pendants. Perhaps the Japanese were brought to the Ainu Islands - AINUMOSIRI, as a labor force for agriculture, since the Ainu themselves did not engage in agriculture. So, for example, at the Mongols, the ends of the shoes are turned upward, since the land cannot be disturbed by the Mongols, and the people of Daury (Dauriya-Chita region) were engaged in farming for the Mongols, so the Daurs were evicted by the Chinese, so that Russia would not have the support of this agricultural people.

                      From the eighth century the Japanese did not stop carving Ainu, who fled from extermination to the north - to Hokkaido - Matmai, the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin. Unlike the Japanese, Russian Cossacks did not kill them. After several hassles between normal-looking blue-eyed and bearded aliens, normal friendships were established on both sides. And although the Ainu flatly refused to pay the tax “yasak”, however, no one, unlike the Japanese, did not kill them. However, 1945 became a turning point for the fate of this people. Today, only 12 of its representatives live in Russia, but there are many “mestizos” from mixed marriages.

                      The destruction of the "bearded people" - Ainu in Japan stopped only after the fall of militarism in 1945. However, cultural genocide continues to this day.

                      It is significant that no one knows the exact number of Ainu in the Japanese islands. The fact is that in “tolerant” Japan, a rather arrogant attitude towards representatives of other nationalities is still often observed. And the Ainu were no exception: their exact number is impossible to determine, because according to Japanese censuses they do not appear either as a people or as a national minority.

                      According to scientists, the total number of Ainu and their descendants does not exceed 16 thousand people, of which purebred representatives of the Ainu people are no more than 300 people, the rest are mestizos. In addition, Ainam are often left with the most un prestigious jobs. And the Japanese are actively pursuing a policy of their assimilation and there is no question of any “cultural autonomy” for them.
        4. +1
          22 January 2013 01: 41
          Quote: Beck
          In 1644, the Japanese compiled a map, on which the Kuril Islands were designated under the collective name "thousand islands". "

          At the same time, there are records that the then Japanese state did not officially consider itself the sovereign of not only Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands, but also Hokkaido: this was confirmed in his circular by the head of the Japanese government Matsudaira in connection with the Russian-Japanese negotiations on border and trade in 1772 year.
          1. Beck
            +1
            22 January 2013 09: 58
            Quote: NEMO
            At the same time, there are records that the then Japanese state did not officially consider itself the sovereign of not only Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands, but also Hokkaido: this was confirmed in his circular by the head of the Japanese government Matsudaira in connection with the Russian-Japanese negotiations on border and trade in 1772 year.


            Counted Japan, did not count. Japan generally lagged behind the colonial conquests of the time. The founding document is the signed Shimodsk treaty between Russia and Japan in 1875. Where Russia recognizes the sovereignty of Japan over the islands of Habomai, Kunashir, Iturup, Shikotan. And Japan does not claim to other islands of the Kuril ridge.
            1. +2
              22 January 2013 16: 18
              Quote: Beck
              The founding document is the signed Shimodsk treaty between Russia and Japan in 1875. Where Russia recognizes the sovereignty of Japan over the islands of Habomai, Kunashir, Iturup, Shikotan.

              Since 1875 two world wars took place, the participants of which were both Russia and Japan, who were on opposite sides of the conflict, and international law states:
              The state of war between states terminates all and all agreements between them

              Shimodsky treatise, to which you refer, lost power back in 1904. as a result of the Japanese attack on Russia.
              Let me remind you that the result of the Second World War was: "complete and unconditional surrender of Japan", you can really only consider documents and international treaties concluded after of this period.
              In this case, the fact can only be - the result of the war, in fact - the islands belong to Russia, the mention of the periods when they belonged to Japan have no legal force.
              1. Beck
                0
                22 January 2013 19: 20
                Quote: NEMO
                The Pacific Fleet of the USSR was deprived of free access to the Pacific Ocean


                I don’t know this. Actually, it should not have been banned. It is necessary to look at the clauses of the neutrality agreement between Japan and the USSR of 1940.

                Quote: NEMO
                The state of war between states terminates all and all agreements between them


                I don’t know about this either. Probably the agreement is different. To stop the supply of metal under the agreement is yes. I don’t know the territory.

                This "complete and unconditional" is only for the United States, Britain and others with which Japan has signed peace treaties. No such peace treaty has been signed with Russia. In fact, Okmnawaw and the Senkaku Islands belonged to the United States, but the United States returned them to Japan.

                But do not give anything to Japan at all, justify that Hokkaido does not belong to them either. By the right of the strong and take everything in fact. Who are these Japs, narrow-eyed Asians. And from China, Dalyan (Port Arthur) and Harbin need to be taken. As the Russian garrison once quartered in Port Arthur, and the Russian squadron was on the roadstead. And in Harbin, the Orthodox Church stands like that. Is this not a 100% pretext to return Harbin. And China’s sovereignty over these cities has no legal effect. And there, from the coast of Chukotka, Alaska is visible. And somehow an island in the Aegean Sea belonged to Russia. Russia does not have enough land. Nowhere to live.

                Quote: NEMO
                "complete and unconditional surrender of Japan"
                1. +1
                  22 January 2013 20: 13
                  Quote: Beck
                  And from China, Dalyan (Port Arthur) and Harbin need to be taken. As the Russian garrison once quartered in Port Arthur, and the Russian squadron was on the roadstead. And in Harbin, the Orthodox Church stands like that. Is this not a 100% pretext to return Harbin. And China’s sovereignty over these cities has no legal effect. And there, from the coast of Chukotka, Alaska is visible. And somehow an island in the Aegean Sea belonged to Russia. Russia does not have enough land.

                  Do not interfere all in one heap, we are talking about the Kuril Islands, as you see, Russia has more reasons to keep them. The compromise is that Russia is ready to return to chapter 9 of the 1956 treaty.
                  1. Beck
                    +1
                    23 January 2013 10: 30
                    Quote: NEMO
                    Do not bother all in one pile


                    Principle the same. I am healthier - it means mine.
                    1. 0
                      23 January 2013 22: 09
                      Quote: Beck
                      The principle is the same. I am healthier - it means mine.

                      Beck
                      But not Russia, but Japan, through the mouth of its politicians, is trying to speak from the standpoint of the use of force:
                      1. Beck
                        +1
                        24 January 2013 09: 56
                        Quote: NEMO
                        But not Russia, but Japan, through the mouth of its politicians, is trying to speak from the standpoint of the use of force:


                        Actually, I thought I was talking with a person who takes into account the military-economic potential of our time. You never know what the politician can say. And he did not say that by force. This "you" has already attributed the word power at the top. Tough measures in the first place can mean a break in diplomatic relations, curtailment of economic cooperation, etc. in diplomacy this is also called tough measures. Japan is not suicidal to use military force.

                        It’s the same if Nepal talks to China from a position of strength. Funny - of course. And you are in all seriousness.

                        It is simply a manifestation of your misconception of "greatness". The territory is not a sign of greatness, it is an attribute. Greatness is a cultural, economic, scientific and technical component.
                      2. +1
                        24 January 2013 20: 46
                        Quote: Beck
                        taking into account the military and economic potentials of our time.

                        You rightly said that, exactly given the military-economic potentials. In 1960, the Japanese-American Agreement on Mutual Cooperation and Security Guarantee was signed in Washington
                        The 1960 treaty confirmed the deep interest of the United States in the affairs of the East Asia region as a whole. In accordance with the provisions of this treaty, the United States reaffirmed its rights to deploy military bases on the territory of the Japanese islands and received for unlimited use more than 200 bases and facilities on their territory. In turn, the United States pledged to maintain "peace and stability" in the Asia-Pacific region and to ensure the security of Japan itself from external threats.
                        Quote: Beck
                        Territory is not a sign of greatness, it is an attribute. Greatness is the cultural, economic, scientific and technical components.

                        Well if it's yours Main argument for the transfer of the islands to Japan, then I will allow myself to sum up the "multi-day research":
                        There are no historical, cultural, legal, military-political and other grounds for the transfer of the islands of Japan, we are with you not found.
                        Your reasoning about the transfer of the islands is lyrics, about nothing concrete. As if give the islands - and you will be happy for this. Then Leontief’s position is closer to me: (look, when will the time)
                      3. Beck
                        +1
                        25 January 2013 11: 24
                        Quote: NEMO
                        We have not found any historical, cultural, legal, military-political or other grounds for transferring the islands of Japan.


                        No need to juggle. In my first comment I cited a historical chronology with dates. Now, if you ignore them, then you can talk about the position of power and everything else.
    2. urchik
      +1
      20 January 2013 17: 43
      That bent so bent.
  3. avt
    +2
    19 January 2013 10: 53
    Quote: Krasnoyarets
    The Bolsheviks are the worst in the history of Russia, the number of victims will more than surpass any tsar.

    And the funny thing is that from the very beginning they did not hide anything from anyone! They promised to transfer the imperialist to the civilian one — they did, they promised the class struggle — they will receive it, they warned everyone at their second congress, before all the revolutions. So if it’s boring to live and you want a petrel over the gray plain of the sea, I recommend that you think carefully and teach a story. laughing
  4. -1
    19 January 2013 11: 25
    I think that everything remained the same as in 1925, plus the Kuril Islands were added to the insults of Japan. And Japan will definitely play this card; it needs only the right moment for this.
    1. sleepy
      0
      21 January 2013 02: 32
      For campaign propaganda, the Sokurov Islands were awarded the honorary Japanese Order of the Rising Sun with golden rays ...
      The director emphasized that Russia has something to learn from the Japanese people,
      and also noted that he had repeatedly thought about the need to “fraternize” between the two countries.
      “And, probably, you need to give the Japanese people beautiful lands that belonged to them,” RIA Novosti quoted him as saying.
      1. Misantrop
        0
        22 January 2013 01: 25
        Quote: sleepy
        For campaign propaganda, the Sokurov Islands were awarded the honorary Japanese Order of the Rising Sun with golden rays ...
        The director emphasized that Russia has something to learn from the Japanese people, “And, probably, you need to give the Japanese people the beautiful lands that belonged to them,” RIA Novosti quoted him as saying.

        IMHO it is better to give the Japanese ... Sokurov, since they like him so much. And the Japanese will be pleased, and in Russia shit will be less laughing
  5. +4
    19 January 2013 12: 09
    Quote: Armavir
    And Japan will definitely play this card; it needs only the right moment for this.

    A suitable moment was not provided in the 90s, and now it will not be provided even more so! Donkey Japanese obstinacy (doomed to hopelessness) is already beginning to amuse me! laughing
    Aunt teacher, I’m a hat to the moon! Little Johnny, there’s no such possibility! But I’m hating anyway! Kindergarten younger group laughing
    1. sleepy
      +1
      21 January 2013 02: 33
      As the Japanese see Russia.

  6. fenix57
    +2
    19 January 2013 12: 45
    "The Soviet-Japanese convention established bilateral diplomatic and consular relations. According to the convention, Japan pledged to withdraw its troops from the territory of Northern Sakhalin by May 15, 1925, which immediately after that, on the basis of Protocol A, passed under the sovereignty of the USSR. With this protocol, the parties also confirmed that none of them has a secret treaty or agreement with any third party that would threaten the sovereignty and security of the other side.In the declaration of the Soviet government, annexed to the convention, it was emphasized that the government of the USSR does not share political responsibility with the former tsarist government for the conclusion of the Portsmouth Peace Treaty of 1905. "" During negotiations in the spring of 1941 regarding the conclusion of the Soviet-Japanese pact of neutrality, the Soviet side raised the question of eliminating Japanese concessions in Northern Sakhalin. Japan gave written consent to this, but delayed its implementation for 3 years old. Nevertheless, in the end, the victories of the Soviet Army over Nazi Germany prompted the Japanese government to comply with the previously given consent, and on March 30, 1944, a Protocol was signed in Moscow on the elimination of the Japanese oil and coal concessions in Northern Sakhalin and the transfer of all concession property to the Soviet side. At the end of World War II in February 1945, at the Yalta Conference of the Heads of Powers of the countries participating in the anti-Hitler coalition, an agreement was reached on the unconditional return of the southern part of Sakhalin and the transfer of the Kuril Islands to the Soviet Union after the victory over Japan [23].
    On July 26, 1945, the Potsdam Declaration was adopted within the framework of the Potsdam Conference, limiting the sovereignty of Japan to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku. On August 8, the USSR joined the Potsdam Declaration. On August 14, Japan accepted the terms of the Declaration and on September 2, 1945 signed the Surrender Act, confirming these conditions. But these documents did not speak directly about the transfer of the Kuril Islands to the USSR.
    On August 18 - September 1, 1945, Soviet troops carried out the Kuril landing operation and occupied, among other things, the southern Kuril Islands - Urup, Iturup, Kunashir and the Lesser Kuril Ridge. " soldier
    1. DeerIvanovich
      +4
      19 January 2013 19: 57
      in theory, Hokkaido should have been taken, but the Americans decided to substitute advice and not fulfill their agreement with the advice that the Kuril and Hokkaido go to the councils for the councils to fight with Japan.
      but our blessing, seeing that the Americans sent their ships, managed to knock out the Japs with small forces. the funny thing is that there were significantly more Japs on the islands.
      And ours suffered such insignificant losses in comparison with the Japs, and this despite the fact that the Kuril garrisons were fortified.
      but at that time, Soviet soldiers were the best in the world! not for nothing that they fought with the Germans for several years.
      I note about the Germans: East Germans are mostly descendants of the Bodrich Slavs, and Western descendants of the Germans and Bodrich Slavs.
      And the Jewish arrogant Saxons have always tried to essentially play off our fraternal peoples.
  7. +4
    19 January 2013 15: 15
    The Japanese respect only power. So the stronger Russia is, the more stable the situation in the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin. Sincerely.
  8. +3
    19 January 2013 22: 12
    Japan, starting from the Meiji period, got into a fight and quarreled with everyone
    no wonder that in most countries of the Pacific
    heavens just hate. A vivid example of this is China.
  9. mamba
    +1
    20 January 2013 12: 11
    The discussion on the forum has slipped into a predictable course: disputed territories. And the article is not devoted to the results of World War II, but to the liberation of the Far East from the Japanese after the end of the Civil War.
    My maternal great-grandfather Ivan Danilovich Gusev managed to fight in the First World War. He distinguished himself in the Brusilovsky breakthrough, was personally awarded the St. George Cross by Emperor Nicholas II. During the war he became three times St. George Knight. He rose from private to ensign.
    In the civil war he fought on the side of the Reds, he commanded a division probably consisting of the 3rd Army on the Kolchak Front.
    After the end of the Civil War, from 1921 to 1922, he served in the People's Revolutionary Army of the Far Eastern Republic, the core of which were red divisions, was the military commandant of Khabarovsk and, according to some, Chita. Vasily Konstantinovich Blucher personally awarded Ivan Danilovich gold weapons.
    In 1927 he was demobilized for health reasons and moved with his family to Saratov. When Marshal Blucher was arrested in 1938, Ivan Danilovich personally went to the head of the Saratov NKVD and convinced him of the marshal's innocence and devotion to his revolution. Fortunately, Ivan Danilovich came across an honest and decent man who convinced him to stop looking for the truth where it does not exist, and thus saved his life. As you know, even the closest relatives of Blucher were shot, and his orderly and driver were in the basements of the NKVD.
    During World War II, Ivan Danilovich worked in Stroytrest. He participated in the laying of the first gas pipeline to Moscow. He was awarded the medal "For Valiant Labor in the Great Patriotic War".
  10. zstalkerzz
    -1
    20 January 2013 17: 09
    THE ARTICLE IS GOOD, BUT WHY IS THE AUTHOR USING THE WORD LIKE "BELOGVARDESCHINA"? THE TALK IS GOING TO BE ABOUT SOME BANDITS ...
    1. urchik
      -1
      20 January 2013 17: 46
      AND THEY GANGS AND WERE IF THEIR ANTANT SUPPORTED.
      1. zstalkerzz
        0
        24 January 2013 09: 17
        Did the Entente support them? it was all at the official level. and as soon as the defeat of the whites began, the "loyal allies" immediately skidded. Yes, not only skedaddle, I will say more: they shit. take those white Czechs who raped our women, then wrapped them in a sack and threw them off the trains. Kappel himself challenged the Czech deputy commander to a duel. body, but he ignored.
  11. SHOGUN
    +1
    21 January 2013 15: 13
    Japs? What is it? A country with more than 200 nationalities and peoples cannot tolerate one? Such statements in relation to any nation characterize a person very poorly.
    Actually the subject: How can you give a piece of land, even if that in itself is worthless? The value is not in the islands themselves. The value is in the resources around these islands. Plus the expansion of the border and free access to the ocean for the fleet in winter. And if, nevertheless, someday, the question of transferring the two southern islands to Japan still arises. Then they need to be given under such conditions that the Japanese would think: "Maybe, well, them, these islands ah?"
    1. DeerIvanovich
      -1
      22 January 2013 14: 05
      no need to give, on the contrary, you need to return Hokkaido. The Soviets set up the Americas; our troops did not have time to transfer them. So it would be happy Japs and Hokkaido would cry