Military Review

Kuriles - an integral part of our homeland

221
Russkim pioneers, expanding the borders of our Fatherland in the Far East and in the Pacific Ocean,
selflessly exploited new land and water.

Sovetskimi warriors, courageously in battle to defend the Kuril Islands
and restored historical justice.


Kuriles - an integral part of our homeland


The Kuril Islands are the island between the Kamchatka Peninsula and the Hokkaido Island, a slightly convex arc separating the Sea of ​​Okhotsk from the Pacific Ocean. The length is about 1'200 km. Total area - 10,5 thousand km².

It is not the first time that they are the object of the illegal claims made by our countries by Japan, trying to seize the archipelago. So it was both in the 19th century, and in the 20th, and in the 21st, but depending on the current political situation, the country's policy of the rising sun took on different forms.

We would like to consider the history of the Kuril Islands, to get to it, to get to it, to get to it, to get to it, to get to it, to get it out of the country, and to prove that it’s absolutely legal for us, to return to Kursk and South Sakhalin in 1945, the Soviet Union is absolutely legal, to comply with all the Soviet Union’s laws and South Sakhalin is absolutely legal, to keep to Russia and South Sakhalin completely legal, to keep to Russia and South Sakhalin completely legal, to keep to Russia and South Sakhalin. Japanese land, and restored historical justice.

Getting to the analysis of this topic, first of all it is necessary to briefly say about the strategic and economic significance of the Kuril Islands for our country.

Kuriles - a storehouse of minerals. The total estimate of only the mineral reserves of mineral resources for the year 1988 is 44 billion dollars. However, the main mineral resource of Kuril are titanium-magnesium ores, located on the shelf in the form of scattering, and will be applied to earth-earth metals. And titan is, according to expert estimates, the XXI century material. In addition, the offshore island is a potential source of oil and gas.

True, the unique value of Southern Kuril is due to the wealth of water resources. The total stocks of fish and other seafood in the Yuzhno-Kurilskom fishery region is more than 5 mln. Tons, and the permissible catches are about 800 thousand. Tons. In the aquatorium of the Southern Kuril, there is the richest in red seaweed marine life, constituting 89% used for biotechnology of the entire Far Eastern region. According to me, spetsialists, XXI Vek - this is Vek biotechnology, and now the biofartsevtichesky firms of the world in terms of their income are second only to the military-industrial complex.
In addition, in the waters of the Southern Kuril are non-freezing straits from the Sea of ​​Okhotsk to the Pacific Ocean. The Sverokurilsky Straits freeze, thus losing their strategic value for the winter season.

All these facts are undoubtedly known to Japan, which has long been looking at the Kuril Islands to the object of expansion.

What do we know about open Kuril?

In the Kuril Islands, Russia reached the boundary of the XVIII – XVIII table after the famous Kamchatka campaign of Vladimir Atlasov 1696 – 1699, which ended with the annexation of the whole of Kamchatka to the Russian Empire. From the local residents of Atlasov he learned that to the south of Kamchatka there live some special people, “Kurilian foreigners”, “smoked”. It was from Vladimir Atlasov, Kamchatka Yermak, according to the expressions of Pushkin, that the new geographic names “Kuril land”, “Kuriles” and the new ethnonym “Kurilian foreigners”, “Kurils” were included. But in his communion the village of the island has not yet gone about the island, but only about the southern tip of the Kamchatka Peninsula. Here, at the presentation of Atlasov, and was the center of the "Kuril land". And that is why one of the most beautiful lakes of Southern Kamchatka is still bearing the name of Kurilskago. It was in this Kamchatka “Kuril land” opposite the mouth of the first “Kuril rѣka” that Atlas put some kind of earth into the sea.

Indeed, the mouth of the river Goligina sees the island Alaid, in 1954, it was renamed Atlas Island.

The first competent cartographic description of the Kurilsk archipelago, including four southern islands and even the island of Hokkaido, was made in 1711 – 1713 years in the results of the service carried out by the expedition Ignatya Kozyrevsky. In 1726, Akanasіy Yedorovich Shestakov clarifies and supplements the first detailed map compiled by Kozyrevsky in 1713. The Shestakov map for the first time correctly shows the turn to the south of the Pacific coast of the Far East, as well as all islands of the Kuril ridge, including the southern ones, are indicated and listed in detail. Shestakov's card was translated and published in France.



During the 1739 – 1741 years, Martyn Shpanberg headed the next expedition to the Kuril Islands. The 1739 expedition of the year came out to the islands of the Small Kuril Ridge. Through interpreters, the Ainu reported that close to "there are twoteen islands, on which there are a lot of people, and no one on the islands is subject to", with the exception of Matmai Island (Hokkaido), which is "under the rule of the Japanese Khan". So the Russian sailors were convinced that Russia could occupy all the Kuril Islands, including the Small ridge, right up to the coast of Hokkaido.

Upon completion of the expedition, work was done on the first map of the Kuril Islands. The map compiled by Španberg was published in 1745, the Atlas of the Russian Empire. Atlas was published in Russian, French and Dutch. Thus, he received the status of an official document of international significance.



It should be said that the official map issued by him had a special meaning. It was a legal document-izvesheniyem, reflecting the position of the country that issued it, firstly, the composition of its own territory and the length of the border and, secondly, the other countries' legal status. From the point of view of international law ХІІІ - the first half of the XIX century, when many territories were not yet surveyed and therefore did not belong to anyone, preceded by the publication of the geographical map of the “new land” which gave the country that published it and the right of priority to claim ownership of this territory. In other words, it was a principle: the first issued card of the “new territory” has the preferential right to consider it as its possession, even if it is not the first to open it. And to challenge such a cartographic argument was very difficult. An additional advantage was given to the country that issued the card in a foreign language, since in this way it gave its “imitation” not only internal status, but also an international document. And Russia in 1713 – 1796 years produced at least fourteen maps of the Kuril Islands, including the southern group of islands of the archipelago.

Even at the end of the ХѴІІІ century Hokkaido Island, bordering the south by the Kuril Islands, was not part of Japan, which is clearly indicated by the map of the Irkutsk Alliance, published in 1796 year.



The first scientific work was published in 1755 – 1756 in Petersburgѣ, a significant part of which was removed from the Kuril Islands. This is the “Description of the Land of Kamchatka” by Stepan Petrovich Krasheninnikov. Two chapters of the book were specifically devoted to the Kuril Islands. The book of Krasheninnikov was transferred abroad, thanks to which the Kuril Islands gained wide popularity beyond the borders of our country. But it is especially important for science and literature. This book has been carefully studied and spelled out by Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin.

Many materials about the Kuril Islands were sent by the Governor of Irkutsk to the Academy of Sciences. October 24 The 1782 of the year was reviewed by the Tatarinovs' Description of the Kuril Islands - extracts from the notes of the centurion Ivan Chernago, non-commissioned officer and translator The turn and the Siberian nobleman Antipin. In 1785, it was published in the academic "Msesyatselovѣ", in 1790, it was published again. It is noteworthy that in Nometsky and English languages ​​(“translation”) it was published before, in the original…. Tak labor of Ivan Chernago, Ivan Next and Ivan Antipin in the treatment of Mikhail Tatarinov became izvesten the whole world.

Soviet scientists have proven in complete humor that it was we who were the pioneers and explorers of the Kuril Islands.
One of the most venerable experts in the history of Rossi’s entry into their present far-east borders is Dr. E. Ya. Fainberg, author of the Russian-Japanese relationship 1697 – 1875's capital labor. This labor was published on the basis of the eponymous doctoral dissertation defended by it in 1955. The most briefly, the main concept of the author is presented in the dissertation, where it is written:

“Russians were pioneers in the openings and colonizations of the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin. Much later, the Japanese became interested in these islands, having in mind to turn them into a base for fisheries and in the barrier against the advancement of the Russians to the south. At the end of the 18th century, the Japanese first appeared on Urup and Iturup. They began to destroy the crosses and other marks of the presence of the Russians and incite the natives to expel the Russians from the Kuril Islands. Nѣkotorye yaponskіe historians indirectly priznayut these facts svidѣtelstvuyuschіe about tom, that the Japanese were temporary and casual posѣtitelyami Sakhalin and Kurilskih Isles, and sometimes give away, even unto seredinѣ XIX vѣka not only Sahalin and Kurilskіe island, but ostrov Ezo [Hokkaido] not was considered a Japanese possession [1].

[1] E. Ya. Fainberg. Russo-Japanese Relations (1697 – 1875): Abstract of thesis on the doctoral degree of the doctor of historical sciences. Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Institute of Oriental Studies. M., 1955. C. 4


One can quote Boris Petrovich Polevoi’s statements - one of the most authoritative experts on the history of pioneering and first-line Kuril. In the final chapter of his book The Discoverers of the Kuril Islands, which was the result of a long study by the author of little-known archival materials, as well as by the work of foreign and domestic researchers, the following summarizes his findings in the following way:

"Everything that has been told in this book" clearly proves how unusually great the contribution of our people to the history of the discovery and primordial character of the Kuril Islands. The priest of the Russians in this great is undeniable.

Russian first to be quite detailed descriptions of the entire Kuril ridge. They named this archipelago “Kurilskimi”And this name has become firmly established in all the world geographical literature. They were the first to establish the authentic names of all the islands of the archipelago, and also made these names known to the whole world. Finally, it was the Russians who were the first to establish their true location and put on geographical maps.

At first glance, acquaintance with the history of the most diverse Russian expeditions to the Kuril Islands creates an impression that in their organization there were a lot of chance. But when the history of these campaigns is examined sequentially, the important historical task of all the actions of Russians in Kurilakh - to make them the property of our country, our people - is more clearly revealed. And in this they fully succeeded.

It is important to emphasize that the southern Kuril Islands, which the Russians could have been able to pass before the Japanese, certainly were the most interested in the XVII century in Russia. But the guilt of the Russians, the land explorers and the seafarers, in the very end of the 18th - beginning of the 19th century, they remained at the right moment without the support of the government, and the Japanese aggressors took advantage of it. Particularly great here was the role of the ridiculous Paul I. However, short-sightedness was also peculiar to other leaders of the fate of Tsarist Russia. Tsarskіe dignitaries did not understand glavnago - tsѣnnost Kurilskih Isles opredѣlyaetsya not so limited ih fur wealth as ih strategicheskim polozhenіem: vѣd they then began to play a role glavnyh Fatherland forpostov on Dalnem Vostokѣ and Tihom okeanѣ and Japanese ih used unto primarily unto svoih agressivnyh tsѣlyah , “a dagger directed into the heart of Kamchatka”, like a deadbolt blocking the path of Russia to the Pacific Ocean. Therefore, the assignment of the entire Kuril chain to the tsarist government was an unforgivable mistake, as indicated by S O Makarov in 80-x. Nineteenth century. [famous admiral, perished in the Russo-Japanese War]. Even then, the correction of this error has become a historical necessity. However, it was succeeded in correcting it only under Soviet power in 1945, also of considerable sacrifice ”[2].

[2] Field B.P. Discoverers of the Kuril Islands. From the history of Russian geographic discoveries on the Pacific Ocean of the XVIIIth century Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk: Far Eastern Book Publishing House, Sakhalin Department, 1982. C. 178 – 179.


It is worth emphasizing that the use of Japan in the development of the Kuril Islands is denied not only by our compatriots, but also by foreign scientists, who became suspicious in the objectivity of the Japanese supporters of territorial claims and conducted independent research and development. Note to this - the statements of the most prominent American specialist who speaks Russian, Japanese and Japanese, Professor John Stefan of the University of Hawaii, described in the “Kuril Islands. The Russian-Japanese border in the Pacific Ocean. " Tak, describing the situation prevailing in the region of the southern islands of the Kuril ridge in the middle of the XVIII century, Stephen writes:

“In 1770, the Russian year passed the end of the end of almost every island of the Kuril ridge, and most of them completed the initial study of the archipelago almost single-handedly. Their achievements look especially significant in the context of the harsh climatic conditions and limited material resources that were in their disposal. Covering distant distances in fragile kayaks without navigation devices, they brought themselves into the power of sudden storms, unpredictable fogs and treacherous trends that inspire danger even among modern travelers. Hunger ruined a considerable number of those who were spared by the poems of nature. And in spite of all this, those who remained alive, throwing down challenges to difficulties, continued to traverse the archipelago throughout its life, to put on the table, to put its contours on the cards and determine its disposition in relation to Japan, to bury the very bottom of them, which are already the topographers.

[3] John Stephan. Kuril Islands, Russo-Japanese Frontiers in Pacific. Oxford, 1974. P. 50.


At the same time, Professor Stefan rejects the undeserving confidence of the attempts of Japanese historians to attribute to their compatriots the priority of the development of the Kuril Islands.

“Trying to impart legitimacy to their bloated pretensions in sovereign territories, Japanese patrols are trying to interpret the interpretation of old manuscripts and archival materials from old manuscripts. Such an argument could probably be ignored altogether by some creative deviations from history, if she did not enjoy the support of her numerous supporters »[4].

[4] Ibid. P. 50.


A further author directly writes that the first documentary evidence of the appearance of the Japanese in the South Kurilakhs refers only to the year 1754. The author does not deny even more early adventures on the islands, but does not give such an opportunity any historical significance, since they were, as he wrote, only “nameless, strayed along the path and forgotten victims of circumstances” [5].

[5] Ibid. P. 50.


But, perhaps, the very best evidence of the inconsistency of the Japanese official propaganda is given to us by the works of honest Japanese scientists, who, in the name of truth, were not afraid to go against the course and reject the conclusions of tokiy diplomats. The example is a professor at Kagosimskogo University Yoshimitsu Koriyama, who published in 1980 in the year the major work "Studied history of Japanese-Russian relations in the period of Bakumatsu". Operating with a large amount of historical facts, Koriya completely showed in her books that the version was inconsistent as if the Southern Kurils were “from the Japanese land”. From the book it is clear, in particular, that already in the beginning of the 18th century Russian explorers, representatives of the Russian-American company, as well as the envoys of the government of Russia, step by step, began to open and master the Kuril Islands, including them in the Russian State. At the same time, the river is going on about the Sverts, Tak and the Southern Kuriles, including the Kunashir and Iturup islands, the indigenous population of which - Ainu, as it is clear from the book, took Russian citizenship in 1778 a year, that is, 22 years ago, that is, over twenty years, that is, over twenty years ago, I took XNUMX a year, that is, over twenty years, that is, over twenty years ago, I took XNUMX a year, that is, over twenty years, that is, over twenty years ago, I took XNUMX a year, that is, over twenty years, that is, over twenty years ago, I took XNUMX a year, that is, over twenty years, that is, over twenty years ago, I took XNUMX a year, that is, over 20 years, that is, I took out the book, XNUMX, that is, over twenty years, that is, over twenty books, I took XNUMX a year, that is, 22 years ago, i. Kak these islands were in one-sided order declared by the Japanese owners. The Japanese government did not consider not only the Kuriles, but also the northern part of the island of Hokkaido, the Japanese territory of Japan in the 17th century.

Such are the authoritative testimonies not of the journalistic top, but of the real experts on the problem. These testimonies clearly show all the groundlessness of the Japanese claims on the Kuril Islands on the “ancient Japanese territory”. Up until the end of the XVIIIth century, until the beginning of the Japanese expansion on the sovereign, the Kuril Islands, along the Sakhalin Island, remained “abroad”, “alien land”, and the “land of Ainov” for Japan.

In the middle of the XVIII century, the Russians were able to so quickly spread their power to the Kurils, that even then the inhabitants of the southern islands, including the largest of them, Kunashir and Iturup, became subjects of Russia. This further strengthening of Russia in the Pacific Ocean was annoying for some of its foreign rivals. Even in 1763, Lomonosov, pointing out the great strategic importance of the Kuril Islands, warned of future threats to our Far Eastern possession by foreign sea powers. And in the area of ​​the Kuril Islands, foreign intrigues began.

It is known that right up to the middle of 1780-xb the rulers of Tokugawa Japan strictly forbade their subjects to leave its limits under the threat of death. The only Europeans to trade were the Dutch. Rossiya sought to establish trade relations with the Japanese, which could not please the Dutch: in such a case, they would have lost the opportunity to sell their goods at a monopolistically high price. In order to prevent normal contact with Japan, the Dutch began to slander Russia, spread rumors about the threat of Japan and sovereigns. The Dutch directly rebuked the Japanese in that they allowed Russia to occupy the entire Kuril Islands. Wishing to help Russian trade by any means, the Dutch strongly persuaded the Japanese to extract Russians from the southern Kuril Islands: any aggravation of relations would automatically exclude any Russian-Japanese trade.

In 1802, in the city of Hakodat in Hokkaido, an office was created for the colonization of the Kuril Islands. The Japanese “colonization” was accompanied by the demolition of the Russians, the sign of the cross, which had been installed in the 18th century in the sign of belonging to these islands of Russia, and the forcible expulsion of the industrialists from Iturup and Kunashir. The Russian authorities reacted diplomatically to this.

From the Memorandum of Nikolai Pavlovich Rezanov on March 13, 25


I, the undersigned, all-presidential sovereign, Emperor Alexander I, acting chamberlain and Kavaler Nikolai Rezanov, declare to the Japanese government:

4. In order for the Japanese Empire beyond the so-called extremity of Matmai [Hokkaido] Island not to stretch its owners, the whole land and water belong to my sovereign [6].

[6] Russian Kuriles. History and modernity. M., 2002. C. 40


Unfortunately, the official authorities did not show the necessary strength to close the Kuriles behind Russia. All this led to the fact that in 1855, Russia was turned out to be on the southern islands of the archipelago. And the main efforts of the beginning of the ward were directed at the development of the all-American possession of Russia. But they were lost in 1867 year due to the short-sighted policy of Alexander II; last but not least, economic and political, from the loss of Alaska and the Aleutian Islands, we still feel that way. And it is completely unknown when exactly Russian America will return back to the fold of Russia. However, we are convinced that sooner or later this will happen and historical justice will triumph, although it is up to us at the international level to raise this issue at the international level.

According to the Shimoda treatise on January 25 (February 7) 1855, the border in Kurilakh was drawn between the islands of Iturup and Urup. How did it happen that Russia gave away a part of its territory, still in the XVII, closed behind it? First, there was a weakening of military power and political influence of Russia in the Far East. Secondly, the unfavorable outcome of the negotiations was predetermined by the short-sightedness of Petersburg politicians and diplomats, poorly informed by this problem. They clearly underestimated the strategic significance of the Southern Kuril Islands and accompanied Putyatin with vicious instructions drawn up without proper knowledge of the situation and of taking into account the national interests and historical rights of Russia. Thirdly, the Simodsk treatise was signed in the years of the Crimean War, when the Anglo-French squadron literally hunted for the embassy Putyatin, and the Japanese, of course, knew the extent of this, which could not fail to follow the outcome of the negotiations. All this has played its role in the fact that Japan has received significant, unreasonable territorial concessions, and Russia on 90 has lost the South Kurils, which will be returned already to the other government.

The last part of the island Japan, naturally, wanted and continue to continue its expansion into our territory. Tak, Japan, during the signing of the Shimodskoe tractate, claimed the southern part of Sakhalin Island, despite the fact that it was well-known by the Russians, it created military posts and settlements and started mining coal. The Japanese settlements on Sakhalin were few, mainly seasonal, and occupied a very limited part of the coast of Aniva Bay; The Japanese did not know the deep part of the island. In 1855, the territory of Sakhalin remained unlimited, which was recorded in the Simodsk treatise.

Such a situation could not be maintained for a long time, and therefore in 1860-хъ - 1870-ху a gray negotiation was conducted for the solution of the Sakhalin issue. Considering the ever increasing importance of islands for Russia, the tsarist government made a concession to the remaining Kuril Islands from Urup to Shumsh in exchange for the refusal of Japan from Sakhalin. This was closed in the Petersburg treatise on April 25 (May 7) 1875. The concession was unreasonably large and completely unreasonable. The Northern Kurils and so belonged to Russia, while the Japanese did not have any permanent settlements on Sakhalin but were engaged exclusively in fishing on its southern coast, for which they created temporary fishermen villages. In general, the Petersburg treatise is a diplomatic defeat of Alexander II, a defeat that left another spot exactly seventy years in the history of our Far East.

Tak vs во Kuriles passed into the possession of Japan to 1945 year.

The following was signed by the Portsmouth Peace Treaty of 1905, which annulled all previous treaties and agreements, which was fixed in the 9 article, as well as in the annex 10. Thus, they terminated their agreement on trade and navigation 1895 of the year (they, in turn, annulled the Simodsk treatise) and Petersburg treatise. This is a fundamentally important legal position, especially in the context of today's references in Japan to the Simodsk and Peterburgsk treatises. For some reason, the Japanese “forget” that these treatises have long since lost their force.



However, the Portsmouth Treaty was also violated by Japan in 1918 – 1925 years, when the Japanese army occupied the Russian Far East. Recall that our country was not only not located in Japan in the state of war, but was also its ally in the First World War. It is not a secret that Japan dreamed of annexing the Far East from the Russian Empire. Her wishes did not change after the royal power fell and the Russian Empire became Soviet Russia. Even maps were published, where our continental territory was marked as Japanese.

Armed intervention on the mainland continued from 1918 to November 1922. In connection with the international position of our country and the expulsion of the interventionists, the withdrawal of the European part of Japan was forced to establish a diplomatic relationship with us, and the 20 of January 1925 of Beijing signed the Basic Principles of the relations between the USSR and Japan and the countries. 1925 of the year. According to the Convention, Japan undertook to release Southern Sakhalin to 15 in May 1925, which was done by her to the 14 number. Thus, the intervention on Svernem Sakhalin lasted five years, starting with 21 in April 1920.

In the Convention, the agreement was agreed that all agreements concluded by Russia and Japan before November 14, November 7, agreements, agreements and conventions, excluding the Portsmouth Peace Treaty, should be revised. In addition, in the Declaration of the Soviet Government attached to the Convention, it was stated:

“Getting to know the name of the lawyer sectioned with the former tsarist government is the political responsibility for concluding the named agreement ”[5].

[7] Documents of the USSR’s external policy. T. 8. M., 1963. C. 77.


Thus, the Soviet government did not assume responsibility for the loss of South Sakhalin, not recognizing the transfer of the "Count Polusakhalinsky" to this territory of Japan. What a striking difference from Vittev diplomacy!

***


Let us now consider how the Kuril Islands were returned.

In 1930-ies, Japan, contrary to the provisions of the 1925 Convention, conducted a policy hostile to the Soviet Union, was preparing for an armed assault on it. In addition, Japan clearly demonstrated its aggressive attributes by unleashing military action at Lake Khasan in 1938, and at Khalkhin-Gol River in 1939.

The question of the South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands was discussed at the Soviet-Japanese negotiations on the conclusion of a non-aggression pact. 18 November 1940 of the year the Soviet government stated that in the public opinion of the USSR the question of such a pact will be tied up by the problem of returning the lost territories of South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands. It was noted that if Japan was not ready to pose these questions, then it would be reasonable to talk about the conclusion of a neutrality pact, which does not entail a solution to the territorial issues. At the same time, the Soviet government insisted on signing simultaneously a pact on the neutrality of the protocol on the liquidation of Japanese oil and coal concessions on Sverne Sakhalin.

The corresponding pact was signed by 13 of April of 1941 of the year, however, Japan began to not set up to perform it. The Japanese seized, fired and even sank the Soviet merchant ships. Japan retained from joining the war, oppose us not a neutrality pact, but availability to the Far East of Soviet troops and victories of Soviet arms under Moscow, Stalingrad, Kursk. In all the years of the Great Patriotic War in the Far East, there was from 15 to 30% of the total composition of the Red Army, to the delight of Hitler and his generals. South Sakhalin and the Kuriles were turned into a base for attacking our country.

The question of the restoration of the Soviet Union’s rights to South Sakhalin and the Kuriles was discussed in November 1943 at the Teheran Conference by the heads of the Allied Powers. At the Yalta conference, the issue was finally resolved.

From the Yalta Agreement


The leaders of the Three Great Powers - the Soviet Union, the United States of America and Great Britain - agreed that in two or three months after the capitulation of Germany and the end of the war in Europe, the Soviet Union would join the war against Japan on the side of the Allies against the Allies, against the Allies, against the Allies, against the Allies, against the United States and the end of the United States of America and the United States of America and Great Britain and the United States of America and Great Britain.

1. Preservation of the status quo of Mongolia (Mongolian People’s Republic).

2. Restoration of rights belonging to Russia, violated in the control of Japan by 1904, namely:

a) the return to the Soviet Union of the southern part of Fr. Sakhalin and all adjacent islands;

3. Transfers to the Soviet Union Kuril Islands.

The Heads of Government of the Three Great Powers agreed that the claims of the Soviet Union would certainly be satisfied after the victory of Japan [8].

[8] Foreign policy of the Soviet Union during the Patriotic War. T. 3. M., 1947. C. 111 – 112.


In an effort to avoid final defeat, the Japanese government offered to “voluntarily” return South Sakhalin and the Kuriles in 1945 year.

In the liberal press there is a lot of opinion that the USSR first attacked Japan, and only then declared war on it, and all this with the existence of a Pact of neutrality between the two states of 1941 of the year. These gentlemen deduce that the USSR acted with Japan and did exactly the same as four years earlier Nazi Germania did itself. Say, the Soviet Union violated all the norms of international law, acted as an aggressor. Needless to say, what position in relation to the Kuril Islands these gentlemen occupy and in general belong to our country and our history. However, our country for them is not the Motherland, but “this country”, which all intelligent people (by whom they mean only themselves and themselves), dream of “dumping”.

Consider how everything happened at the very same time.

6 April, more to the end of combat actions on the soviet-german front, in the official soviet organ of the press published a corresponding statement, handed to the japanese side of the day.

Declaration of the Government of the USSR on the denunciation of the Neutrality Pact by Japan from 5 in April to 1941


The Neutrality Pact between the Soviet Union and Japan was 13 on April 1941, that is, before the German attack on the USSR and before the war between Japan, on the one hand, and England and the United States of America, on the other.

Since that time, the situation has changed in the root. Germania attacked the USSR, and Japan, an ally of Germany, helped the last war against the USSR. In addition, Japan is at war with the United States and Anglia, which are allies of the Soviet Union.

With such a position, the Neutrality Pact between Japan and the USSR lost its meaning, and the extension of this Covenant became impossible.

In force of the said above and in accordance with the article 3 of the Covenant, which provides for its rights of denunciation

[9] Izvestiya Newspaper from 6 April 1945


Kak see, the Soviet Union in advance denounced the pact, observing all its norms. In addition, by publishing an official statement to an official source, the Soviet government informed the whole world that the pact was terminating its activities.

Now as for the fact that the USSR has attacked Japan comfortably without the declaration of war. As is known, the fighting on the Soviet-Japanese front began on August 9. And, as in the case of the denunciation of the Covenant, a corresponding declaration was published. Pay attention to the text of this document.

Application of the Soviet Government to the Government of Japan 8 August 1945


After the defeat and capitulation of Hitler's Germania, Japan turned out to be the only great power that was still behind the continuation of the war.

The requirement of the three powers - the United States of America, the United Kingdom and China from 26 on July this year about unconditional surrender was rejected by Japan. This is the very proposal of the Japanese government to the Soviet Union to mediate in the war in the Far East that is losing all soil.

Considering the refusal of Japan to capitulate, the Allies appealed to the Soviet Government to propose to enter the war against the Japanese aggression and thus shorten the terms of the end of the war, reduce the number of sacrifices and contribute to the speedy restoring of the universal peace.

In its allied debt, the Soviet government accepted the proposals of the allies and joined the declaration of the allied powers from 26 on July this year.

The Soviet Government believes that such a policy is the only means capable of bringing the onset of peace closer, freeing the people from further sacrifices and sufferings and enabling the Japanese people to get rid of the dangers and destruction that were experienced by Germany after its refusal to accept unconditional surrender.

In view of the above, the Soviet Government declares that, tomorrow, that is, on August 9, the Soviet Union will consider itself in a state of war in Japan [10].

[10] Pravda Newspaper from 9 August 1945


So, we can see that the Soviet Union did not even think to attack Japan in the absolute, and in exactly one day warn it about the start of the war. It turns out that all the imitations of the liberals and the antipatriots are broken about documentaries Sources that are worthless discrepancies prove the deliberate deceit of our internal enemies of the Fatherland.

If something can be compared with the USSR and Hitler's Germanism, then this is also the degree of fulfillment of Hitler's willed dream — the so-called lightning war. Hitler, regardless of loss, went to Moscow, but reached our capital only in late autumn, and so did not manage to capture it. The USSR 8 August declared war on Japan, and already 2 September, twenty five days after the war was declared by us, Japan signed the act of unconditional surrender. Truly, what Hitler wanted to bring about in relation to us, we ourselves carried out his ally.

Outgoing І. V. Stalin to the Soviet people 2 September 1945


Japan ... took advantage of the defeat of Tsarist Russia in order to grab South Sakhalin from Russia, to establish itself on the Kuril Islands and, thus, to close our country east to the east of the Crimea and the Soviet Union of Czechoslovakia and East Siberia, this way. It was clear that Japan set itself the task of rejecting all its Far East from Russia.

But the defeat of the Russian troops in the 1904 year in the first Russian-Japanese war left in the minds of the people a hard memory. It fell on our country black spot. Our people waited and waited for the day when Japan would be broken and the spot would be eliminated. Forty years we, the people of old generation, were waiting for this day. And here, this day has come. Today Japan recognized itself to be conquered and signed the act of unconditional surrender.

This means that South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands will depart to the Soviet Union, and from now on they will not serve as a means of separating the ocean and the base of the Japanese attack on our Far East, but a means of direct communication between the Soviet Union and the ocean and the base of our country's defense from Japanese aggression.

In addition, an important international legal document that recorded an unqualified refusal of Japan from its claims on the Kuril Islands, became the San Francisco Peace Treaty of 8 of September 1951 of the year it signed. The Soviet Union refused to sign it, since it opposed early commitments, gave Japan the opportunity to participate in aggressive blocks, did not contain the democratic provisions of Japan. Moreover, thanks to the reinforcements of our former allies in the Second World War, the text of the Treaty did not explicitly indicate in favor of whom Japan refused from South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands. Clause “c” of Article 2 of the Treaty states:

“C) Japan refuses from all rights, rights and claims to the Kuril Islands and to that part of Sakhalin Island and the islands adjacent to it, sovereignty over which Japan obtained under the Portsmouth Treaty from September 5 on 1905 of the year [XNXX]

[11] Collection of documents and materials in Japan (1951 – 1954). M .: DVO MFA SSSR, 1954. C. 89 – 104.


In an effort to weaken the legal significance of the refusal, in the following years, the leaders of the Japanese Foreign Ministry brought their casuistic argument, the essence of which is reduced to the statement that the representatives of the USSR did not sign the Peace Treaty, but did not receive a consent of the USSR to agree to the Peace Treaty, the USSR did not have to agree to a peace agreement, the USSR did not sign a peace agreement, the USSR did not sign a peace agreement community ownership of the Kuril Islands and Southern Sakhalin, from which Japan refused, and that the USSR did not have the right to refer to this agreement. However, the artificiality, illogicality and inconsistency of such an interpretation are obvious. Suffice it to recall that Japanese diplomats do not put the doubts of China’s right to Taiwan and the Pescadore Islands, from which Japan refused to comply with the agreement, and also without mentioning the extent to which these islands are taken over.

Attempts by Japanese diplomacy to alter the meaning of San Francisco’s peace treaty clause refusing Japan from the claims of the Kuril Islands by deceitful approvals seem to be more conclusive and essentially dishonest and dishonorable. The essence of them comes down to the fact that de recorded in an agreement ѣ rejection of Japan from the Kuril Islands does not mean its refusal from the four islands of the Kuril archipelago on the basis that these islands of Japan did not consider the Kuril Islands and that when signing the agreement, the Japanese government considered Kak Kuriles, and Kak islands, adjacent to the coast of the island of Hokkaido. Naturally, these requirements were supported by the Americans. However, let us turn to the fact.

October 19 The 1951 of the Year of the Special Committee on the Peace Treaty of the House of Representatives of the Japanese Parliament, Head of the Department of Foreign Affairs Department of the Japan Kumao Nishimura Foreign Ministry, referring to the understanding of the Kuril Islands, said:

“I believe that the territorial prerequisites of the Kuril Islands, which are referred to in the agreement, include in themselves the sovereign Kuril Islands, as well as the South Kuril Islands, taken apart. The peace treaty was signed in September of 1951, and, consequently, the question of which region falls within the meaning of the “Kuril Islands”, which is under the agreement, must be completed today’s position. As I have already said, the understanding of the Kuril Islands contained in the agreement is interpreted as meaning that it includes the South Kuril Islands and the South Kuril Islands. However, as I have already explained, the point of view of the government in that the two areas of the historical point of view are in completely different positions will not change even in the future ”[12].

[12] Russian Pacific epic. Khabarovsk, 1979. C. 586.


Thus, the official face of Japan recognized that the southern islands of the Kuril Islands are Kuril Islands, but it was immediately stipulated that the Japanese government would always look at the South and South Kurils in different ways.

Here is the definition of the Kuril Islands Islands Encyclopedia of Americana, published by Japanese friends:

“The Kuriles, or the Kuril Islands, is a chain consisting of approximately 30 large and numerous small islands and reefs, stretching from the tip of the Kamchatka Peninsula almost to the Samago coast of Hokkaido, Japan [13].

[13] Encyclopedia Americana. International Edition. V. 16. 1973. P. 559.


When the Kuril Islands entered into Japan, it did not occur to the Japanese to consider the Southern Kuriles to be something else that was not part of the Kuril Archipelago. Here you can find the Kuril Islands The official guide to Japan in the Department of public health roads Japan 1941:

“Chisima [Thousand Islands], or the Kuril Islands, is a long volcanic island (32 Islands), stretching nearly 710 miles from Nemuro [about. Hokkaido] to the Tisima strait, which separates the island from the southern tip of Kamchatka. The name Kuril Islands comes from the Russian word “smoke” ...

The Kurile range includes: Kunashir, Shikotan, Iturup, Urup, Shumshu, Alaid and Paramushir ”[14].

[14] Russian Pacific epic. Khabarovsk, 1979. C. 580.


The authors of the guidebook are mistaken about the origins of the names: philologists have established that the basis of the name of the island lies with one of the self-identified Ainovs - “kur”, which means “human, people, people”. This Ainu word formed the basis of the Russian name of the island - Kurilia. But that's not what's important here. From the quotations it can be seen that the Kunashir, Shikotan, Iturup are included in the Kuril Islands, which later on, after the return of the island to the Soviet Union, the Japanese will try to exclude the numbers entering the Kuril archipelago.

Four years later, the San Francisco Conference of the Government of the USSR and Japan expressed their readiness to enter into contact with each other in order to find ways for the formal settlement of their relations and the conclusion of a peace treaty. It was precisely such a goal that, at first, it seemed, both sides at the Soviet-Japanese negotiations, which began in London in June 1955, at the level of ambassadors of all countries. But it just seemed, for kak it turned out, the main task togdashnyago yaponskago government was unto tom to use Soviet interest unto normalizatsіi otnoshenіy Sh Yaponіey and unto zaklyuchenіi be with her mirnago contract for vytorgovyvanіya in Moscow territorіalnyh ustupok and return beneath yaponskіy administrative control of a significant part of tѣh “Sovereign territories”, from which Japan had refused four years earlier. Not accidentally top peregovorov unto Londonѣ preceded sensatsіonnoe vystuplenіe unto yaponskom parlamentѣ 26 May 1955 years togdashnyago Minister Mamoru Shigemitsu inostrannyh dѣl suddenly obyavivshago of namѣrenіi Yaponіi continue to pursue her vozvraschenіya Sakhalin (obviously of all, and not just the southern part) and Kurilskih Isles. There is an act of revanchism, the abandonment of peaceful cooperation and a turnaround to the militaristic policy pursued by Japan in 20-40-e. Japan, an ally of America, did not want to be a neutral country and openly became our own enemy, as it was before.

Negotiations between the USSR and Japan were going on for ten months, and then they were interrupted and resumed in Moscow. It is important to note that at the same time the Japanese side was zatyan territorial dispute. It was not in the name of restoring justice, but proceeding from other calculations. The main task was to ensure nationality, to cause nationalist attitudes, to adjust the inhabitants to the achievement of a new national political and political task and rally their foundations around this foundation around their foundations. Putting forward territorial claims to the Soviet Union, the Japanese government circles were drawn up to us and were recognized by the patriotic anti-American slogans of the democratic movement (recall that America held in Japan, the occupying forces) to take advantage of our own forces, to take advantage of our own forces, to take advantage of our own forces, to take advantage of Japan’s Union.

Noteworthy behavior of the ruling circles of the United States. Contrary to the Yalta agreement, the US government, under the names of Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, began to put pressure on the Japanese people, pushing them towards the advancement of territorial demands. Tak 19 August 1956 was located in London by the Minister for Foreign Affairs Mamoru Sigemitsu through the US Ambassador to the United States who was informed that if the signing of the peace treaty of the USSR Japan agreed to recognize South Sakhalin and Kuriles, when they signed the peace treaty of the USSR, Japan agreed to recognize South Sakhalin and Kurilsky in the United States, when they agreed to recognize South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands, they would consider the South American and the United States to recognize South Sakhalin and Kuril Islands as part of the United States to recognize South Sakhalin and Kuril Islands in the United States will retain in their possession the islands of the Ryukyu Islands (Okinawa), transformed into the largest US base in the Far East. The backstage maneuvers of the American diplomacy testify to the fact that the entry of Japan into the territorial dispute over the Soviet Union in the middle of the 50 year began not only at home and in the approval of American diplomacy, but also as a result of its hidden presidency.

At first, Japan tried, in the quality of the basis of the conclusion of the peace treaty, to put forward the requirements for the transfer of South Sakhalin and all Kuril to it. But this was utterly absurd, and, in order not to disrupt the negotiations, she had to limit her territorial harassment to four southern islands, the most favorable for life and economic activity: Kunashir, Iturup, Shikotanom, and I apply.

During the course of negotiations, the incompatibility of the approach to the territorial claims of the then leadership of our country was revealed. The main figure among them is Khrushchev, the one who fights the most with the cult of personality, the renamer of Stalingrad, the maker of corn up to the St. Vernac of the Polarnago circle, and so on, and so on.

Not having a clear understanding of the Kuril Islands and the fact that they have more strategic and economic value, Khrushchev was concerned with the name of a kind of coins. He decided to give Japan a small territorial concession, thinking that this would speed up the negotiation and the signing of the peace treaty. At the point 9 of the Joint Declaration of the USSR and Japan 1956, the following words appeared:

“At the same time, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, by following up the wishes of a january and its main ideas, will agree to the transfer of Japan to the islands of Habomai and Shikotan [Shikotan], however, that the actual transfer of these islands to Japan will be made and will be applied. Republic and Japan ”[15].

[15] Russian Kuriles. History and modernity. M., 2002. C. 130.


This Khrushchev's gesture, detrimental to our national interests, was perceived by Japan not as a friendly act, but as a manifest weakness of our side. It could not be otherwise. Never in the history of such a thing were things otherwise perceived.

Happily, Khrushchev's tyranny did not deprive the Soviet Union of its primordial territories. Having felt the weakness of the Japanese, they began to put forward all the most territorial demands. Distortedly interpreting the Joint Declaration, Japan began to argue that the normalization of the cooperation between the two countries was not the end, but, on the contrary, it implies further negotiation on the “territorial issue”, and that the Declaration does not draw a line out of the second. .

All this prompted the Soviet leadership to make adjustments to the assessments of the Japanese foreign policy, which did not respond to the spirit of the Joint Declaration. 27 January 1960 of the year, after Japan signed the US Security Treaty, which was obviously anti-Soviet, the USSR government sent a memorandum to the Government of Japan. In her, in particular, it was said:

“By agreeing to the transfer of Japan to the islands after the conclusion of the peace treaty, the Soviet government went forward to the wishes of Japan, taking into account the national interests of the Japanese state and the peace-loving nature-Japan, which was expressed at that time by the Japanese government in the course of the Soviet-Japan-Japan-Japan. But the Soviet Government, given that the new military agreement signed by the Japanese government, directed against the Soviet Union, like the People’s Republic of China, cannot help transfer the territory used by foreign troops to the transfer of the islands. In view of this, the Soviet Government considers it necessary to declare that only under the conditions of withdrawal of all foreign troops on the territory of Japan and the signing of the peace treaty between the USSR and Japan, the islands of Habomai and Sikotan will be handed over to Japan, as provided for by the Joint Declaration of the USSR and Japan. "[19].

[16] Same place. C. 131 – 132.


In response, the Japanese government in a memorable note from 5 February of the same year wrote:

“The Government of Japan cannot approve the position of the Soviet Union, put forward new conditions for the implementation of the provisions of the Joint Declaration on the territorial issue and is trying to modify the content of the Declaration. Our country will relentlessly seek to return to us not only the islands of Habomai and Sikotan Islands, but also other native Japanese territories ”[17].

[17] Same place. C. 132.


Kak see, answer the Japanese side was very aggressive. The Japanese government did not even stop writing about its own revanchist namurenіyah, which was mentioned in the memorable note of the soviet government from February 24 1960 of the year.

Fortunately, the Soviet government was able to ultimately counteract the tyranny of Khrushchev. In a memorable note of the soviet government from 22 in April 1960, the Soviet Union finally declared that

“The territorial issue between the USSR and Japan is closed and closed by the relevant international agreements that must be respected” [18].

[18] Same place. C. 137.


From this point on, 25’s position of the Soviet Union on the territory of Japan’s relations was more simple and clear: the issue of the settlement of the wagons was about the settlement of the wagons of the wagons of the wagons of the wagons, and the situation of the wagons of the wagons of the wagons of the wagons of the wagons of the wagons of the wagons of the wagons of the wagons. The most important role was played by Andrei Andreevich Gromyko, who became Minister of Foreign Affairs in 1958 for a year. With his name, he deservedly links the whole epoch into our foreign policy. It differed from the others of the Brezhnevskoye neighborhood both by the greatest political experience, and by the foresight, and the breadth of horizons, and the hardness of its judgments. It is his merit that is the strength of the Soviet position in relation to the so-called “territorial issue”, against the escalation which the Japanese government did not spare the money. Gromyko seriously made only one mistake: the code was approved by the appointment of Gorbachev as general secretary of the CPSU. Kak sam Andrei Andreevich after all talked, "not according to the Shink's hat". But nothing could have done this old man. He was lucky that he died in 1989 year, did not see our greatest for all the history of the defeat, which we suffered in two years.

Years went by. Time worked on the strengthening of the Soviet position in this dispute. For decades, past to the middle of 80-ху years from the time of the signing of the Joint Declaration, the South Kuril Islands were already inhabited by Soviet people and turned into an integral part of the economic complex of the Sakhalin region. For many of their inhabitants, they became their homeland: the second and third generation of Kurilites were born there, and what could seem to the Japanese possible in the 1956 year, after 30 the year became impossible.

In addition, the belonging of the Kuril Islands to the Soviet Union was indirectly recognized by Japan itself. In accordance with international law, the state, the actions which testify to the express or tacit consent under the terms of the international agreement, does not have the right to refer to the invalidity of this agreement. In other words, if the state actually fulfills or recognizes any international agreement with its actions, it does not have the right to declare that this agreement is not valid for it. This position is fixed in the article 45 of the Vѣnsky convention on the rights of international treaties of the year 1969.

This factual recognition of the Soviet-Japanese border is the Japan-Fisheries Agreement and the Fishing Agreement of the Soviet Union, in particular the 1963 and 1981 Agreements. According to the 6 Agreement of the 1963 of the Year and the 5 Agreement of the 1981 of the Year, Japanese fishermen engaged in the seaweed harvesting pledged to comply with the laws, regulations and rules of the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republic, which are located in the area of ​​the trade. The fishery was supposed to take place near the island of Signalny, which is part of the Small Kuril ridge. In addition, in addition, the lines of the limited area of ​​the fishery, data on the coordinate system were indicated.

Signing the Agreement, Japan actually recognized the sovereignty of the USSR above the islands of the Lesser Kuril Ridge. After this she does not have any legal basis to assert that the question of the line of passage of the border is unresolved.

But, despite the firm position of the Soviet leadership, Japan has all the years been constantly aggravating the problem of sovereign territories in the country. As you can see from the outset of one name, this phrase can be interpreted in different ways. Some Japanese circles under the sovereign territories named the Southern Kuriles, the others - all the Kuriles' archipelago, and the third - the Kuriles and South Sakhalin. In addition, even those from the champions of territorial claims to the Soviet Union, which were limited to their requirements by four southern islands, did not rule out the prospects for the possibility of increasing these requirements, and sometimes, by cynical frankness, it was precisely in favor of such a prospect. By the way, the Communist Party of Japan officially demanded from the Soviet Union, as it demands now, the transfer of Japan not only to the Southern Kuriles, but to the whole of the Kuril archipelago. And nothing, nothing of the aggrieved international conscience of the Japanese left no experience *.

* Here it is meant that internationalism is far from being everywhere, especially in the international arena. It is necessary for us to remember that in the name of falsely understood internationalism, national interests cannot be neglected. But the Communists Japan, of course, the USSR friends were not.

In the beginning of 1980-x, when the authorities came to Dzenko Suzuki, the Japanese government adopted a provocative resolution on the introduction of countries and the introduction of the “Territory Territories” calendars. This “day” was 7 February. It was this day that 1855 was signed by the Simodsk treatise, which caused damage to the interests of our country. The choice of this date was to emphasize that the Simodsk treatise, which had been annulled a long time ago, and still remains important. The first “Day of Territory Territories” report was held on February 7 of the year.

Everything changed when Gorbachev came to power. LNTOM 1985, Gromyko was relieved of his post as Minister of Foreign Affairs, which he occupied for the duration of 27 lѣt. Nearly he was appointed by Shevardnadze, who had no experience in similar work. It was clear that the changes would occur.

At the beginning of the restructuring, the Foreign Ministry did not change its positions: Gorbachev was afraid of the so-called conservative wing of the CPSU, which, if it had learned about his real interests, would have immediately removed him from power. Therefore, Gorbachev, Kak, and his friend Shevardnadze, had to maneuver and agree on the words of the position, which the previous Soviet leadership adhered to. The Foreign Ministry began to “restructure itself” only in 1988 of the year, gradually yielding to the Japanese and indirectly recognizing that the territorial problem sucked by the finger in the name of the triumph of Japanese imperialism and outright revanchism still exists.

In addition, starting with 1988, on the pages of the Soviet press and on television, absolutely incompetent people began to express their opinion, but then Japan's great friends. Those who didn’t agree with such a “new idea”, who began to put a label on them like “conservative”, “dogmatic” or even “chauvinist”. When there is nothing to argue, they begin to arrive at demagogy.

Now it became clear that in the Southern Kuril question, even then, the political background was exacerbated. Proponents of concession in Moscow and Tokio negotiations were in the overwhelming majority of the press and the public groups, who after a year and a half joined the movement aimed at breaking the soviet state structure, transforming the USSR into a conglomerate of large and small “sovereign states.” But then, in the 1988 year, it seemed to many more that such views are no more misleading.

In addition, supporters of “common human values” began to pass to Japan from the USSR and express their opinion, which was essentially the support of Japanese imperialism to the detriment of our Motherland.

So, Akanasyev spoke in favor of the transfer of the four southern islands of Japan. At the same time, he said his sadly famous words that “perestroika is historical reality is the end of the last empire, called the Soviet Union”. The performance of this man provoked a stormy protest in the Sakhalin region.

The notorious “academician” Sakharov, declared to his merits before American imperialism for the weakening and destruction of the USSR by the “conscience of the nation”, also expressed his “authoritative” many. We will not comment on it and refute with factual material, we confine ourselves to a quote, for the blatant ignorance of the topic to which this “academician” spoke was obvious to anyone, even to a schoolboy.

“The problem of the Kuril Islands is a very difficult problem. I know how great this problem is for Japan. I understand that for Japan with a very high population density and not very rich, by comparison with the USSR, every square kilometer has tremendous value for natural resources, and I know how much the Japanese contributed to the development of the districts before the second world war . I think that in general the correctness of the principle would be the preservation of the border that existed before the second world war, because war should not be a source of expanded territory. ”


It is also worth quoting Yeltsin’s words, which was Japan’s 1990 year.

“I want to say that Japan will not get more revolution proposals than I’ve put forward [meaning stage-by-stage, in the 15 – 20 lHt, which is about the transfer of Japan to South Kuril]. For them, they criticize me both there and here. I want you to understand one thing: I know quite well the psychology of Soviet people. The times when many people in our countries were not taken into consideration were gone. I believe that, according to the way that the process of democratization in our countries will develop, the public opinion of our country will also change. The people can only understand the essence of this issue, only having reached a higher, higher level of political culture ”.


Yeltsin, in a brazen manner, slandered Soviet people, accusing them of a low level of political culture. It turns out that the negative attitude towards the illegal transfer of Soviet territory means “undeveloped”, “undemocratic”. Pnul Yeltsin and previous soviet rulers, who allegedly were not considered to be the demise of the people. But Yeltsin, as his own father, was considered to be the em of many people, even such an undeveloped one, like us! Pharisees lie gravedigger of the USSR amaze! By the way, in the negotiations with Japan, Yeltsin talked about the market of the Russian Federation, about the possible conclusion of a peace treaty between Japan and the Russian Federation! And this is in 1990, when the USSR still existed! He already then saw himself reigning in the "sovereign" Russia!

At times, there were proposals to give Japan four islands, sell them, make them a free zone, and so on. The media conducted a frankly pro-Japanese campaign, not scientists, but “experts” expressed themselves - supporters of “new thinking”, proteges of the main perestroika.

True, authoritative opinions were also expressed. Tak, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Rogachyov, to write ѣ 24 on January 1989, published in Izvіstyіykh, touched upon the history of the Kuril issue, and proved that the Southern Kurils belong to the USSR legally founded, not occupied by the Second martial law. propaganda and japanese politics.

Of course, Gorbachev also had to agree with words that the territorial claims of Japan were unfounded. However, it has long been known that all of Gorbachev’s policy was built on a false game: to say one thing in words, but to surrender to one’s own national interests. So, in a joint Soviet-Japanese statement from 18 in April 1991, in paragraph 4 was first mentioned the territorial dispute between the USSR and Japan. There is nothing justified the concession of Japan, made by Gorbachev during his visit to the country of the rising sun.

In the same year, the concept of “two plus alpha” was born, which boiled down to immediately transferring the islands of the Lesser Kuril Ridge to Japan, and starting negotiations on the fate of Kunashir and Iturup for a clear prospect of concessions. Her nominal creator was Kunadze - Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Kozyrev, known for his destructive policies. In calculating the implementation of such a "compromise", the leadership of the "sovereign" of the Russian Foreign Ministry began to plan the visit of President Yeltsin to Japan. Only the mass resistance that engulfed many deputies of the Supreme Soviet, the military circles, the scientific community and patriotic organizations, forced the leadership of the Russian Federation to reject the proposed visit. This led to the cooling of Russian-Japanese relations, and in the long run forced the regime to go to the position of refusal from the transfer of Japan Kuril.

I think that the "democrats" could carry out their criminal plans. For example, during Yeltsin’s time, polls were published according to which the supposedly overwhelming majority of the residents of the Sakhalin Oblast and Moscow were in favor of transferring the South Kuril Japan. By provirk it was not clear when and among whom these alleged polls were conducted. First of all, Japan would have succeeded in realizing its revenge-seekers, if not for one “but”. Soviet people lived on Kurilakh. And they acted with mass protests against the transfer of our land to Japan, and they were also supported by ordinary people, living in other regions of our vast Motherland. It is precisely the population of the islands and the mass resistance of the treacherous policies of the authorities, in my opinion, that were the main reasons why the Kuriles and the aftermath of the collapse of the USSR remained in the Russian Federation. We must not forget that in the case of the transfer of Japan to the Southern Kuril we would have had to decide the fate of 25 thousands of people living on them, massively resettle them, gain housing, work and other things. And with the fierce resistance of the southern Kurilians, the question of their resettlement, if it had reached him, would have provoked the island’s insubordination to the regime, which could have resulted in an open recovery. If they were followed by residents of the Far East, as well as other regions. All this would greatly undermine the legitimacy of power and put an edge on the question of its existence.

The regime has worked instinct self-preservation. He could have drowned thousands of people in the blood, but an attempt to suppress the forces of twenty-five thousand could have ended in a “sad” manner for the “democrats”. Moreover, they would hardly have been able to find a sufficient number of mercenaries ready to fight for the money against such a large number of people. For a thousand who rose back, the mercenaries would be found, and by ten thousand - no. It would be extremely dangerous for the regime to use regular troops and police for suppression. History teaches that in such cases, the soldiers go over to the side of the restoring people.

However, the Yeltsin regime still made concessions to Japan. So, in 1996, the Russian Foreign Ministry put forward a proposal for “joint economic development” on the four southern islands of the Kurilsk archipelago. The issue of the Southern Kuriles in a special zone accessible to the business activities of Japanese citizens was interpreted in Japan as indirect recognition by the Russian side of the justification of the Japanese claims to these islands.

Noteworthy and another thing: in the Russian proposals that supposed a wide access of Japanese businessmen to the South Kuriles, there was not even an attempt to determine this access by agreeing Japan to appropriate privileges and free access of Russian businessmen to the territory with a close access to South Africa and to free access to the territory close to South Africa and to free access to the territory close to South Africa, to the territory close to South Africa, on the territory close to South Kurils. In other words, the idea of ​​“joint economic development” of the Southern Kuril Islands was no different than one-sided step of the Yeltsin regime to build up the Japanese aspiration to master these islands.

In accordance with the agreement on certain issues of cooperation in the field of marine living resources from 21 in February 1998, Japan was granted the right to almost free access to its fishermen in the southern Kuril waters. Note: it’s not about a two-hundred-mile economic zone, but about a two-and-a-half-mile coastal zone, which, under international law, cannot include foreign vessels without the permission of a host.

Japan pinned great hopes on the so-called "meeting without a tie" by Yeltsin and then-Prime Minister of Japan Ryutaro Hashimoto. There were no official reports about the content of the meetings that were held on these meetings. Kursik on Japanese demands, fortunately, did not lead to irreparable aftermaths, for the restraining influence was rendered by opponents of territorial concessions, especially among the people, also in higher circles.

With the arrival of Putin’s Kremlin, the situation has changed. The position of the modern leadership is fundamentally different from the position of Yeltsin, although, to a great regret, the official authorities recognize the 1956 Joint Declaration of the Year, including the 9 article, which the Soviet leadership refused in 1960 in the year. Otherwise, it can’t be called a mistake. Not least, Putin has repeatedly stated that Russia does not intend to transfer the Kuril Islands to Japan. And the President Medvedev in 2010 was even visited by the Southern Kuriles, which caused a protest from Japan, which urgently withdrew its ambassador from Moscow to Moscow for counseling. Ambassador, however, soon returned. Japanese Foreign Minister Seiji Maehary said that Medvdeva's trip injured the population of Japan, and Prime Minister Naoto Kan said that Medvedy appeared in South Kurilakh regrettably. The Russian Foreign Ministry, in a note of protest, declared that the president of the country can establish its territory without the consent of foreign countries. In 2012, the situation repeated. Medvedev, now Prime Minister, again visited the Southern Kuriles, paid particular attention to the economic development of the region, and Japan called its ambassador to Moscow "for clarification" in Tokio.

It is possible to say that modern management occupies the correct position on the relations between the Kuriles and the statesman. But we should never forget that in the Russian Federation, there is still a fifth column of “Japanese friends” ready to be activated at any moment. Recall that not a single person who claimed the "validity" of territorial claims, received from the official authorities at least a protest for such actions.

In conclusion we say two things. Our country has always had many enemies, but we survived. Stand and now, do not disgrace the honor of their ancestors.

As for Japan and Japanese, I want to sincerely wish the prosperity and all the universal development. But let it not be forgotten that aggressive aspirations will not only not contribute to good relations with us, but will also be used by dark forces striving for world domination.

Literature
1. Latyshev I. A. Poultry on the Kurils. - Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, 1992. - 240;
2. Field B.P. Discoverers of the Kuril Islands. From the history of Russian geographic discoveries on the Pacific Ocean of the XVIIIth century - Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk: Far Eastern Book Publishing House, Sakhalin Department, 1982. - 208;
3. Russian Pacific epic. - Khabarovsk, 1979. - 608;
4. Russian Kuriles. History and modernity. Collection of documents on the history of the formation of the Russian-Japanese and Soviet-Japanese border / Issued 2-e, extended and augmented. - M .: Algorithm, 2002. - 256 with.


From the author: I understand that people who do not know the old spelling are difficult to read at first, because they are accustomed to modern "writing".

I am a convinced supporter of pre-revolutionary orografii. And this is not my whim. This circumstance is dictated by the fact that it is the old spelling that reflects all the possibilities of the Russian language as an exponent of the Word. What was introduced in 1917 year distorted the Russian language, in many ways beyond recognition.

We need to return the Russian language to its original form - then it will truly transform, and together it will transform everything in our life. This is not a waste of words. Everything is interconnected.

By the way, many contemporaries of the revolution did not accept orographical changes, and still wrote until the end of their lives. And this is not a coincidence.

In order for the moment to move to the dead point, you need to start at the Malago. What will be more like I write in accordance with the norms of the pre-revolutionary orografy, so that a speedy society will come to the fact that you need to go back to the source. And such as I, in historical Russia are many.

I hope you understand why I am writing in the old way.

If you start to publish books, publish articles in journals in accordance with pre-revolutionary spelling, a short time, when will be canceled by the decree of the People's Commissar of "Education" of Lunacharsk.

Naturally, it is necessary to train people in the rules of pre-revolutionary organization. By the way, to learn, where the letter ѣ (aj) is put, it’s not difficult at all. The letter і (і decimal) is put in front of vowels, st (and short) and in the word mіr.

If a person knows the rules, he does not want to write "in a modern way" (if he, of course, is not a hater of the Russian language).
Author:
221 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. avt
    avt 9 July 2013 07: 42
    42
    Is it weak to translate an article into a verb with an appropriate font? laughing The principles are good, but if you wanted to convey your thoughts to more people, then it’s better to do this by means of generally accessible means, the commitment to the pre-revolutionary writing was already appreciated in the comments.
    1. Canep
      Canep 9 July 2013 07: 56
      30
      And why shouldn't the author write to become in Old Church Slavonic or Ancient Greek?
      Who needs these show-offs?
      And as for smoking, everything is true. The only rhenium deposit in the world was discovered on Iturup Island in 1992, and it is not wise to give it to the Japanese. Rhenium is used in the aircraft engine industry as an alloying element of heat-resistant alloys and in the chemical industry as a catalyst.
      1. bazilio
        bazilio 9 July 2013 08: 08
        +6
        Quote: Canep
        And about smoking everything is right


        I agree. The most important thing in the Kuril issue, and in other territorial disputes, is not to give in, to rest and not to give in. If you pick the historical aspects of owning a particular territory, you can come to a standstill. But in this case, one must be vigilant - not to go too far so as not to give the West reasons and pretexts to accuse the Russian Federation of aggression.
        1. nov_tech.vrn
          nov_tech.vrn 10 July 2013 15: 19
          +1
          it is difficult to read, but it is possible, information redundancy at one time demanded a simplification of spelling, but those who want to use it can, although not in official documents, everything is regulated there, of course, the history sometimes needs to be reminded in detail, because, in information attacks, our sworn "friends" the lack of awareness of the majority of the population is widely used, a separate fragment is pulled out and verbiage begins to wind up on it, an article a plus sign for a shoveled amount of information
        2. barium
          barium 26 May 2020 17: 07
          0
          The Russian aggression should be presented to our neighbors as a blessing for them !!!
      2. kavkaz8888
        kavkaz8888 9 July 2013 16: 53
        -6
        Ponty, these are "bazaars about ponty". Let him write as he wants. And if you return the Russian letters to the Russian language, it will not be worse for sure.
        1. Donvel
          Donvel 9 July 2013 20: 30
          +2
          And what letters are in it now?
        2. kavkaz8888
          kavkaz8888 9 July 2013 20: 44
          -3
          Che, pontoon pasanchiks did not appreciate the bazaar for pontoons? If anyone has trouble reading, my condolences.
          And simplifying the language will make it anything but "great and mighty"
          1. Donvel
            Donvel 9 July 2013 21: 09
            +3
            Does archaic runes mean make him so?
            1. Mikhail
              9 July 2013 22: 08
              -1
              You at least think about what you write. The runes have nothing to do with it.
              1. Donvel
                Donvel 9 July 2013 23: 57
                0
                The word "sarkazm" is not familiar to the Slavs at all?
                1. Mikhail
                  10 July 2013 00: 14
                  -3
                  It’s familiar. Your sarcasm is inappropriate.
            2. barium
              barium 26 May 2020 17: 09
              0
              how many Russians can read these runes in the original source, and most importantly - to understand them?
            3. barium
              barium 26 May 2020 17: 11
              0
              how many Russians can read these runes in the original source, and most importantly - to understand them?
          2. Mikhail
            9 July 2013 22: 10
            -3
            You are right three times. Simplification never makes anything great.
          3. kavkaz8888
            kavkaz8888 10 July 2013 16: 07
            -2
            It's nice that the conversation about the LANGUAGE caused a lively plus-minus one. So the topic "catches". It means that We are not indifferent. It means that "Russia has not yet been vmerla."
            And the minus listeners to listen to the song "Chunga Changa lives merrily ..." Go to Africa, there the mumba-yumba will not bother with their language.
            Z.Y. Interestingly, the conversation about the language arose on a discussion of another topic.
        3. Vasilenko Vladimir
          Vasilenko Vladimir 10 July 2013 12: 02
          0
          Quote: kavkaz8888
          And if you return the Russian letters in the Russian language, it will not be worse for sure.

          can you calculate the economic component of such an innovation ?! smile
          1. Mikhail
            10 July 2013 16: 02
            -7
            Retraining people will cost inexpensively. It will be more expensive to remember all signs, signs and so on. But this can be done gradually, during the course of a few years.

            They renamed the police and the police spent a lot of money, but did it make any sense? It would be possible to spend this money on spelling reform.
            1. Vasilenko Vladimir
              Vasilenko Vladimir 10 July 2013 16: 11
              +4
              apparently in general issue (economic) did not work out

              for the sake of interest, count how many characters the text increases, and this is the print volume - time, raw materials, etc. it all costs money.
              books will rise in price first
              1. Denis
                Denis 10 July 2013 19: 36
                +1
                Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                apparently in general issue (economic) did not work out
                What are you talking about, Vasily, when these grief (or thieves?) - reformers considered money?
                They gaggle, and pay yourself you know who
            2. Vasilenko Vladimir
              Vasilenko Vladimir 10 July 2013 16: 12
              0
              apparently in general issue (economic) did not work out

              for the sake of interest, count how many characters the text increases, and this is the print volume - time, raw materials, etc. it all costs money.
              books will rise in price first
              1. Mikhail
                10 July 2013 16: 40
                -5
                Why so.
                Letter ъ increase text by 3,5%, letter і mixes the text by 0,5%; consequently, the overall increase will be 3%. That's not a lot. Books will not rise in price from this. It is necessary to save in another way: do not publish waste paper.
                In addition, language is generally not the place where you need to economize. Do you know how many Englishmen and Frenchmen write "unnecessary" endings, how do the citizens depict sounds in writing? ш и ч (sch, tsch)? But saving on such a name doesn’t come to your head: it’s just blasphemy.

                As I said, the main costs will be precisely on the change of inscriptions and so on.
                1. Vasilenko Vladimir
                  Vasilenko Vladimir 10 July 2013 19: 17
                  +3
                  it's pointless to argue with you, you caught your glitch and you think the rest are stupid, your right

                  Do you know how many English and French people write "unnecessary" endings?
                  you imagine I know, but I also know that the Russian language is more voluminous compared to the ones mentioned above.
                  As I said, the main costs will be precisely on the change of inscriptions and so on.
                  i like it "AS I SAID" you forgive someone by education, linguist, economist, WHO? !!!!!
                  you yourself declare that the increase in volume will be 3% and immediately say that there will be no rise in price.
                  and about the waste paper I agree, it would be nice to limit graphomania to no fool
                2. Basileus
                  Basileus 11 July 2013 07: 38
                  +2
                  Specifically, in your text there is a little more than 4%. It seems that this is a half percent difference? But in the volume of the country it will result in hundreds of tons of waste paper annually. But us something, right?
                  1. Vasilenko Vladimir
                    Vasilenko Vladimir 11 July 2013 09: 19
                    +2
                    and tovarischchch does not consider and does not understand, they are not interested
      3. krasin
        krasin 9 July 2013 19: 45
        +1
        Hiroshima Nagasaki!
        In the aftermath of the disaster, the Japanese government ordered the forced evacuation of about 80 residents, from the 000km no-entry zone around the Fukushima nuclear power plant, which had become unusable.


        They would decide! They fucked their own, they would have something else! Crap and stand until they wipe! sad
      4. Denis
        Denis 9 July 2013 20: 31
        +3
        Quote: Canep
        And why shouldn't the author write to become in Old Church Slavonic or Ancient Greek?
        A Sumerian cuneiform? She generally looks ...
        And bullshit that no one will read
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Corsair
      Corsair 9 July 2013 08: 27
      15
      Quote: avt
      The principles are good, but if you wanted to convey your thoughts to more people, then it’s better to do this by means of generally accessible means, the commitment to the pre-revolutionary writing was already appreciated in the comments.

      The article is not bad, but it’s a pity that the author has problems with modern spelling ...
      1. Cheloveck
        Cheloveck 9 July 2013 14: 02
        +3
        Quote: Corsair
        The article is not bad, but it’s a pity that the author has problems with modern spelling ...

        As if not only with the modern ... laughing
    4. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 9 July 2013 09: 26
      11
      Author Michael Teikin
      The author is Natsik finished, hence the text.
      interestingly, he fills in the same documents with the same text laughing
    5. IRBIS
      IRBIS 9 July 2013 09: 29
      12
      Quote: avt
      Is it weak to translate an article into a verb with an appropriate font?


      This is probably a new "feature" like that. Now I'm thinking of "rolling out" an article about Kaliningrad in Gothic type in German in the style of Kant.
      1. Hon
        Hon 9 July 2013 09: 37
        +5
        We must switch to cuneiform laughing
      2. Canep
        Canep 9 July 2013 17: 25
        +1
        Quote: IRBIS
        Now I'm thinking of "rolling out" an article about Kaliningrad in Gothic type in German in the style of Kant.

        If so, then I will definitely not read.
        1. IRBIS
          IRBIS 10 July 2013 09: 23
          +2
          Quote: Canep
          I definitely won’t read.

          In vain. There, from the second paragraph will be "Das ist fantastish!" Be sure to read it!
    6. My address
      My address 9 July 2013 09: 35
      +7
      From your first sentence freaked out.
      After all, a good article, and set out ...
    7. ShturmKGB
      ShturmKGB 9 July 2013 12: 17
      +4
      It is necessary to rename the islands, so that the Japanese do not have doubts about Russia's intentions to leave the island behind them ...
    8. baltika-18
      baltika-18 9 July 2013 18: 32
      +5
      Quote: avt
      The commitment to the pre-revolutionary writing was already appreciated in the comments.

      This is a miserable semblance of pre-revolutionary writing.
    9. Denis
      Denis 9 July 2013 20: 28
      +3
      Quote: avt
      Is it weak to translate an article into a verb with an appropriate font?
      A show off where to put?
      They article and spoiled
    10. Xnumx kopeek
      Xnumx kopeek 10 July 2013 09: 48
      +2
      Quote: avt
      Is it weak to translate an article into a verb with an appropriate font? laughing The principles are good, but if you wanted to convey your thoughts to more people, then it’s better to do this by means of generally accessible means, the commitment to the pre-revolutionary writing was already appreciated in the comments.

      -that's nichavo, you can figure it out -And it could beat like: "Father Onufriy walked around the vicinity of Lake Onega. He found a naked Olga." Give it up, Olga! I will gild. "- Olga answered Onufriy-" Move away, perky ", etc.
  2. Basileus
    Basileus 9 July 2013 07: 53
    19
    Author - perverted
    1. klimpopov
      klimpopov 9 July 2013 08: 52
      +6
      Eyes broke! It seems to be readable, but ...
      Author - perverted

      Just show off to mine.

      The author you probably write on clay tablets at home? Or on birch bark?
    2. little man
      little man 9 July 2013 10: 49
      +7
      You shouldn’t be so. The work is not small and interesting.
      And let's discuss the essence, not the bows.
      1. Basileus
        Basileus 9 July 2013 12: 38
        0
        You know, sometimes bows make it very difficult to see this very essence.
    3. Vladimir73
      Vladimir73 9 July 2013 13: 17
      +3
      normally readable text ... request
      1. klimpopov
        klimpopov 9 July 2013 13: 24
        +6
        Readable text. You know, I also taste the Belarusian text, even without special knowledge, because it is intuitively clear, but the speed of reading decreases, and it is more difficult to digest.
        Well, what is the need? Main question...
        1. Vladimir73
          Vladimir73 9 July 2013 13: 39
          +2
          I don’t know about you, but I read more concentratedly. In plain text, sometimes I miss some points.
          1. klimpopov
            klimpopov 9 July 2013 14: 39
            +5
            No, well, it is clear that you are focused because you are "distracted" by the unusual spelling. And by the way, I agree about the content of the article - everything is for sure. But here's the spelling, I don't know. My personal opinion ... Again, well, there is no need to say every word to yourself, and the article is quite voluminous, but here I had to, although in the middle there was a desire to quit these things, but I have a principle - you write a comment, be so kind as to understand ...
  3. raf
    raf 9 July 2013 08: 01
    +1
    Quote: Canep
    And why the author does not write at all to become in Old Church Slavonic.
    Who needs these show-offs?

    Completely and completely agree! The article put a minus even without reading, I do not like those who "pontuyutsya"!
  4. nepopadun
    nepopadun 9 July 2013 08: 17
    +3
    Not only do Americans climb everywhere, but here the Japanese interfere
  5. krasin
    krasin 9 July 2013 08: 20
    11
    It began, justification, argumentation! Yes, our Kuril Islands, and from time immemorial, ours have been and will remain -OUR!
    And what came after the war is a punishment for them, for the things that they did in the Far East for centuries. The narrow-eyed attacked 5 times, and each time we freed the Far East.
    I don’t like these excuses of OUR territories. Here it is necessary simply and firmly, GO THE MALL TO X .....
    1. Vladimir73
      Vladimir73 9 July 2013 13: 19
      +2
      yeah, and let them give the northern part of Hokkaido !!!! Then they would immediately forget about the Kuril Islands !!!! good
  6. Smersh
    Smersh 9 July 2013 08: 24
    +3
    Kuriles - a storehouse of minerals. The total estimate of only the mineral reserves of mineral resources for the year 1988 is 44 billion dollars. However, the main mineral resource of Kuril are titanium-magnesium ores, located on the shelf in the form of scattering, and will be applied to earth-earth metals. And titan is, according to expert estimates, the XXI century material. In addition, the offshore island is a potential source of oil and gas.


    and how then can the Japanese dream of our Kuril Islands?
    1. Vladimirets
      Vladimirets 9 July 2013 08: 36
      +3
      Quote: Smersh
      and how then can the Japanese dream of our Kuril Islands?

      Yes, they can dream ... wink
    2. Xnumx kopeek
      Xnumx kopeek 10 July 2013 10: 32
      0
      Quote: Smersh
      The Kuril Islands are a storehouse of useful ones.


      and how then can the Japanese dream of our Kuril Islands?
      -
      -and smoke there, Smoking-room. They also have a lack of air there, in Yaboniya, so the islands want to make them "smoking rooms". Spilled to the Kuril Islands, say, from Hokkaido island, in a break, smoked on the shore, and back to Hokkaido, to work.
  7. 123_123
    123_123 9 July 2013 08: 50
    +6
    In general, Hokkaido Ainu belongs in a good way. In fact, in Japan there is a quiet genocide of the Ainu that inhabited the Kuril Islands and Hokkaido. It is better for us to raise the question of Japan returning Hokkaido to its inhabitants ... and joining Russia. To protect against the Japanese. There can be no question of the Kuril Islands - they are definitely Russian forever.
    1. Rakti-kali
      Rakti-kali 9 July 2013 10: 25
      +2
      Quote: 123_123
      In fact, in Japan there is a quiet genocide of the Ainu that inhabited the Kuril Islands and Hokkaido

      As well as the rest of the islands of the Japanese archipelago (Jomon culture), according to Akulov. And the genocide of the Ainu ended long ago, back in the first quarter of the XNUMXth century, now there is essentially no one to "genocide".
  8. Terrible ensign
    Terrible ensign 9 July 2013 08: 55
    +1
    This is historically our land! ..
    Respect the strong: partner, opponent, friend, enemy (not the point is important) ...
    The main and significant: to determine the priorities for the leadership of our country - which is more important for us in historical and geopolitical terms - the conclusion of a peace treaty with Japan to resolve this territorial issue (in one way or another), or the integrity of the state and the preservation of sluggish tension on the Far Eastern borders (go to aggravate relations and frank confrontation with us is not in Japan’s interests - the economy is stepping into everybody - it’s better to trade than to fight).
    You can demonstrate your free will (as well as your own power) in various ways ...
    If it is more important to have stability and a peace treaty (with the ensuing economic preferences, which should be understood as a high level of investment in our Far East, joint development of deposits, active development of territories, first of all, making this region interesting for the migration of our Russian population for permanent residence there), it would be possible, as it seems to me, to consider the issue of concluding an agreement on the joint ownership of disputed territories with the formation of special bodies of local (regional) government, with representatives of both sides ... the highest authority in the territory should be exercised by a permanent Russian-Japanese commission , the rights and obligations of which should be determined by a special treaty or an additional agreement to a peace treaty. In addition, it would be possible to conclude several agreements developing and consolidating the situation in the region, in the development of joint defense of the territory, environmental measures, and law enforcement.
    Who has any thoughts on this? Share, colleagues ...
    1. AlexeyD
      AlexeyD 9 July 2013 11: 34
      +2
      Previously, there was at least some sense in the peace treaty - to draw Japan into the Russian orbit so that it was not the bridgehead of America.
      And now this makes no sense at all. America is blown away before our eyes. To give land for the sake of some investment? It’s better to let Kudrin’s cup open and invest.
    2. Vladimir73
      Vladimir73 9 July 2013 13: 28
      +2
      "Respect the strong: partner, enemy, friend, enemy (not the point) ..."

      This is correct, but I'm afraid at the end of your remark you contradict yourself. The Japanese will clearly perceive such concessions on joint territorial management as weakness (they have such a mentality). After a couple of years of such management, it turns out that there is no indigenous population (all conditions have been created for its crowding out - lack of work, expensive housing, ordinary threats of violence ... etc.), and there are many Japanese who came to work in firms (for some reason then only Japanese) operating in the given territory. As a result, the issue of ownership of these territories of Japan will be decided in a radical way. Example? Kosovo.
      1. Terrible ensign
        Terrible ensign 9 July 2013 15: 10
        0
        Maybe ... But, it is here that there is a wide field for the work of diplomats, international lawyers, and above all, our State Duma (committee on foreign affairs). So that they finally get involved in the real business, providing mechanisms for the implementation of the rights and obligations of the parties to the treaty ...
    3. nov_tech.vrn
      nov_tech.vrn 10 July 2013 15: 30
      0
      the contract is a pretext, a clue, and the renewed fortified area is an argument that outweighs tons of papers, of course, given a strong economy and the removal of national traitors from the top. And if they wish, they are engaged in economics, on OUR land.
  9. sergey72
    sergey72 9 July 2013 08: 56
    +4
    Dear Author! Show respect to people! Read the Lenin Decree on the eradication of illiteracy and do not engage in nonsense. PS And the article is nothing informative. Yours faithfully... hi
  10. basal
    basal 9 July 2013 08: 56
    +7
    An interesting topic, the author spent a lot of effort on its disclosure, but it is impossible to read. The author looks especially stupid when stylizing as the 19th century quotes from modern sources))). And the argument that after the revolution, many wrote in the old way, does not sound like that. They wrote as they taught. And we were taught the modern Russian language. The overwhelming majority of themselves do not consider themselves to be flawed at all because they do not know where the "yat" should be inserted and why it is correct to write not "Russian" but "Russian".
  11. bddrus
    bddrus 9 July 2013 08: 56
    +7
    I’m looking at the map - Ay, how would it be good for Hokaido to close the picture across the territories!
  12. Prapor Afonya
    Prapor Afonya 9 July 2013 09: 03
    +5
    Quote: Canep
    And why shouldn't the author write to become in Old Church Slavonic or Ancient Greek?
    Who needs these show-offs?
    And as for smoking, everything is true. The only rhenium deposit in the world was discovered on Iturup Island in 1992, and it is not wise to give it to the Japanese. Rhenium is used in the aircraft engine industry as an alloying element of heat-resistant alloys and in the chemical industry as a catalyst.

    It is unreasonable to give away to someone, part of our territory, in the place of the government, I would recall to Amers that the rental of Alaska has long been over!
  13. Onotollah
    Onotollah 9 July 2013 09: 04
    17
    It is very commendable that the author of the article, through pre-revolutionary spelling, change everything in our life.
    And I would like to wish the author not only success in this way, but also not to dwell on pre-revolutionary writing, to expand the scope of my efforts and on the path to the fundamental principles, nature, to master the Mayan nodal writing, Sumero-Akkadian cuneiform writing on clay tablets, racially correct letter on birch bark letters, archetypal knocking out of drawings on the rocks, as well as drawings with ocher and embers from a fire and carving on walrus bone.
    And most importantly: the author - no Internet for he is from the evil one, all letters on purpose or with passing merchants, and reading out articles on the market square through the herald.
    1. klimpopov
      klimpopov 9 July 2013 09: 20
      +5
      Enchanting! good
      Your syllable is very laughing
  14. cumastra1
    cumastra1 9 July 2013 09: 06
    +1
    Double impression. The article is probably interesting, but "niasilil". But in general, if they have taken it again, then do not give it back, the tea is not 1905.
  15. Terrible ensign
    Terrible ensign 9 July 2013 09: 17
    +9
    As for the manner of presentation and presentation of the material in the article:
    1. Now is the XNUMXst century, and not the beginning of the XNUMXth; we have adopted a new spelling;
    2. Such a "style de parlet" indicates the position of the author as an adherent of the Russian Empire of the 1913 model - the position is not worse than others ... However, this is perceived as nothing more than "show off".
    3. "It is necessary to look forward, not back ...", while paying tribute to the costs and sacrifices that our country and people suffered in the historical process of the development and augmentation of territories. But one should not slide down to the level of "bazaar squabbles" with a neighbor and uncontrollable emotions (this is about some comments from colleagues).
  16. pensioner
    pensioner 9 July 2013 09: 18
    +4
    If a person knows the rules, he will not want to write "in a modern way" (unless, of course, he is not a hater of the Russian language)

    Brad.
  17. pensioner
    pensioner 9 July 2013 09: 24
    +2
    And articles on topics that are significant for society should be examined for the adequacy of the authors. At least the simplest. For example, on the subject of writing it in accordance with the generally accepted modern (without quotation marks) standards.
    1. My address
      My address 9 July 2013 09: 37
      +2
      I agree, Yuri. Good article set out through ...
  18. Rakti-kali
    Rakti-kali 9 July 2013 10: 03
    18
    I am a convinced supporter of pre-revolutionary orografii. And this is not my whim. This circumstance is dictated by the fact that it is the old spelling that reflects all the possibilities of the Russian language as an exponent of the Word. What was introduced in 1917 year distorted the Russian language, in many ways beyond recognition.

    I propose to the author for completeness immersion in Old Russianism and Slavism in his texts:
    Return the categories of the dual;
    To return short forms of the adjective in indirect cases;
    refuse to use the instrumental case of nouns and adjectives included in the compound predicate;
    To return alternations of consonants in the basics of velar;
    To return the mutual influence of the declension of names with the foundations on hard and soft consonants;
    To return perfection, imperfect, plus-perfection and aorist, as forms of past tense;
    Refuse the category of germs;
    Abandon constructions with prepositions in the field of case management of nouns.
    This is so, for starters ...
    1. pensioner
      pensioner 9 July 2013 10: 24
      +8
      Quote: Rakti-Kali
      This is so, for starters ...

      Op-pa ... Yes, after this the author will drink bitter week ...
    2. sergey72
      sergey72 9 July 2013 10: 45
      +1
      How cruel you are however ... laughing
    3. Odysseus
      Odysseus 9 July 2013 13: 29
      +3
      Quote: Rakti-Kali
      plussquamperfect

      Plugging is strong
      I will use as a curse smile
  19. kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 9 July 2013 10: 13
    +6
    What are we talking about, our islands forever and ever, and any "justifier" is a traitor to the Russian people. And not to see the narrow-eyed Kurils as their ears. She died so she died, but we need to be friends with Russia, because we are closer to the Amers. Although the Amers dropped A-bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Russian Vanya finished off the Kwantung army. : they were not yours and never will be!
    1. omsbon
      omsbon 9 July 2013 15: 04
      0
      Quote: kartalovkolya
      .Although the amers dropped A-bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Russian Vanya killed the Kwantung Army.

      According to surveys among Japanese schoolchildren, the Russians dropped the atomic bomb on civilians, and who destroyed the Kwantung army; guess one time? That's right, minke whales.
      I completely agree with the content of the article, but not with the manner of presentation!
      1. Basileus
        Basileus 9 July 2013 15: 39
        +1
        Is it possible to proof the poll results? If everything is really so sad with education there, the standard of living of the Japanese is surprising.
  20. explorer
    explorer 9 July 2013 10: 29
    +7
    And hr. with her with the form! I agree with the content. To the author plus. good
  21. Yuri Y.
    Yuri Y. 9 July 2013 10: 43
    +5
    The article is a definite plus in terms of material. Let the Japanese say thanks for
    our ancestors, the kingdoms of heaven to them, did not have time in advance about Hokaydo.
    Quote: retired
    If a person knows the rules, he will not want to write "in a modern way" (unless, of course, he is not a hater of the Russian language)

    Brad.

    Then I agree.
  22. Fetel
    Fetel 9 July 2013 10: 44
    +4
    The article is probably interesting and informative, but because of the unreadable text I did not get to know her, but instead I put MINUS to her with a pure heart.
    1. iSpoiler
      iSpoiler 9 July 2013 18: 10
      +1
      Did exactly the same ..)
      1. Dimy4
        Dimy4 10 July 2013 21: 14
        0
        Similarly!
  23. Standard Oil
    Standard Oil 9 July 2013 10: 53
    +3
    The author will save our nerve, write like everyone else, it’s all the same what didn’t return. The article is good, but for some the performance will completely ward off the desire to get acquainted with it.
  24. Gromily4
    Gromily4 9 July 2013 11: 21
    +1
    You can read, but it hurts your eyes.
  25. dropout
    dropout 9 July 2013 11: 37
    +4
    You shouldn’t have attacked a man in such a crowd. Everyone has their own quirks, all the more so from good intentions. Personally, I read it with pleasure and pleasure. The text is informative. .Yes even if there is nothing there-we are open and poured with our blood.As for spelling, you can’t enter the same river twice. But I can’t blame the author, as the saying goes, no matter what the child plays with .....
  26. AlexeyD
    AlexeyD 9 July 2013 11: 44
    +6
    That you are all clinging to writing. The article is excellent in content. There are few such articles that reveal the question and put an end to it. Yes, and read without problems.
  27. PValery53
    PValery53 9 July 2013 11: 53
    +4
    The content of the article is convincing, patriotic. Such materials would be more often and bolder. Well, the form of the letter is, in a sense, the author’s oddity, excusable.
  28. bbss
    bbss 9 July 2013 12: 10
    +1
    Kuril Islands - Russian land !!!
    And the author of the article does not respect his fellow citizens.
  29. knn54
    knn54 9 July 2013 12: 15
    +1
    The losing side shall not dictate the requirements to the Winner.
  30. sumcream56
    sumcream56 9 July 2013 12: 18
    -8
    In Russia, there are now rallies demanding the separation of the Caucasus. And it can indicate to the people of Russia how much the Kuril Islands cost. And then hold a referendum. Alexander II sold Alaska. And what, Russia has become very poor? Pragmatism is needed. When the primordial Russia itself is mired in ruin, that is, the interior of Russia is rotting, is there any point in "painting the Facade"?
    1. Basileus
      Basileus 9 July 2013 12: 45
      +2
      Kagbe, given how much was eventually found in Alaska, lost a lot. And I think that under the tsar it was hardly super difficult to settle two tens of thousands of people there, because it was the probability of losing Alaska due to its development by the Americans that was one of the main reasons for its sale.
    2. Fetel
      Fetel 9 July 2013 14: 13
      +2
      On the Kuril Islands, as far as I remember, on Kunashir, one of the largest deposits of rhenium in the world is located - the metal, which radio-electronic equipment really needs. Offer to sell this wealth?
  31. KononAV
    KononAV 9 July 2013 12: 39
    +2
    them and not smoked!
  32. Ross
    Ross 9 July 2013 12: 40
    +4
    Quote: bazilio
    Quote: Canep
    And about smoking everything is right


    I agree. The most important thing in the Kuril issue, and in other territorial disputes, is not to give in, to rest and not to give in. If you pick the historical aspects of owning a particular territory, you can come to a standstill. But in this case, one must be vigilant - not to go too far so as not to give the West reasons and pretexts to accuse the Russian Federation of aggression.


    We all know about the genocide of the American Indians, but the Japanese also committed the same genocide against the indigenous inhabitants of the Kuril and Hokaido. A photo of a typical Ain is no different in principle from a photo of Leo Tolstoy. Leaving South Sakhalin in 1945, the Japanese took with them all the Ainu and destroyed their homes and artifacts to cover all traces. Now the remnants of the Ainu live on the reservation and communication with them is strictly prohibited for the press. Ainu have the same haplo group as the Slavs.
  33. Odysseus
    Odysseus 9 July 2013 13: 27
    +4
    Regarding spelling, everyone has already said above, but in terms of content, everything is correct.
    However, in order to keep the Kuril Islands, it is necessary to strengthen (or rather restore) the troop grouping in the Far East and the Pacific Fleet. So far, everything is happening exactly the opposite ....
    In the meantime, "No matter how you say" halva "in your mouth will not become sweeter."
  34. Hort
    Hort 9 July 2013 13: 30
    +3
    Article "+" and for the information content and for the "author's afterword". I didn't see any show off in this, everything is easy to read, and all the moaning and ridicule over the writing style is more likely out of laziness, and not because of the difficulty of reading.
  35. Ross
    Ross 9 July 2013 13: 30
    +3
    Quote: sumcream56
    In Russia, there are now rallies demanding the separation of the Caucasus. And it can indicate to the people of Russia how much the Kuril Islands cost. And then hold a referendum. Alexander II sold Alaska. And what, Russia has become very poor? Pragmatism is needed. When the primordial Russia itself is mired in ruin, that is, the interior of Russia is rotting, is there any point in "painting the Facade"?


    The people already answered in due time to Yeltsin - the Kuril Islands Russian land.
  36. pensioner
    pensioner 9 July 2013 13: 43
    +1
    During his time as president, Medvedev visited the Kuril Islands. The Yapps were so excited that their prime minister rode a boat near one of the disputed islands, surrounded by a large number of zhurnalyugs and very carefully examined the islands through binoculars. And just a few days later, it was the prime minister who met with Putin. Putin told him with a characteristic smile: "I heard that you traveled around our islands, looked at them through binoculars. Did you like it?" In response, he pushed back the speech for half an hour. Putin listened. And then, it turns out that he answered himself: "And we like ...". That one already shuddered ...
  37. Yuri Y.
    Yuri Y. 9 July 2013 14: 11
    +2
    Quote: Basileus
    Kagbe, given how much was eventually found in Alaska, lost a lot. And I think that under the tsar it was hardly super difficult to settle two tens of thousands of people there, because it was the probability of losing Alaska due to its development by the Americans that was one of the main reasons for its sale.

    The government was not interested. The Governor of Alaska, who lived in California (and they staked out there, the first European construction of Fort Ross),
    asked to send people at least convicts. The government did not react.
    1. Basileus
      Basileus 9 July 2013 14: 25
      0
      I was not interested in this topic. But in general, there was such an opportunity, and how we missed it is a question IMHO for another discussion. If ours were interested in this, they would not only colonize Alaska.
      1. alicante11
        alicante11 10 July 2013 16: 50
        +1
        Serfdom. There were few free people. And the nobles to give the serfs for the development of land was "zapadlo".
        At that time, our people were also few in Siberia, and the capital city of Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky had a population of as many as one and a half hundred people, even at the beginning of the century. Yes, and during the Crimean from there the whole city was taken out in several ships.
  38. sebulba
    sebulba 9 July 2013 14: 29
    +1
    it should be interesting, just impossible to read
  39. awg75
    awg75 9 July 2013 15: 10
    +1
    on behalf of the overwhelming number of our citizens of Russia, I want to say to the citizens of Japan ---- BIG ... DEAR TO YOU, NOT OUR KURILLS!
  40. Essenger
    Essenger 9 July 2013 15: 26
    -9
    That is the question to the Russians.

    Here it is customary for you to believe that Hitler violated the nonaggression pact between prisoners between Ribbentrop and Molotov. Germany attacked the Soviet Union when she did not fight with anyone; on the contrary, Germany fought with the British and French.

    Almost exactly such a neutrality pact at the Soviets was with Japan, which was valid until April 13, 1946. But on August 9, 1945, the Soviets treacherously attacked Japan, which had fought with the United States and had already received nuclear bombing. Further resistance from the Japanese was pointless. Thanks to this, the USSR chopped off the territories in question now.

    Now the question is who is Hitler or still Stalin?
    1. Basileus
      Basileus 9 July 2013 15: 34
      -2
      Two states have done the same thing. And while someone should be meaner. You put the question wrong.

      Moreover, we were obliged to start a war by agreement with the same allies. And the start of the campaign was primarily demanded by the Americans.
      1. Mikhail
        9 July 2013 15: 54
        0
        It is not at all the same thing that two states have committed. We denounced the pact with the Japanese in advance (I wrote this volume, I even quoted citations from the newspaper).
        1. Essenger
          Essenger 9 July 2013 17: 31
          -2
          According to paragraph 3, “This Covenant enters into force from the date of its ratification by both contracting parties and remains valid for five years. If none of the contracting parties denounces the pact one year before the deadline, it will be considered automatically extended for the next five years.

          From the point of view of the neutrality pact itself, being only denounced (and not annulled), it can legally retain its force until April 25, 1946.

          The question is that the denunciation of April 5, 1945 is an act not to extend this pact for the next 5 years. That is, the contract is not renewed, but it is not canceled. Those legally pact is valid until April 25, 1946.
      2. Essenger
        Essenger 9 July 2013 20: 02
        -2
        If you mean the Yalta agreement.

        Another confirmation of my innocence.

        They accepted these agreements on February 4-11, 1945. That is, having an existing agreement with Japan, which has not yet been denounced (on April 5, 1945, Molotov handed the note to the Japanese ambassador, and even after the denunciation is valid until April 13, 1946). The USSR accepts the obligation to enter the war against Japan. This is already a violation of the contract.
        1. Mikhail
          9 July 2013 21: 37
          0
          In your opinion, the agreement should have been denounced before the Yalta Conference?
          Allied agreements on the future entry into the war cannot in any way violate the neutrality pactѣ. Denunciation of the pact is a formality necessary in order to enter the war without violating the principles of international law.
    2. Odysseus
      Odysseus 9 July 2013 15: 47
      +2
      Quote: Essenger
      But on August 9, 1945, the Soviets treacherously attacked Japan.

      And what is secondary education already canceled in Kazakhstan?
      Let me tell you a "terrible secret" the pact of neutrality with Japan was denounced by the USSR on April 5, 1945 in accordance with the obligations to the allies waging a war with Japan.
      Quote: Essenger
      Germany attacked the Soviet Union when she did not fight with anyone; on the contrary, Germany fought with the British and French.

      Now try to read your own phrase. laughing
      Who is she ? What is the opposite? The Soviet Union is actually HE.
    3. Mikhail
      9 July 2013 15: 49
      0
      Please read the refutation of your utterance. It is to becomeѣ.
    4. baltika-18
      baltika-18 9 July 2013 19: 31
      +5
      Quote: Essenger
      But on August 9, 1945, the Soviets treacherously attacked Japan.

      On August 8, war was declared.
      On August 9, hostilities began in Manchuria.
    5. alicante11
      alicante11 10 July 2013 17: 03
      0
      That is the question to the Russians.


      Yes, everything is simple. If the Yankees had finished the Japanese, then who would have given us the Kuril Islands and the second part of Sakhalin?
      By and large, Japan had already been defeated and the fact that the USSR entered the war did not change anything. As you can see, all the Japanese did not become "kamikazi", why then expect that they would become such, defending themselves to the end against amers? So, here it is like with Poland. After we couldn't make it any worse, we just came and took our own.

      Another thing is that in Japan, judging by diplomatic documents, there was hope for mediation on the part of the USSR to conclude a more or less honorable peace. And for the sake of this, the Japanese were ready to give up not only the Kuriles and Sakhalin, but also surrender the Kwantung Army in full force without a fight. So, perhaps, Stalin was in vain here in a hurry with a military solution. Although, on the other hand, the amers would hardly have looked at the world on easier terms for the Japanese, even with our mediation. The Cold War had already begun. So, most likely, "mission impossible" was.
  41. Mikhail
    9 July 2013 15: 39
    +1
    ANSWER VSѢM ON THE ORDER OF SPELLING (I ask you to read the rest of the article to the end)

    I see that the reaction to the old spelling on kept me waiting. There is nothing surprising in the fact that some readers negatively reacted to orography. Everything is explained by the banal ignorance of pre-revolutionary orographic norms (annoying that which you do not understand). In addition, everyone was used to the rules that were taught in schools.
    Using diligent spelling is not my whim or fad. I do not write on any clay tablets or on birch. A letter from Maya and others has nothing to do with it. Such comparisons and assumptions come from the fact that people perceive the pre-revolutionary spelling as something archaic, outdated. This is the main mistake. Nothing archaic in the old spelling; on the contrary, rather, the modern writing norm can be called archaic (even cave) for its unhistorical nature, breaking away from the roots of the development of the Russian language.
    Pensioner considers nonsense my statement that if a person owns the rules of pre-revolutionary spelling, he will not adhere to modern norms imposed on us by Lunacharsky and Lenin. My question is: does he know the pre-revolutionary orography?

    I understand that at first it is difficult for many to read the text written "in the old way", especially for those who do not read the "old" books at all. What can I say: correct yourself, read more such texts, learn the rules - and then reading will not cause difficulties and irritation.
    In general, it seems to me that those who did not read the article to the end and immediately put a minus only for orography, are completely wrong. Maybe you were just too lazy to read? Still, the article takes up almost a full 17 pages of printed text. In electronic form, long texts are read worse than short ones.
    I advise you to slowly learn the norms that were canceled by Lunacharsky in December 1917, so that when you return the pre-revolutionary spelling, be prepared for this.

    As for the love of Russia. Yes, I love Russia: both pre-revolutionary, and Soviet, and modern, divided into several states. And I hate tѣkh, who did evil to her. The use of pre-revolutionary spelling is not the result of being obsessed with everything that was "under the king".
    Many readers still do not understand that changing the spelling was the greatest evil that pursued completely pragmatic goals: to break the connection of time. And the reformers achieved their goal: many do not know the pre-Revolutionary spelling, they perceive with bayonets everything that is written according to its norms.
    But the return to unjustly discarded will occur. Comparison with one that cannot be entered twice, as well as the statement that now is the XXI century, are incorrect. What, with the advent of each of the following centuries, should we degrade and not be able to use the language that our ancestors freely used?
    Incidentally, the old spelling not only reflects the history of the development of the Russian language, but also clearly shows the connection with the Church Slavonic language.
    The return to undeservedly devoted oblivion will occur. Our cause is RIGHT.
    1. Basileus
      Basileus 9 July 2013 15: 57
      0
      How can rejection of language changes not be a whim, but something else? And how is pre-revolutionary spelling better than pre-Petrine? Old Russian? Indo-European?

      Well, yes, I got excited with the pre-Indo-European spelling)
      1. Mikhail
        9 July 2013 16: 32
        -3
        You are all mixing together. If the changes are positive, they can only be welcomed. If the changes destroy the language, you cannot accept them. I, too, once wrote the way they taught in schools. But, having become interested in the old spelling, I learned it. Now I will never accept the "spelling" introduced by Lunacharskiy.
        By the way, the entire "progressive" community spoke about the need to simplify spelling before the revolution. Needless to say, how she in most of her attitude to "this country".
        1. Alexander Romanov
          Alexander Romanov 9 July 2013 16: 37
          +2
          Quote: Michael
          You all mix in one pile.

          As it is written in your profile, you are a supporter of the reconstruction of Russia within the borders of the USSR. But you are not a creator, you are a destroyer of the created, if you came to power you would force everyone to write as you write yourself. People ask them if this is necessary? Although I watch you, this does not bother you much.
        2. Ulan
          Ulan 9 July 2013 17: 53
          +5
          This is just your personal opinion and nothing more. The language of the organism is alive and constantly evolving, but you want to preserve it, on the grounds that it breaks the connection of tenses. In my opinion, the approach is too narrow. The connection of tenses is established not only by spelling.
          As for the spoken language, it has not changed much since the pre-revolutionary years. I’ve had enough years and managed to talk with native speakers who were born long before the revolution. My father was born in 1913, so talk about grandparents.
        3. Basileus
          Basileus 10 July 2013 07: 24
          +1
          That is, the unnecessary duplication of the vowel "i", the consonant "f" and the diphthong "ye" is the preservation of the tradition? Not to mention a solid sign, which was completely unnecessary and took up a huge amount of space. Together with all the comments at the moment there are a little more than three thousand solid signs on the page.

          Well, you didn’t say anything about pre-Petrine spelling. But in vain - the civilian alphabet is the same simplification! Separation from the roots! The creation of a new man, divorced from his own past, this Russia, Russia! So why don't you use it, but use the rules introduced by the Westerner Peter?
    2. baltika-18
      baltika-18 9 July 2013 19: 02
      +4
      Quote: Michael
      RESPONSE VSѢM ON THE ORDER OF SPELLING

      You know, Mikhail. The language, and with it its graphic expression in the form of a letter, develops in the same way as a person. Its written form is optimal at the moment. Each specific sound used, the scale of which is simply magnificent, corresponds to a certain graphic designation. So that your calls for a transition to pre-revolutionary writing are inappropriate.
      You express love for your native country and for your native language in a very strange way, introducing letters that are not needed in principle. We all perfectly express our thoughts in modern Russian.
      A person is not a frozen church dogma, but a creature originally created striving for development and perfection. And it degrades when it is thrown from one extreme to another. Why is the middle always called golden.
    3. baltika-18
      baltika-18 9 July 2013 19: 24
      +2
      Quote: Michael
      Many readers do not yet understand that changing the spelling was the greatest evil,

      What is evil explain?
      1. Mikhail
        9 July 2013 20: 35
        -3
        In principle, I briefly explained in my long commentary: breaking with tradition.
        Do you know what the main evil of the whole spelling reform is? - In the fact that you (a good man, patriot of your Motherland) do not understand the advantages of the "old" orthography over the "new" one, consider it somewhat obsolete, like horse carriages in our time.
        The reform was intended to build a "new man" who would not have a connection with the past. The reformers succeeded in doing this. But we need to correct their evil.

        The church is not the most important thing.
        As for the fact that one letter must correspond to one sound, I categorically cannot agree with you. Orography is first of all a tradition. For example, in Western European languages ​​for sound ф There are two options for writing: f for "native" words and ph for words of Greek origin. Offer them to eliminate this "excess".

        By the way, Jews have a language, Hebrew is called. In the beginning of the XNUMXth century, ordinary Jews did not know him at all. But now this language of the Talmud has become the official language of Israel. Who will say that the Jews were wrong?

        Proponents of diligent spelling suggest only returning to the language what was taken from him.
        1. baltika-18
          baltika-18 9 July 2013 21: 13
          +4
          Quote: Michael
          The reform was intended to build a "new man" who would not have a connection with the past. The reformers succeeded in doing this. But we need to correct their evil.

          A change in writing, and with an easy one, removed only 4 letters, to break the connection with our past?
          A very dubious statement. The language is primary, writing is secondary.
          Spelling rules have become easier and easier. New spelling has helped to defeat illiteracy in the country.
          The deleted letters duplicated other letters. "Fita" was used in the words that came from Greek, instead of "theta". And the meaning? That would not forget that it is Greek.
          "Izhitsa" in the words referring to the church and in Greek instead of "upsilon". The same meaning does not.
          "Yat" is mainly in the roots, 128 words, they had to be memorized. Meaning?
          "i" before the vowels e, yat, yu, i, y, in the word "world" (universe). The same is not clear why. After all, one word carries only the designation of something, and two or more words in a bundle already carry a certain semantic load.
          1. Mikhail
            9 July 2013 21: 45
            -2
            Not only the destruction of at least one letter, but also the simplification of the rule (for example, the unification of the end of the plural adjectives) leads to unification.
            No doubt, writing has become easier. Only simplicity is worse than theft.
            In the old orography, everything was orderly. Many things that previously differed in writing began to be written the same way.
            As for the orography for the sake of eliminating illiteracy, it’s just a Bolshevik propaganda miѳ. Only idiot can eradicate illiteracy by simplifying the orthography. Not the worst, but the best. Incidentally, in the Russian language, the rules are still preserved, more difficult than spelling the letters Ѣ. Why haven’t they been canceled for the alleged elimination of illiteracy? - Yes, because the purpose of the reform was not the elimination of illiteracy, but the destruction of that secret that was in the Russian language.

            Read more old books. You will understand why the so-called are needed. "extra" letters.
            1. baltika-18
              baltika-18 9 July 2013 22: 07
              +3
              Quote: Michael
              but the destruction of that secret that was in the Russian language.

              First: the innermost in language, not in writing. In sounding. In conveying what is born in the subconscious to the area of ​​the conscious. By writing "no" through "yat" you expressed the same negation as by writing "no" through "e" , saying "no" anyway.
              The language is primary, the sound, not the design of what sounded.
              Second: I have found for myself the mystery and intimacy of the Russian language even without "izhytsy" and "yat".
              And what do you think is hidden in the Russian language?
              1. Mikhail
                9 July 2013 22: 41
                -3
                The language consists of the number of letters. I hope you will not deny that a language without writing, to put it mildly, is less developed than a language with writing.
                For everyday speech, perhaps, the primary sound, but for literature, science, the sound goes to the back plan, and the written design of thoughts goes to the front plan.
                Orography is not a pronunciation - it reflects a thought. In addition, in the orography, the interconnectedness of the words with each other should be clearly expressed. So we write honest sunbut we pronounce them differently. Same thing with the letter ѣ.
                I met examples when people interconnect words that don’t have anything common with each other (one is written through е, another - through ѣ) For example, the word is displayed vѣdun ot words lead. I wonder who leads whom.

                In orography, absolutely everything is important - everything is confidential. If you take out at least one brick, the wall will begin to crumble.

                About the word not.
                With the advent of the Internet, the dictionary has been replenished with the corresponding word. Abbreviated internet can be called no. A new pair of phonetic homonyms appeared (words having the same sound shell, but different spelling).
    4. alicante11
      alicante11 10 July 2013 17: 16
      +2
      ANSWER VSѢM ON THE ORDER OF SPELLING (I ask you to read the rest of the article to the end)


      Um, excuse me, of course, dear Misha. But why do you think that a small number of gourmet graphomaniacs who are nostalgic about "boys in sailor suits and young ladies in capes, as well as the crunch of a French roll" can dictate to the majority of the population of Russia what spelling rules to teach them, given that have they already learned other rules? Why do you think everyone here should adjust to your writing style?
      Forgive me, but you shouldn't consider other people to be a lame who cannot understand "how delightful evenings are in Russia." This is where your predecessors got burned. They "zapadlo" was to condescend to the dark mass of peasants and workers who fed and protected them and to whom they lowered the "rules" from their heights. As a result, WWI and Civic ended the way they ended. They practically ruined the country. But "Lenin and Lunacharsky", it turned out to be "not zapadlo" and they were able to unite the people and save the country twice during the same Civil War from intervention and collapse and in the Second World War from enslavement and destruction.
      In general, have respect for the people you communicate with.
  42. Yuri Y.
    Yuri Y. 9 July 2013 15: 50
    +1
    Quote: Essenger
    Almost exactly such a neutrality pact at the Soviets was with Japan, which was valid until April 13, 1946. But on August 9, 1945, the Soviets treacherously attacked Japan, which had fought with the United States and had already received nuclear bombing. Further resistance from the Japanese was pointless. Thanks to this, the USSR chopped off the territories in question now.

    You read the article, I see that it’s not. How then do you comment on it.
    1. Basileus
      Basileus 9 July 2013 15: 52
      0
      Sorry, but you do not quote me
  43. Russ69
    Russ69 9 July 2013 15: 57
    +1
    Our Kuril Islands and Basta. Let the Japs rejoice that only these islands have returned to themselves, according to the idea, others should be chopped off.
    1. Mikhail
      9 July 2013 16: 37
      -1
      Everything has its time.
      But first, you need to put a bullet on the Kuril issue ѣ so that the Japanese do not claim anything on the international arena ѣ.
  44. svoboda1970
    svoboda1970 9 July 2013 16: 03
    +1
    We don’t need a foreign land, but we WILL NOT GIVE UP our own.

    I advise you to slowly learn the norms that were canceled by Lunacharsky in December 1917, so that when you return the pre-revolutionary spelling, be prepared for this.


    From today I’ll start ... wink
    1. Mikhail
      9 July 2013 16: 35
      -1
      Get started. God help you.
  45. Southerner
    Southerner 9 July 2013 16: 46
    +2
    Although I was a Dagestan, I was able to read the text, and the author did a fine job.
  46. Mikhail
    9 July 2013 16: 55
    0
    Quote: Southerner
    Although I was a Dagestan, I was able to read the text, and the author did a fine job.


    It is not that people cannot - people do not want. Habit. But from the bad habits imposed on the society by Lunacharsky and others like him, we must get rid of the whole society.
  47. Mikhail
    9 July 2013 17: 27
    -4
    Quote: Alexander Romanov
    Quote: Michael
    You all mix in one pile.

    As it is written in your profile, you are a supporter of the reconstruction of Russia within the borders of the USSR. But you are not a creator, you are a destroyer of the created, if you came to power you would force everyone to write as you write yourself. People ask them if this is necessary? Although I watch you, this does not bother you much.


    Yes, I would like everyone to finally begin to write the way our ancestors wrote. Not right away, of course: we need to give a couple of years so that everyone finally retrained. But this is not violence, but the correction of violence - the one that Lunacharsky did when he forced everyone to write the way they write now. In the 1920s, the letters ѣ, і, ъ were half-jokingly called counter-revolutionary. It was simply unsafe to write "the old way" at that time (except for personal notes).
    Destroyers destroy. I, on the contrary, want the restoration of the Russian language.
    Many (how do you) think that people do not need this. You just don't know the whole problem. I am not accusing you of anything, because you are not to blame for the fact that you were taught to write "in Bolshevik" at school. But the spelling wounds of the Russian language must be healed.

    And further. There are many priests among the supporters of the "old" spelling. This is no coincidence. It is absolutely impossible to refer to God with such a "spelling" as we have now.
    My deeply believing friend (at first distant from the problem) told me that he specially took a prayer book with pre-revolutionary spelling and began to pray for it. Here are his words: "I felt that everything in my tongue fell into place, all the prophets that were filled were filled."
    1. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 10 July 2013 05: 17
      +2
      Quote: Michael
      Yes, I would like everyone to finally write as our ancestors wrote. Not immediately, of course: we must give a couple of years to ensure that all finally retrained

      From this, corruption will decrease in our country, pensions will increase, new jobs will be created ??? You have nothing more to do? or is this the last problem not solved in our country?
      No, no, let alone someone to whom something bothers. This will not be because it is nonsense!
      1. Ruslan67
        Ruslan67 10 July 2013 05: 51
        +3
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        Will corruption decrease in our country, pensions will increase, and new jobs will be created?

        Everything is simpler - screening according to the Unified State Examination will be more objective - most of the teachers will not be able to put checkmarks in the right places wassat
  48. Ulan
    Ulan 9 July 2013 17: 56
    +2
    The article is good ... correct, evidence-based and the conclusions are correct, there is undoubted respect for the author. I honestly remember well the fuss of the Yeltsin circle around this issue. And there was a feeling of anxiety. Knowing this audience, it could be assumed that they would give the Kuril Islands. I know what played a role, fear for his own skin or the Lord did not allow, but this campaign did not manage to turn this meanness.
  49. pensioner
    pensioner 9 July 2013 18: 07
    +1
    But by and large: the article is about nothing. Article title:Kuriles - an integral part of our homeland Hmm ... And someone doubted it, or what? The evidence for this in the article is compelling ... so what? Well, let's listen to the yupps. They will provide even more beautiful! Type them their these islands and all! If we get involved in this fight of evidence, then this will be a manifestation of weakness. OUR ISLANDS BY STRONG RIGHT !!! And that's all, calm down. You can only spin around with elastic bands and take a picture and make friends. And that’s it. All that we can help ... This is the kind of policy that should be. As the youth says IMHO.
    1. kanevsvv
      kanevsvv 21 July 2013 20: 05
      0
      Our islands are rightfully strong. Correctly! And if yuppy doubt it, we can REPEAT!
  50. sergey72
    sergey72 9 July 2013 18: 22
    0
    Excuse me, Mikhail, who do you mean by "Lunacharsky and others like him"? If my sclerosis does not deceive me, the new spelling in its current form was developed by Alexei Alexandrovich Shakhmatov, at the suggestion of the Imperial Academy of Sciences in 1911. And your reference to priests gives, excuse me again, natural obscurantism ... I'm not talking about how the old spelling, if adopted, will greatly reduce the number of literate people ...