Former Russian Ambassador to Japan Alexander Panov sees no point in further negotiations on the Kuril Islands ("Jiji Press", Japan)

November 6, 2015 57

November 3 ex-Ambassador of Russia to Japan Alexander Panov (71) gave an interview to Jiji Tsushin. Commenting on the talks resumed in October at the level of deputy foreign ministers on the “northern territories” and other issues, he stressed that there is no point in continuing the talks if the parties only insist on their positions. In addition, Panov reacted doubtfully to the prospects associated with the visit of President Putin to Japan. If, under conditions of a stalled Russian-Japanese relationship, when there is no hope for a result, the visit will still take place, this, according to the former ambassador, will only worsen the relationship. The following are the main aspects of the interview.

- How do you perceive relations between Russia and Japan?

Alexander Panov: Many people think that now Russia and Japan have the worst relations in the entire post-Soviet period. The parties are confronted on international issues. And in Ukraine and Syria. I can not understand why Japan criticizes Russia for air strikes in Syria.

- Negotiations on the conclusion of a peace treaty at the level of deputy foreign ministers resumed.

- The parties only expressed their positions. They did not try to find solutions and compromises, as well as to draw up a plan of action. To negotiate a peace treaty, friendly and good neighborly relations are necessary. For now, Japan will take anti-Russian measures (sanctions and so on) negotiations are unreal. Negotiations are held when both sides have a desire to find ways of settlement, but neither Russia nor Japan has such a desire. This is not a negotiation. It makes no sense to hold talks in order for the parties to once again express their complaints.

- Is the “hikivake” option that President Putin spoke about?

- The USSR has already made a compromise, having agreed to return the two islands (Soviet-Japanese declaration 1956 of the year). Japan should be pleased with this. In 2001, the president proposed to conduct negotiations in accordance with this declaration, but Japan refused. Japan is not set to discuss real options and compromise. Therefore, Russia believes that the problem has been solved.

- What does Russia hope for in terms of President Putin’s visit to Japan?

- Preparations for the visit was not conducted. It is clear that this year the Russian leader will not go to Japan. There are no agreements for signing. The parties will only talk about things that are unpleasant for each other. This will only worsen Russian-Japanese relations. In this situation, there will be no results. As long as Japan does not change its position on sanctions and the territorial problem, Russia will not be able to fully cooperate with this country.

Alexander Panov was born in Moscow in the year 1944. In 1968, he began working at the Foreign Ministry. He is a specialist in Japan. He worked as ambassador to South Korea, as well as the deputy foreign minister. From 1996 to 2003, he served as ambassador to Japan for a year. He was also ambassador to Norway, after which from 2006 to 2010 he worked as rector of the Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia for a year. He is currently a professor at MGIMO.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

venaya

+16

6 November 2015 05: 53

Until Japan changes its position regarding sanctions and the territorial issue, Russia will not be able to fully cooperate with this country.

And what's so surprising? Japan's foreign policy is completely subordinate to the interests of the United States, is this a sect for someone? What the United States sneezes, the Japanese will do it.
1. Goga101
  
  +20
  
  6 November 2015 06: 00
  
  venaya - Colleague, quote - "What the US sneezes, the Japanese will do." - and what else to expect from them? This is an occupied country, so the occupiers rule Japan as they see fit. In this regard, one cannot but recall the saying - "why talk to a ram when you can talk to his shepherd ..." - while there are occupation troops in Japan, what can you talk about with them (the Japanese)?
2. Andrey Yuryevich
  
  +10
  
  6 November 2015 06: 01
  
  . I can't understand why Japan criticizes Russia for airstrikes in Syria
  What is not clear? we are enemies, and with igil, and with japan. Japan, igil does not threaten purely even geographically, but the axiom is that the enemy of my enemy, my friend always worked.
  1. hydrox
    
    +3
    
    6 November 2015 08: 40
    
    Quote: Andrey Yurievich
    the enemy of my enemy — my friend has always worked.
    
    And the fact that the Americans are friends and even the "parents" of ISIS - for whom were you going to take the "friend of your enemy" then?
    Let's get rid of double standards even here ...
  2. ver_
    
    0
    
    6 November 2015 15: 03
    
    ... by the way, about the birds - the peace treaty Russia - Japan is not signed - legally the war is not over ..
3. Finches
  
  +7
  
  6 November 2015 06: 09
  
  I can’t understand why Japan insists on the return of the original Russian territories! Or maybe we need to firmly begin to review the results, say the Russo-Japanese War and ask the children of the sun for Tsushima and Port Arthur?
  1. Goga101
    
    +8
    
    6 November 2015 06: 18
    
    Zyablitsev - We need to ask Khrushchev for Port Arthur - after the war, IS restored our military base there, Khrushchev saved everything
    1. perm23
      
      +6
      
      6 November 2015 06: 47
      
      Khrushchev has ruined and ruined a lot of things - A little upstart came to the place of a great leader and imagines himself to be the navel of the earth.
      1. EGOrkka
        
        +14
        
        6 November 2015 08: 33
        
        perm23
        Khrushch ruined and ruined a lot of things
        
        .... and what did you think .... the genes of the ancient Ukra ... and without a mess ???
      2. ver_
        
        +1
        
        6 November 2015 15: 05
        
        .. Crest he and that says it all ..
  2. Andrey Yuryevich
    
    +3
    
    6 November 2015 06: 32
    
    Quote: Finches
    Or maybe we need to firmly begin to review the results, say the Russo-Japanese War
    
    or maybe just raise the question of the need for the presence of Russian bases throughout the narrowed island? (well, we need it, and that's all ... without explanation))) and the yapam: "We will give you a bucket, we will throw you into the sea and -" adyu "! Filatov.)
  3. bastard
    
    +2
    
    6 November 2015 14: 04
    
    Quote: Finches
    I can’t understand why Japan insists on the return of the original Russian territories! Or maybe we need to firmly begin to review the results, say the Russo-Japanese War and ask the children of the sun for Tsushima and Port Arthur?
    
    Under Catherine II, in St. Petersburg, when they did the so-called “Spatial Land Descriptions of the Russian State”, not only all the Kuril Islands, but also the island of Hokkaido were included in the empire. At that time, the Japanese not only did not settle it, but did not even control it, fighting the indigenous people in the south of Hokkaido and in the north of even more southern Honshu. As a result of the expedition of Ivan Antipin and Dmitry Shabalin in 1778-79, local Aborigines, Ainu, who lived in the north of Hokkaido, were considered subjects of the Russian Empire. The Kuril Islands themselves were explored and taxed by the Russian Cossacks a century earlier, back in the middle of the XNUMXth century.
    
    Alexander I, in a letter to the Japanese emperor of July 30, 1803, called the inhabitants of the Kuril Islands “their subjects”, which did not cause any objection from the Japanese side, let alone official protest. Until the end of the eighteenth century, Japan showed no interest in either Sakhalin or the Kuril Islands. Even the island of Hokkaido was officially considered in Japan as foreign territory, such as, for example, Korea. Arriving in 1786 in Kunashir and Iturup, the first Japanese met there local residents who bore Russian names and surnames. These were the descendants of those Ainu who adopted Orthodoxy and Russian citizenship in the first half of the eighteenth century.
    
    As we see, if we take the long history of the development of this region by Russia and Japan, then we can well lay claim not only to all the Kuril Islands, but also to the north of Hokkaido.
    
    Japan officially declared its claims to the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin only in 1845. What immediately caused an official objection of Nicholas I. However, after the defeat in the Crimean War, weakened Russia was forced to cede the southern part of the Kuril Islands to the Japanese. Then there was a defeat in the war with Japan itself, when in 1905 Russia lost southern Sakhalin.
    
    The Bolsheviks, concluding an agreement on diplomatic relations with the Japanese in 1925, made an official reservation that, recognizing the factual borders established by force, they condemn the former tsarist government, which gave Russia Russian lands to Japan.
    
    Full article here:
    
    http://alter-vij.livejournal.com/222116.html
4. hydrox
  
  +5
  
  6 November 2015 08: 32
  
  Quote: venaya
  Until Japan changes its position regarding sanctions and the territorial issue, Russia will not be able to fully cooperate with this country.
  
  And what's so surprising? Japan's foreign policy is completely subordinate to the interests of the United States, is this a sect for someone? What the United States sneezes, the Japanese will do it.
  
  Yes, we don’t have anything to talk about with yuppies until Russia has carried out a complete and comprehensive analysis of the importance of the ridge for us in political and economic terms, all the more so when we talk about this during the crisis of economies and relations.
  Now it would be better to denounce that declaration 60 years ago, as having lost its connection with political reality and economic feasibility for Russian politics and economics.
  For some reason, the years go by, and Japan's attitude towards Russia is only getting worse :: isn't it time for the yapps to say: "If you behave well, so be it, we will return to discussing this issue, but while you are in the American occupation - NO WORDS on this matter! "
  1. Starik72
    
    +2
    
    6 November 2015 13: 21
    
    hydrox! ....... analysis of the importance of the ridge for us in the political and economic terms, ..... Why discuss this issue when it is practically resolved? The Okhotsk Sea International Organization is recognized as the INLAND SEA OF RUSSIA, and if so, the Kuril Islands are, as it were, the coast of this sea, and on this basis, the Kuril Islands is the territory of Russia! And neither can it be transferred to anyone either!
5. Vend
  
  +1
  
  6 November 2015 10: 29
  
  Quote: venaya
  Until Japan changes its position regarding sanctions and the territorial issue, Russia will not be able to fully cooperate with this country.
  
  And what's so surprising? Japan's foreign policy is completely subordinate to the interests of the United States, is this a sect for someone? What the United States sneezes, the Japanese will do it.
  
  I’ll add, if you don’t mind. And with such a policy of completely subordinating Japan to the United States, there is no guarantee that US military bases will not be built on these islands.
  1. venaya
    
    0
    
    6 November 2015 15: 45
    
    Quote: Wend
    ... with such a policy of completely subordinating Japan to the United States, there is no guarantee that US military bases will not be built on these islands.
    
    The idea of building US military bases in the territory of present-day Japan existed as far back as the 45th century, when the Japanese received military and economic assistance in the war with China and later in the Russo-Japanese War. After the XNUMXth year, bases were built on the island of Okinawa and in other places. For some reason, this information is still not advertised, surprisingly true.
6. the most important
  
  +2
  
  6 November 2015 10: 33
  
  That's when Japan will join Australia ... then ... maybe ... it's worth it and promise something to Japan! In the meantime, it’s not bad for me even without a peace treaty, I hope that everyone is present too!
7. Max_Bauder
  
  +5
  
  6 November 2015 11: 25
  
  negotiations only under such conditions
Mikhail m

+2

6 November 2015 05: 54

Therefore, Russia believes that the problem is resolved.

So what is the conversation about? The Yap would have had more strength, others would have had conversations. In the language of guns. And sooner or later it will be so.
1. Alexey Lobanov
  
  +1
  
  6 November 2015 06: 05
  
  Quote: Mikhail M
  So what is the conversation about? The Yap would have had more strength, others would have had conversations. In the language of guns. And sooner or later it will be so.
  
  Only China and Japan can do this. If the Japs didn’t decide to attack us in the 41st, they would never attack.
domokl

+7

6 November 2015 05: 57

That's exactly it. Currently, any visit will only worsen relations. The problem will not be resolved in the near future.
1. perm23
  
  +6
  
  6 November 2015 06: 52
  
  What a problem, it is not. If someone does not recognize the outcome of the war, then this is their business. The Japs do not want to conclude a peace treaty, yelling about the islands, let them continue. To us what. The dog barks, the caravan goes on. Today let's go back and give them 1 meter, tomorrow they’re not only them, they will all come and demand. As the Baltic countries want, nobody wants anything. England holds the Volklans, Giblartar and what. And let them make demands Spain and Argentina hold and all.
Wolka

0

6 November 2015 05: 58

for sure, the Yankees use Japan as a migraine for Russia, nothing less than a strong, but constantly aching and exhausting headache ...
1. Andrey Yuryevich
  
  +3
  
  6 November 2015 06: 03
  
  Quote: Volka
  for sure, the Yankees use Japan as a migraine for Russia, nothing less than a strong, but constantly aching and exhausting headache ...
  
  well, they don’t pull on a headache ... it’s rather like a splinter somewhere in the little finger.
  1. EvgNik
    
    0
    
    6 November 2015 06: 13
    
    Quote: Andrey Yurievich
    well, they don’t pull on a headache ... it’s rather like a splinter somewhere in the little finger
    
    If we take medical terms, it’s more likely for hemorrhoids.
Nasty

+1

6 November 2015 05: 58

If we are not going to give the islands that belong to us, then what to talk about? Or are you going?
1. Gerasim
  
  +7
  
  6 November 2015 06: 27
  
  If Russia and Japan sign a peace treaty, then we’ll have to give two islands! But the trouble is that if we give these two islands away, the hemorrhoids for Russia will be much bigger than now!
  1. perm23
    
    +1
    
    6 November 2015 06: 53
    
    Then there will certainly be a big hemorrhoids and a big headache.
evil partisan

+12

6 November 2015 05: 58

Here is very interesting about the Kuril Islands:
1. Andrey Yuryevich
  
  +1
  
  6 November 2015 06: 43
  
  evil partisan
  hello old man!
  1. evil partisan
    
    0
    
    6 November 2015 06: 51
    
    Quote: Andrey Yurievich
    was old
    
    Oh, I will answer you one rhyme somehow ... Hello amateur!
    1. Andrey Yuryevich
      
      +1
      
      6 November 2015 06: 58
      
      Quote: Angry Guerrilla
      Oh, I will answer you one rhyme somehow
      
      expressing is prohibited on the site!
svp67

+2

6 November 2015 06: 13

What is good about the "ex" position, that you can say whatever you want ...
dmi.pris1

+4

6 November 2015 06: 36

In general, it made sense to start negotiations .. Was there even a topic? Is this the territory of Russia and that’s the point.
rotmistr60

+2

6 November 2015 06: 54

Until Japan changes its position regarding sanctions and the territorial issue, Russia will not be able to fully cooperate with this country.

In my opinion, the position is very clearly and concisely expressed. which Russia must adhere to. And for many years to pour from empty to empty and listen to categorical demands from Japan, which signed the surrender in the 2nd MV, it makes no sense.
stas74

+2

6 November 2015 07: 18

In Japan, everything is there, however, the main thing is missing - the national idea
The return of the northern territories is an analogue of the requirements of Ukraine to return the Crimea.
The same can be said of the Folkland Islands.
The whole point is not in returning, but in the idea. Ours are also good - they gave China the daman now precious in Chinese and everything is fine. Japan needs to be afraid of China, or it will show the bill for 30 million dead
aszzz888

+1

6 November 2015 07: 32

I can’t understand why Japan is criticizing Russia for air strikes in Syria.

Yes, because with merikatos suck!
kartalovkolya

+7

6 November 2015 07: 45

Which Japan? What negotiations? Is it possible to negotiate with an actually occupied country, something in the world history of precedents for this has not been encountered! Now about the claims of Japan to the primordially Russian territories, and they "did not beguiled the coast" for an hour, and they are not afraid that we will get tired of all this fuss and we will ask "in full" for their participation in the plunder of Siberia and the Far East during the Civil War , for the stolen "tsarist gold", for the Japanese-Russian war unleashed by them and for the cruiser "Varyag", and there is much more to ask from these very "restless" ??? !!! It's time to shut up these "hungry mouths", and at the same time knock out every single teeth! Although by and large they "sing" from other people's voices, and more from the stars and stripes - "miserable" in one word!
Erg

+2

6 November 2015 08: 14

I catch myself thinking that Japan is simply annoying. Like an annoying fly.
F.Vastag

+2

6 November 2015 08: 17

Nobody sees this "Meaning" (in the "negotiations" about our Reinforced Concrete Kuril Islands) (except for some Circles in the leadership of Russia - which do not want to completely close this Question - referring to the INTEGRITY of the Results of World War II). I do not understand why the Russian leadership does not close this issue ONCE and FOREVER and EVERYTHING PULLS AND PULLS. If someone explains to me what the "Focus" is, I will be grateful.
1. hydrox
  
  +4
  
  6 November 2015 08: 53
  
  Quote: F. Vastag
  If someone explains, I will be grateful.
  
  Nothing interesting or surprising: in Russia there is one powerful layer (oligo-liberal) that wants to kiss the gums with the West, and Putin and Lavrov constantly go on the side that for some reason the West’s ass is opposite the lips of this layer, besides it is disgustingly odorous - the oligo-liberals become uncomfortable and they are indignant!
  1. BIG
    
    0
    
    6 November 2015 14: 42
    
    oligo-liberals become uncomfortable and they are outraged!
    
    Are you kidding me?
    So that our liberals resent the ass of the West? Yes, they will cling to her in ecstasy!
2. Disant
  
  0
  
  6 November 2015 22: 26
  
  Quote: F. Vastag
  This "Meaning" (in the "negotiations" I do not understand why the Russian leadership does not close this question ONCE and FOREVER and EVERYTHING PULLS AND PULLS. If someone explains to me what the "Focus" is, I will be grateful.
  so above in the video comment answered at the end - the question was closed on September 2, 2015. take a look
3. The comment was deleted.
taseka

+7

6 November 2015 08: 51

What is there to guess? In 1904 we are enemies, in 1918 we are enemies, in 1941-1945 we are enemies again! GOD LOVES THE TRINITY - ALREADY ENOUGH THIS TYAGOMOTINA WITH THE SONS OF MIKADO - EVERYTHING IS CLEAR AND UNDERSTANDING !!! It's like with the Bulgarian "brothers", we all get away with them, and they are in the 1st world against us, in 2 against us and now in NATO against Russia !!!
akudr48

+4

6 November 2015 08: 57

Well, Ambassador Panov explained everything.

It would be even better if he explained, (Panov was already Ambassador to Tokyo) how the Kuril issues were addressed under Minister Kozyrev and the deputy. Minister Kunadze, when they almost gave all the islands to the Japanese, under a glass of EBN sake, but what, then, there was democracy and friendship.
And there were traitors.
Mihalich17

+2

6 November 2015 10: 04

Our position on this issue should be exemplary!
Do not like Japan what happened as a result of the Great Patriotic War? Yes please!
We respect their opinion but that's all!
And then the song should sound in Japanese: "Come on, goodbye!"
Volzhanin

+1

6 November 2015 10: 47

In short: "The sheriff is not interested in the problems of blacks."
NordUral

+2

6 November 2015 10: 49

For some reason, everyone who has the States behind them is behaving insolently. For the great country of Japan, this is a shame. And as for the Kuril Islands, everything was decided in 1945. Forever!
AlexTires

+4

6 November 2015 11: 13

It seems that Japan simply frankly and unceremoniously does not want to recognize the outcome of the Second World War, refuses to recognize all the most important legal documents that determined its status by the results of unconditional surrender, the San Francisco Peace Treaty, according to which it refused the Kuril Islands.
Again, the current Japanese state is not the successor of the one with which we fought, - says international law, - because complete and unconditional surrender ceases to exist the state and its sovereignty. Thus, the term "return" in the discussion of the topic of the Kuril Islands should be removed from use.
Evgeniy667b

+3

6 November 2015 12: 24

With the Japanese in general, it is not worthwhile to conduct any dialogue on territorial issues. Everything fell into place in 1945. And our president has nothing to do there.
1. saturn.mmm
  
  +1
  
  6 November 2015 13: 48
  
  Quote: Evgeniy667b
  With the Japanese in general, it is not worthwhile to conduct any dialogue on territorial issues. Everything fell into place in 1945. And our president has nothing to do there.
  
  Quite right, the Russian problem of the Kuril Islands is only how to develop and settle in the territory.
SIMM

+3

6 November 2015 13: 12

"The USSR has already made a compromise, agreeing to return two islands (Soviet-Japanese Declaration of 1956)"
I didn’t know - SHAME on me (((
This - again shows: give a finger - bite off the elbow! No need to give the islands cross-eyed!
Eastern wind

+2

6 November 2015 13: 18

Something like this!
Starik72

+1

6 November 2015 13: 47

It is impossible to give the islands of the Kuril ridge of Japan, since THEY are, figuratively speaking, THE INLAND SEA OF RUSSIA, this is recognized by the International Organization! This is equivalent to the fact that I built a house, and I have to give the front door to my neighbor, and he will decide how to enter my house, through the door or through it. My opinion, nor any negotiations on the transfer of the islands, and to declare it loudly, and not to lisp.
roskot

+3

6 November 2015 13: 51

Thank you for saying about fat. But do not strain about the Kuril Islands, you won’t get it.
chunga-changa

0

6 November 2015 13: 56

Well, this is a former ambassador, he can say whatever he wants. But what the current "best of ministers" will come up with is not known, he surrenders the laurels of the territory of Russia to neighbors without the slightest hesitation, quickly and without any benefit. Hurray-patriots, I will remind - China near Khabarovsk, Norway, the richest industries, and Azerbodzhan our villages, along with Russian citizens, and blasphemy.
Basil50

+1

6 November 2015 14: 01

Amazing texts of international treaties drawn up by the Japanese in Japanese. The divinity of the * ampirator * and the duty of all countries to serve him are colorfully described, but they do not question their own dependence on the British. How does this fit together? Even the Japanese do not always understand the * complexity of the soul * of the Japanese and urge them to be accepted without understanding.
yuriy55

+1

6 November 2015 14: 07

We do not want any land,
But we won’t give up our tip. (C)
Cossack Ermak

0

6 November 2015 14: 37

As I understand it, so far this is only the personal opinion of Mr. Panov. He expressed his mood in the Russian Foreign Ministry, but not any official statements.