The problem of belonging to the Kuril Islands. Historical reference. Kuril Islands in the history of Russian-Japanese relations

History of the Kuril Islands

The narrow strait separating Kunashir from Hokkaido is called the Strait of Izmena in Russian. The Japanese have their own opinion on this matter.

The Kuril Islands got their name from the people who inhabited them. “Kuru” in the language of these people meant “man,” the Cossacks called them “Kurils” or “Kurilians,” and they called themselves “Ainu,” which in meaning was not much different from “Kuru.” The culture of the Kurils, or Ainu, has been traced by archaeologists for at least 7,000 years. They lived not only on the Kuril Islands, which were called “Kuru-misi”, that is, “land of people”, but also on the island of Hokkaido (“Ainu-moshiri”), and in the southern part of Sakhalin. In their appearance, language and customs, they differed significantly from both the Japanese in the south and the Kamchadals in the north.


A non-Mongoloid type of face, thick hair, a thick beard, pronounced vegetation all over the body - ethnographers searched for the ancestral home of the Ainu in both the Caucasus and Australia. In accordance with one of the latest hypotheses, the Ainu, who have lived on their islands for centuries, represent a “splinter” of a special, ancient race.


The Cossacks called them “shaggy”, and this nickname was used even in official Russian papers. One of the first explorers of Kamchatka, Stepan Krasheninnikov, wrote about the Kurils: “They are incomparably more polite than other peoples: and at the same time they are constant, just-hearted, ambitious and meek. They speak quietly without interrupting each other’s speeches... Old people are held in great reverence...”


In the XVII - 19th centuries The Japanese had a different name for the island of Hokkaido - Ezo. In the old days, the term “edzo” meant the “northern savages” who obey no one. Gradually, Ezo in Japan began to mean all the lands north of the island. Hondo (Honshu), including Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands. The Russians called Hokkaido Matsmai, since in its southwestern part there was a city of the same name, built by the samurai Matsumae clan.


One of the first expeditions to the lands of Ezo was undertaken by the Japanese in 1635. Presumably, a certain Kinfiro, a translator from Ainu who served with the feudal lords of Matsumae, took part in it. Whether Kinfiro managed to get to Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands or received information about them from the Ainu is not known for certain, however, based on the results of his journey in 1644, a map was drawn up on which, although conditionally, Karafuto (Sakhalin) and Tsisimi - “a thousand islands” were designated " - that's what the Japanese called the Kuril Islands. Almost at the same time, in 1643, the Southern Kuriles region was explored by the Dutch expedition of Maarten Fries, who was searching for mythical countries rich in gold and silver. The Dutch not only compiled good maps, but also described the lands they discovered (the journal of senior navigator Cornelius Kuhn was preserved and published), among which it is easy to recognize Iturup, Kunashir, and other islands of the South Kuril Islands.


In Russia, the first information about the Kuril Islands appeared in the reports of Vladimir Atlasov, who made the famous campaign against Kamchatka in 1697. But the first descriptions of the islands were compiled not by him, but by the Cossack Ivan Kozyrevsky, who, by a sad irony of fate, participated in the murder of Atlasov. To beg for forgiveness, Kozyrevsky went to the Kuril Islands in 1711, but visited only the first two islands - Shumshu and Paramushir, where he questioned in detail the “shaggy” people who lived there. He supplemented his report with information received from the Japanese, who were brought to Kamchatka during a storm in 1710.


In 1719, Peter I sent two surveyors to Kamchatka - Ivan Evreinov and Fyodor Luzhin. Officially, to find out whether America and Asia have come together. However, the content of the secret instructions they had was obviously different, since the surveyors, contrary to expectation, directed their ship not to the north, but to the south - to the Kuril Islands and Japan. They managed to pass only half of the ridge: near the island of Simushir, the ship lost its anchor and was thrown back to Kamchatka by the winds. In 1722, Evreinov personally presented Peter with a report on the expedition and a map of the islands examined.


In 1738-1739, Martyn Shpanberg, a member of the Bering expedition, walked south along the entire Kuril ridge and mapped the islands he encountered. Spanberg's ship rounded Matsmai and anchored off the coast of Hondo - here the first meeting in history between the Russians and the Japanese took place. She was quite friendly, although not without mutual wariness. Avoiding risky voyages to the Southern Kuril Islands, the Russians developed the islands closest to Kamchatka, subjugating the “furry ones” and demanding yasak (fur tax) from them in sea otter skins. Many did not want to pay yasak and went to distant islands. To keep the Kurilians, the Cossacks took amanats (hostages) from among their children and relatives.


In 1766, at the direction of the Siberian governor, the toyon (leader) from the island of Paramushir, Nikita Chikin, and the centurion from Kamchatka, Ivan Cherny, were sent to the southern Kuril Islands. They had to “persuade the Kurils into citizenship, without showing, not only deeds, but also a sign of rude actions and bitterness, but greetings and affection.” Chikin himself was one of the “shaggy” ones and easily found a common language with his fellow tribesmen, but, unfortunately, he died suddenly on Simushir and Black stood at the head of the party. The centurion walked to the 19th island (Iturup), along the way, by force bringing the “shaggy” ones into citizenship. From them he learned that the Japanese had a fortress on the 20th (Kunashir). During the winter on the 18th island (Urupa), Cherny drank, poached and mocked both his companions - the Cossacks and the “shaggy ones”. On the way back, the centurion took with him the “descended” (runaway) Kurilians, and kept them tied up on the ship, which is why many died. Cherny’s “exploits” did not go unnoticed; he came under investigation, but died in Irkutsk from smallpox. Embittered by the actions of Cherny and other merchants, the “shaggy” rebelled in 1771 and killed many Russians on the islands of Chirpoy and Urup.


In 1778, the Siberian nobleman Antipin, familiar with the Japanese language, was sent to the Southern Kuril Islands. At Urup he was joined by the Irkutsk townsman and translator Shabalin. The instructions given by the head of Kamchatka, Matvey Bem, ordered “to establish peaceful communication with the Japanese and the shaggy ones,” and “under death penalty do not offend the wild, as happened on Aleutian Islands...". Antipin and Shabalin managed to win the sympathy and favor of the “shaggy” ones, and in 1778-1779 more than 1,500 Kurils from Iturup, Kunashir and Matsmay were brought into Russian citizenship. Contacts with the Japanese were unsuccessful. Strictly adhering to the state policy of self-isolation, Japanese officials conveyed to Antipin a ban not only from trading on Matsmai, but also from going to Iturup and Kunashir. The expedition of Antipin and Shabalin was not continued: in 1780, their ship, anchored off the island of Urup, the strongest tsunami was thrown onto land at a distance of 400 meters from the shore! With great difficulties, the sailors managed to return to Kamchatka using kayaks...


In 1779, by her decree, Catherine II freed the Kuril residents who had accepted Russian citizenship from all taxes. The “Extensive Land Description of the Russian State...” published in 1787 by order of the Empress contains a list of the Kuril Islands, “of which 21 are now considered under Russian possession...”. The 21st island was Shikotan, and about the 22nd, Matsmai, it was said that the Japanese have a city on its southern side, but how far their possession extends in the northern side of Matsmai is unknown.


Meanwhile, the Russians had no real control over the islands located south of the 18th (Urupa). In the report of the navigator Lovtsov, who visited Matsmai in 1794, it was reported: “The Kurilians, who live on the 22nd, as well as on the 19th, 20th and 21st islands, are revered by the Japanese as their subjects and are used by them in grave ways.” work... And from this it is noticeable that all the Kuril residents are extremely dissatisfied with the Japanese... In May 1788, one Japanese merchant ship came to Matsmai. The Kuriles attacked the ship. All 75 Japanese were killed, and the goods were taken and divided. An official was sent from Matsmaya and executed 35 people...”


In 1799, by order of the central government of Japan, two principalities founded outposts on Kunashir and Iturup, and since 1804, the protection of these islands was carried out constantly.


An attempt to resume negotiations with the Japanese on trade was made in 1805, when the founder of the Russian-American Company (RAC), actual state councilor Nikolai Rezanov, arrived in Nagasaki - the only port in Japan where foreign ships were allowed to enter. However, his audience with the governor was a failure. The acts handed over by the Japanese side finally formulated the refusal of trade relations with Russia. As for the Russian ships, they were asked not to stop at anchor and rather depart from the Japanese shores. Offended by the refusal, Rezanov made it clear to Japanese officials that the Russian emperor had ways to teach him to treat him with respect. In his report to the tsar, he also reported that the Japanese nobles, suffering from the despotism of the spiritual ruler "dairi", hinted to him, Rezanov, that the Japanese should be "moved" from the north and remove some industry - this would supposedly give the Japanese government a reason to establish trade relations with Russia... Rezanov instructed Lieutenant Khvostov and Midshipman Davydov to carry out this “hint”, forming an expedition of two ships.


In 1806, Khvostov expelled the Japanese from Sakhalin, destroying all trading posts in Aniva Bay. In 1807, he burned down a Japanese village on Iturup, and distributed goods from the stores to the Kurils. On Matsmai, Khvostov captured and plundered 4 Japanese ships, after which he left the Matsmai governor a paper with the following content: “The Russians, having now caused such little harm to the Japanese empire, wanted to show them only through ... that further stubbornness of the Japanese government could completely deprive him of these lands "


Believing that Khvostov's pirate raids were sanctioned by the Russian government, the Japanese prepared to retaliate. That is why the completely peaceful appearance of Captain Vasily Golovnin in Kunashir in 1811 ended with his capture and imprisonment for more than 2 years. Only after official government papers were delivered to the Matsmai governor of Okhotsk, which stated that “Khvostov and Davydov were tried, found guilty, punished and are no longer alive,” Golovnin and his friends received freedom.


After the release of Golovnin, the Irkutsk governor forbade Russian ships and canoes to sail further than the 18th island (Urupa), on which a colony of the Russian-American Company had existed since 1795. In fact, by the middle of the 19th century, the strait between Urup and Iturup began to serve as a border between states, which was recorded by the treaty of 1855, signed by Admiral Putyatin in the Japanese city of Shimoda. In a secret instruction to Putyatin, endorsed by Nicholas I, it was written unambiguously: “Of the Kuril Islands, the southernmost, which belongs to Russia, is the island of Urup, to which we could limit ourselves...”.


The 1855 treaty left the status of Sakhalin uncertain, and in 1875 a new treaty was signed in St. Petersburg, according to which Japan renounced its rights to Sakhalin, receiving in return all the Kuril Islands up to Kamchatka itself. The Ainu from Sakhalin did not take Russian citizenship and moved to Hokkaido. The Ainu of the northern Kuril Islands decided to remain on their islands, especially since the RAC, to which they were in virtual slavery, ceased its activities in 1867. Having accepted Japanese citizenship, they retained Russian surnames and the Orthodox faith. In 1884, the Japanese government resettled all the Northern Kuril Ainu (there were no more than 100 of them) to Shikotan, forcibly transforming them from fishermen and hunters into farmers and cattle breeders. At that time, the population of the Southern Kuril Islands, concentrated mainly in Iturup and Kunashir, was about 3,000 people, of which 3/4 were Japanese.


After Russia's defeat in the Russo-Japanese War, an agreement was signed in Portsmouth in 1905, according to which the southern part of Sakhalin (below the 50th parallel) also ceded to Japan. In 1920, Japan occupied and northern part Sakhalin, where intensive oil development began. Historian Dmitry Volkogonov discovered evidence that Lenin was ready to sell northern Sakhalin to the Japanese in 1923, and the Politburo was going to ask for $1 billion for it. However, the deal did not materialize, and in 1925 a joint declaration in Beijing reaffirmed the provisions of the Portsmouth Treaty.



At the Yalta Conference in 1945, Stalin said that he would like to discuss the political conditions under which the USSR would enter the war against Japan. Roosevelt noted that he believed that there would be no difficulty regarding the transfer to Russia of the southern half of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands at the end of the war.


On August 8, 1945, the USSR fulfilled its obligations and attacked Japan. At the beginning of September, Soviet troops occupied the Kuril Islands, including the occupied island of Shikotan and the Habomai ridge, which both geographically and according to Japanese territorial division did not then belong to the Kuril Islands. In 1946-1947, all Japanese from Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands, numbering about 400 thousand, were repatriated. All the Ainu were deported to Hokkaido. At the same time, more than 300 thousand Soviet settlers arrived on Sakhalin and the islands. The memory of the almost 150-year stay of the Japanese in the Southern Kuril Islands was intensively erased, sometimes using barbaric methods. On Kunashir, Buddhist monuments that stood along the entire coast were blown up, and many Japanese cemeteries were desecrated.


At the 1951 peace conference in San Francisco, the USSR delegation proposed to include in the text of the peace treaty with Japan a clause recognizing the sovereignty of the USSR over southern Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands, but in the circumstances “ cold war“The position of the USA and Great Britain was already different than in 1945, and the USSR’s proposals were not accepted. The final text of the treaty included a provision on Japan’s renunciation of all rights and claims to the Kuril Islands and southern Sakhalin, but it did not say, firstly, in whose favor Japan was renouncing these territories, and secondly, the concept of “Kuril Islands” was not deciphered islands,” which each side naturally understood in its own way. As a result, the USSR did not sign the treaty, but Japan did, which gave it the formal right to immediately raise the issue of returning the South Kuril Islands.


The refusal of the Soviet delegation in San Francisco to sign a peace treaty legally left Russia and Japan in a state of war. In 1956, a joint declaration was signed in Moscow between the USSR and Japan, which contained the consent of the Soviet Union to return Shikotan Island and the Habomai ridge to Japan immediately after the conclusion of a peace treaty. But in 1960, the USSR government unilaterally refused to implement the clause of the declaration on the return of the islands, citing "


" its rejection of the contents of the new Japan-US security treaty.


Since 1990, Japanese citizens have had the opportunity to visit the burial places of their relatives in the Southern Kuril Islands (the first such visits began in 1964, but were subsequently discontinued). Many abandoned Japanese cemeteries were restored by Russian residents of the islands.


In 1993, a declaration on Russian-Japanese relations was signed in Tokyo, which sets out the need for an early conclusion of a peace treaty based on resolving the issue of ownership of the Southern Kuril Islands. In 1998, the Moscow Declaration on the establishment of a creative partnership between Russia and Japan was signed...


The strait separating Kunashir from Hokkaido is narrow. On Russian maps it is called the Strait of Treason - in memory of the captivity of Captain Golovnin. Many today believe that this name is unfortunate. But the time for renaming, apparently, has not yet come.


Russian President Vladimir Putin will visit Japan in mid-December. It is already clear in advance that the main content of the meeting, at least for the Japanese side, will be the issue of the Kuril Islands. Following the results of World War II, the Southern Kuril Islands, occupied by Soviet troops in September 1945, were included in the USSR. But soon Japan demanded that four islands - Kunashir, Iturup, Shikotan and Habomai - be returned to them. At numerous negotiations, the USSR and Japan seemed to have initially agreed that only two smaller islands would be ceded to Japan. But the agreement was blocked by the United States, threatening the Japanese that if a peace treaty with the USSR was signed, they would not return the island of Okinawa, where their military base was located.

Russians and Japanese began almost at the same time to develop these lands, inhabited by the Ainu - the ancient and indigenous population of the Kuril Islands. Japan first heard about the “northern territories” only in the 17th century, around the same time Russian explorers spoke about them in Russia. Russian sources first mention the Kuril Islands in 1646, and Japanese sources - in 1635. Under Catherine II, signs were even installed on them with the inscription “Land of Russian Dominion.”

Later, a number of interstate treaties were signed (1855, 1875) regulating the rights to this territory - in particular, the Shimoda Treaty. In 1905, after the Russo-Japanese War, the islands finally became part of Japan along with South Sakhalin. Currently, for both the Russians and the Japanese, the issue of the Kuril Islands is a matter of principle.

After the collapse of the USSR, Russian public opinion is especially sensitive to any potential loss of at least some part of the territory. The recent transfer of a piece of land to China did not cause much indignation, since China is firmly perceived as our country’s main ally, and these lands along the Amur River meant little to the bulk of Russians. It’s a completely different matter - the Kuril Islands with their military base, blocking the entrance with Pacific Ocean to the Sea of ​​Okhotsk. They are perceived as Russia's eastern outpost. According to a public opinion poll conducted by the Levada Center in May, 78% of Russians are against the transfer of the Kuril Islands to Japan, and 71% of Russians are against the transfer of only Habomai and Shikotan to Japan. To the fundamental question “What is more important: to conclude a peace treaty with Japan, receiving Japanese loans and technology, or to preserve two deserted small islands? 56% also chose the second, and 21% - the first. So what will be the fate of the Far Eastern islands?

Version 1

Russia will give Japan the entire Kuril ridge

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has already held 14 (!) meetings with Vladimir Putin. This year alone, the Japanese Prime Minister visited Russia twice, in Sochi and Vladivostok, and proposed a plan for resolving the territorial issue there. In the event of the transfer of the islands, Japan promises to develop economic cooperation on 30 projects with a total value of $16 billion - in the fields of energy, medicine, Agriculture, in urban planning, growth of small and medium-sized businesses. And also the construction of a gas pipeline to Japan from Sakhalin, the development of industry in the Far East, cultural contacts, and so on. Plus guarantees that if the Kuril Islands are transferred to it, no military contingent from the United States will be stationed there.

According to the Japanese Prime Minister, Russia reacted positively to this plan. Japanese loans, technology, etc. may become suitable negotiating terms. Moreover, according to a Levada Center poll, only slightly more than half of Russians – 55% – believe that the level of trust in Putin will decrease if he decides to return the Kuril Islands to Japan. 9% believe that his rating will increase, and 23% believe that it will remain at its current level.

Version 2

Russia will hand over Habomai and Shikotan to Japan

In early November, Chairman of the Federation Council of the Russian Federation Valentina Matvienko held negotiations with the leaders of the Japanese Parliament in Tokyo. Their goal was clearly the desire to outline the Russian position in advance. Matvienko unequivocally stated: “The Kuril Islands were transferred to us as a result of the Second World War, which is recorded in international documents. And therefore Russia’s sovereignty over them is beyond doubt. There are things that Russia will never agree to. Limiting Russian sovereignty over the Kuril Islands, and even more so transferring them to the jurisdiction of Japan, is one of them. This is the position of all our people, here we have a national consensus.”

On the other hand, why not assume that Matvienko could play the role of a “bad cop” in the classic scheme? So that the Japanese negotiators would then be more accommodating with the first person, who may well become a “good cop” and agree on favorable conditions. Even during his first presidential visit to Japan, Putin actually recognized the validity of the 1956 Declaration, and in 2001 a Russian-Japanese statement recognizing its legal force was published.

And the Japanese seem to be ready for this. According to a survey conducted by the Mainichi Shimbun newspaper, 57% of the country’s residents do not demand the absolute return of the entire Kuril ridge, but will be satisfied with a more flexible solution to the “territorial issue.”

Version 3

All islands of the Kuril chain will remain Russian

Last week, the Ministry of Defense announced the deployment of coastal missile systems “Bal” and “Bastion” in the South Kuriles - to the great disappointment of the Japanese authorities, who clearly did not expect anything like this. It is unlikely that our military would have carried the latest defense systems such a distance, knowing that the islands were being prepared for transfer to the Japanese.

In addition, the islands are of great strategic importance. As long as they belong to Russia, no foreign submarine can enter the Sea of ​​Okhotsk undetected. If at least one island goes to Japan, then Russia will lose control over the straits and any warship will be able to get into the center without Moscow’s permission Sea of ​​Okhotsk.

But the main guarantee that Moscow will never agree to exchange the Kuril Islands is not missile systems. The fact is that Tokyo has territorial claims following the Second World War not only to Moscow, but also to Seoul, and, most importantly, to Beijing. Therefore, even if we assume the unthinkable that the Russian authorities intend to carry out Nikita Khrushchev’s idea and give the Japanese a couple of islands in order to improve relations, you need to understand that a negative reaction from the Chinese and Koreans to this step will follow immediately. China, in response to such a geopolitical setback, may present its territorial claims to Russia, and the Zhongguo will have grounds for this. And Moscow understands this well. So the current political “round dances” around the Kuril Islands will not lead to serious consequences - most likely, the parties are simply letting each other off steam.



In the destructive euphoria of “perestroika,” Russian diplomats inadvertently gave the Japanese government reason to hope for a revision of the results of World War II, and although Tokyo today shows a subtle diplomatic flair, these hopes remain. The concession of the Kuril Islands, in addition to a blow to Russia’s strategic positions in the Pacific Ocean, would become an extraordinary precedent for the resumption of territorial disputes throughout the world.

After the destruction of the Yalta-Potsdam order, active attempts are being made to achieve its legal revision. In connection with these disputes, we undertake to resolutely assert that the changes that have occurred do not at all entail the possibility of challenging the remaining territorial results of the Yalta-Potsdam agreements. Satisfying Japanese claims for the “return” of the islands would mean undermining the very principle of the inviolability of the results of World War II. This is especially dangerous now, when the US and NATO aggression against sovereign Yugoslavia has made the map of Europe unsteady.

The ideologists of perestroika considered it uncivilized to defend Russia's historical achievements. Under the communists, all phenomena and achievements were explained by the merit of the only true teaching, which gave rise to jokes like: “The party teaches that gases expand when heated.” During perestroika, gases stopped expanding when heated, just as anecdotally, because that was what the party that had lost power taught. Russian grief thinkers have again reached the point of absurdity, with pathos renouncing all the paternal tombs of not only Soviet, but also all of Russian history.



There are two Japans - before and after the war

The term "return" in relation to an item territorial claims post-war Japanese state should be permanently withdrawn from official language Russian officials.

This term is a conceptual revision of the results of the war, meaning indirect recognition of the new Japan as the legal successor (continuity) of the Japanese state that started and lost the war.

Politicians and statesmen should remember some provisions of international law. Neither the FRG and the GDR, created after the war, nor Japan, nor even today’s united Germany are continuers of the subjectivity of the pre-war states, do not have continuity in relation to them. They are new subjects of international relations and international law. Their legal succession in relation to the former states is limited by the decisions of the powers that had quadripartite responsibility. This follows from the legal content of the principle of complete and unconditional surrender embedded in the post-war system. Complete and unconditional surrender is fundamentally different from simple capitulation in its legal, political and historical consequences. Simple surrender means only recognition of defeat in hostilities and does not affect the international legal personality of the defeated power. Such a state, even if completely defeated, retains sovereignty and itself as legal side

One can give an example of how the United States used its powers in relation to Germany two decades after the victory. In 1973 During the Arab-Israeli war, Foreign Minister Walter Scheel officially objected to the sending of American weapons from Germany to Israel and the use of its ports and airfields, and stated that Germany did not want to deteriorate relations with the Arab world and was choosing the role of a neutral state. There was an immediate rebuke from Washington. The State Department, in a strongly worded official note, stated, that Germany does not have full sovereignty, and the United States, based on its rights arising from the principles of the post-war settlement, has the right, without notice, to take any actions from the territory of the Federal Republic of Germany that it deems necessary for its interests. The lack of complete sovereignty and continuity in relation to the Reich was demonstrated even by the moment of German unification. It is unlikely that anyone could interfere with this process; however, in order for the new state to gain sovereignty, the four powers had to agree to unification and formally resign, which was done in the “Two Plus Four” Treaty.

The concept of the Japanese government is based on non-recognition of precisely this basis for the post-war settlement. In the case of Japan, the external manifestations of the loss of sovereignty and interruption of international legal personality are less obvious. Japan retained its former emperor. This fact is used to argue that Japan's legal personality has not been interrupted, and that the continuation of the former imperial sovereignty means the continuity of the state. However, in reality there was no continuity, but recognition of the succession of imperial power took place, but the source of the preservation of the imperial dynasty is completely different - it is the will and decision of the victors.

Japan's position does not stand up to criticism that it cannot consider itself bound by the Yalta agreements, since it was not a party to them. If we recognize the right of today's Japan to challenge the territorial decisions of the victors, is it possible to guarantee that in the future the Oder-Neisse line, drawn not by the Germans, but by the victorious powers, who did not ask for the consent of Field Marshal Keitel, will not be questioned. Today's Japan is a post-war state, and a settlement can only proceed from the post-war international legal framework, especially since only this basis has legal force. What is especially interesting in this matter is that all the historical treaties of the past, which Japanese politicians refer to, have lost force in today’s disputes, not even in 1945, but back in 1904, with the beginning of the Russo-Japanese War.

History of the "Kuril issue" and international law

The entire “historical” layer of the Japanese side’s argumentation has no relation to the rights of today's Japanese state, although it certainly has something to do with Japanese history. In this argumentation, a special place is occupied by references to treaties of the 19th century - the Shimoda Trade Treaty of 1855, according to which the border was drawn between the islands of Urup and Iturup, and Sakhalin remained undelimited, as well as to the St. Petersburg Treaty of 1875, according to which Japan recognized everything Sakhalin to the Russians, all the Kuril Islands were transferred to Japan.

In modern Japanese literature, only those official historical studies and maps of the past are given, where in one way or another the Kuril Islands are designated as possessions of Japan. However, Japanese historians of the past gave Russia undisputed priority in the discovery and development of the islands and pointed out that until the middle of the 19th century, Japan did not consider its possessions not only the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin, which was considered a peninsula there, while on the Russian side it had already been explored in detail , but even the island of Hokkaido, which was not yet inhabited. But already in late XIX V. Japan is seeking to oust Russian settlers from the Kuril Islands, destroy their posts, and evict the indigenous inhabitants - the Ainu, who, before the advent of the Russian pioneers, had not seen the Japanese and had not paid tribute to anyone.

Experts in the USSR, based on archival materials, foreign sources and cartographic data, gave a convincing answer to all unfounded attempts by Japan to distort the history of the discovery of the Kuril Islands. These works were prepared in the 60-70s, as a rule, for official use. They are scrupulously documented and free from propaganda sharpness, which the modern reader often suspects of bias.

Japanese diplomats believe that last years received irrefutable evidence of the “original” ownership of a number of islands disputed today. We are talking about the instructions to Admiral Putyatin, with which he went to negotiate with Japan in 1853. Under A. Kozyrev, this archival document was “kindly” provided to Japan from the archives of the Russian Foreign Ministry by employees of the Kozyrev school - an action that at all times was considered incompatible with the official and departmental ethics of a diplomat - simply a betrayal. In the instructions for the negotiations of 1854, Nicholas I considered it possible, under certain conditions, to agree to the insistence of Japan and recognize that “of the Kuril Islands, the southernmost, belonging to Russia, is the island of Urup”... so that “from our side the southern tip of this island would be (as it essentially is now) border with Japan."

The Japanese side, and such “Russian” diplomats as G. Kunadze and others. interpret these words as evidence that the disputed islands did not belong to Russia even before 1855, and that the Russian government itself knew this and allegedly did not consider the Kuril Islands to be south of Urup Russian territory. However, these words only mean that the Russian government proceeded from the general recognition that the islands north of Urup belonged to Russia, and was aware that Japan disputed the ownership of the islands south of Urup.

At that time, the border between Russia and Japan had not yet been formally enshrined in an international bilateral treaty, which was what had to be done. The very construction of the phrase “as now it in fact is" just means that, in the opinion of the Sovereign, there was a discrepancy between the proper border due to the ownership of the islands of Russia, and the line that "in fact", that is, in real circumstances it had to be observed in order to avoid sharp clashes with Japan, which claims the territory. Russia lacked a population sufficient and capable of self-defense, economic infrastructure and armed posts on Far East, that is, there were no military-political opportunities to actually exercise their sovereignty over these islands in the face of constant encroachments by the Japanese. The difficult international situation on the eve of the Crimean War forced us to behave in such a way as not to intensify the severity of relations, that is, to “essentially” retreat from our historical rights.

The mentioned Russian-Japanese treaties are like any territorial demarcations are a reflection of the balance of forces and the international situation. The Treaty of Simoda was concluded at the height of the Crimean War, when English and French squadrons ruled the Sea of ​​Okhotsk. Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky was besieged, and although the attack of the English landing force was repulsed, the port was even evacuated to Nikolaevsk-on-Amur. At any moment, the British could land on the Kuril Islands, which were not formally delimited in an international treaty. It was safer for Russia to make a delimitation in which part of the islands would be under the jurisdiction of Japan, which was weak in naval terms, but would not be subject to occupation by the strongest naval power, Great Britain. In addition, Japan’s agreement to trade food with Russia, which could not maintain its military posts on Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands due to chronic food shortages, was considered a great success. Japan, which pursued a policy of complete isolation, for a long time categorically refused to sell even salt and flour.

Even then, the United States played an openly anti-Russian role and began a massive infiltration into the Far East-Pacific region. The United States considered Russia one of the main obstacles to its expansion, and Japan as a tool against it. American missions constantly convinced Japan not to agree to recognition of southern Sakhalin as Russian and suggested that Russia was seeking to seize Hokkaido. Russian diplomats had to disavow these insinuations, and the Americans even had to make official apologies. American printing in the 70s. XIX century openly expressed the hope that as a result of cooperation between the United States and Japan, a “reduction in Russia’s possessions in the eastern part of Asia” would be achieved.

The same situation persisted during the conclusion of the St. Petersburg Treaty of 1875 on the exchange of territories. It was more important to secure in an international legal manner the ownership of all of Sakhalin to Russia and to protect it from the shameless military expansion of Western European powers. But even after the conclusion of these treaties, Japan almost never observed them, violating territorial waters and landing on other territories belonging to Russia, and later unleashed the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905. And this war completely crossed out all previous decisions, because international law states: a state of war between states terminates the validity of any and all treaties between them. Today's Japan should be reminded of this, as well as the fact that this was precisely what was indicated by the Japanese side to Count S.Yu. Witte, who tried at the Portsmouth negotiations in 1905. save southern Sakhalin, referring to the 1875 agreement. According to the Treaty of Portsmouth, Russia ceded all the Kuril Islands and southern Sakhalin to victorious Japan, which Russian diplomacy always viewed as a great defeat.

American Ambassador to Russia as an informant for the Japanese in 1905

A real detective story is the diplomatic game of the United States during the Portsmouth negotiations following the results of the Russo-Japanese War lost by Russia. The United States, of course, “took to heart the cause of universal peace,” which could lead to the much-desired “reduction of Russia’s possessions in the southern part of Asia.” American President Theodore Roosevelt believed that American "future history will be determined more by our position in the Pacific with respect to China than by our position in Atlantic Ocean in relation to Europe." The United States did not consider Japan itself a serious rival, but tried in every possible way to prevent the strengthening of Russian positions. Therefore, from the very beginning of the Russo-Japanese War, Theodore Roosevelt's sympathies were on the side of Japan.

By the time of the Portsmouth negotiations, Roosevelt had agreed with the Japanese government on the delimitation of spheres of influence. According to a secret agreement dated July 31, 1905, through an exchange of telegrams between T. Roosevelt and Katsura, the Japanese Prime Minister, Japan renounced its “intentions” regarding the Philippines, leaving them to the will of the United States, and the United States agreed to Japan’s right to establish through military occupation control over Korea. (Against this background, it is inappropriate for Washington to be indignant at the Molotov-Ribbentropp Pact, which only allowed the USSR to restore the territory of historical Russia, lost due to the revolution, civil war and intervention). Having such an “American-Japanese alliance” behind him, T. Roosevelt, who took on the role of an “honest broker,” could not be an impartial mediator. The real role of the United States is clarified by the very interesting memoirs of the largest Japanese diplomat of the early twentieth century. Kikujiro Ishii, a direct participant in the events, published in a brilliant translation by O.A. Troyanovsky and with excellent analysis by A.A. Troyanovsky Sr. Ishii later became the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Japan and the author of the famous agreement on special rights in China, the Lansing-Ishii Agreement of 1917.

At the Portsmouth Conference, the Japanese delegation demanded not only all of the Kuril Islands, but also all of Sakhalin, and monetary indemnity. Russia represented by Count S.Yu. Witte objected, showing, as Ishii put it, “hysterical stubbornness,” and refused to pay any indemnity at all. It is clear from the memoirs that Japan was so exhausted by the war and wanted peace as quickly as possible that by the end of the negotiations it was ready to agree to the ownership of all of Sakhalin by Russia without any monetary compensation. This was unknown neither to St. Petersburg nor to the Russian delegation, but the decision to concede was made by the Japanese government. Relevant instructions were sent to Portsmouth, ordering the Japanese delegation, in case of further persistence of the Russian delegation, to agree to retain all of Sakhalin for Russia.

At the moment when the Japanese government decided to retreat from its initial demands regarding Sakhalin, Russia was completely unaware of these intentions, Washington was immediately informed by someone about this prospect that did not suit it, and the United States undertook to “help.” How much the United States would like to “reduce Russia’s possessions” is clear from T. Roosevelt’s telegram to Nicholas II. The American “peacekeeper” frightened Japan with insurmountable claims and its determination to resume hostilities, threatening that “continuation of the war could lead to the loss of all Russian territory east of the lake Baikal", that is, to stop the existence of Russia as a Pacific power. These days in St. Petersburg, the American Ambassador to Russia Mayer asked for an audience and began to persuade Nicholas II to make concessions, promising the mediation of President T. Roosevelt in the matter of “persuading” Japan to renounce the indemnity. Nicholas II generally “persisted,” but then “in passing, as if to himself, he noted that it would be possible to consider the possibility of transferring the southern part of Sakhalin to Japan...” Information about Russia’s potential readiness to cede southern Sakhalin was immediately transmitted to President T. Roosevelt, and in less than a day it became known to the Japanese side. In his memoirs, Ishii strongly denies the assumption (which naturally arises in the reader) that the American president could convey this information to Tokyo, however, the facts indicate the opposite.

A fortunate circumstance for Japan was the 14-hour time difference between Tokyo and Portsmouth. Ishii managed to meet with the Prime Minister, who at first doubted the reliability of the information. The Minister of War warned Ishii that he would have to commit hara-kiri if the information turned out to be false. But Ishii was confident in the reliability of the communication channel. It can be assumed that this same channel had already proven itself by informing Roosevelt of the Japanese decision to accept the Russian conditions. Of course, Ishii describes the acquisition of this information as pure "accident" during a conversation with "a friend" "at one of the foreign missions in Tokyo" in which he "learned about what happened during the royal audience." Ishii insisted that the old instructions be immediately withdrawn and new instructions sent. The Japanese delegation postponed the next meeting, then, following new instructions, made the following statement: “The Imperial Government has decided, as a sign of its love of peace, to renounce its demands for all of Sakhalin and is making the last concession, being satisfied with the southern half of the island.” From everything it is clear that the diplomacy of Witte, who received the nickname “Count of Polus-Sakhalinsky,” was not successful. With some firmness, Russia would not have lost the southern part of Sakhalin.

What was decided in Yalta, Potsdam and San Francisco?

The only valid and legally binding international legal documents that should form the basis of the current approach to the problem of the Kuril chain are the decisions of the powers at Yalta, Potsdam and the San Francisco Peace Treaty with Japan, signed in 1951 by 51 states led by the United States. In accordance with the decisions of the Yalta Conference, all the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin Island were returned “forever” to the Soviet Union. This was also confirmed by the Potsdam Declaration of the USA, Great Britain and China, which was later joined by the USSR.

The text, compiled even without the USSR, stated that “after complete and unconditional surrender, the sovereignty of Japan will be limited to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku and even less large islands, which we will indicate"The last words illustrate the legal consequences of the principle of complete and unconditional surrender - Japan's loss of international legal personality and the right to discuss peace terms. Based on these documents, the US military administration in Japan sent Directive N677 on January 29, 1946. indicating that all Kuril Islands, including Sikotan and Habomai, are excluded from Japanese jurisdiction.

The USSR did not sign the San Francisco Peace Treaty with Japan. International relations in Asia after the war were extremely difficult due to the completely new role communist China, relations with which in Asia were extremely important for the USSR. The West, on the contrary, recognized the Taiwanese Kuomintang government. As a result, in this treaty the United States managed to impose many provisions that were contrary to the interests of the Soviet Union. This agreement does not indicate that the territories in question are transferred to the USSR. But this does not change the immutable fact that in Article 2 of this treaty Japan “renounces all rights, title and claims to the Kuril Islands and that part of Sakhalin Island and the adjacent islands, sovereignty over which Japan acquired under the Treaty of Portsmouth of the 5th September 1905."

This Treaty and this clause are signed by the United States. Since it seems impossible to circumvent the provisions of the San Francisco Treaty, and their direct undermining would undermine territorial stability in Asia - the status of Outer Mongolia, the independence of Korea, and more, Japan and the United States invented a new argument in the mid-50s, which is intensively imposed on the world community . Now the islands of Sikotan and Habomai allegedly belong to the Hokkaido island system, and the concept of the Kuril Islands allegedly does not cover the “special geographical unit” - the “Southern Kurils” (with a capital “Y”) - Kunashir and Iturup. This is, of course, a geographical “innovation”; even the Encyclopedia Britannica clearly points to Kunashir and Iturup as “the largest of the Kuril Islands”. Any geographical atlas considers the Kuril Islands as a single geographical concept

, since the Kuril ridge has all the signs of such a classification. However, the United States and Japan are completely clear that in the Treaty of San Francisco Japan abandoned everyone Kuril Islands, no doubt. Thus, the book by the American author D. Reese “Seizure of the Kuril Islands by the Soviets” is kept in a special depository in Japanese libraries - it contains an excerpt from the US Navy reference book, published in 1943. in case of military operations in the area. The directory lists all the "Kuril Islands" with their description from the point of view of military navigation. Among them are the very islands that Japan now declares not to belong to. The book cites a recording of a conversation between A. Dulles and Yoshida, the then Minister of Foreign Affairs of Japan, who asked whether it was possible to present the matter in such a way that the Yalta-Potsdam decision did not apply to the southern islands of the Kuril chain. Dulles responded that such a dramatic change to previous agreements would require years of debate, which would delay Japan's attainment of full sovereignty indefinitely. So Japan was aware of which islands it was losing.

A high-ranking Japanese official, Nishimura, director of the Peace Treaty Department of the Japanese Foreign Ministry, presenting the terms of the San Francisco Treaty in the Japanese Parliament, explained that “the concept of the Kuril Islands, appearing in the treaty, includes all the islands, both northern and southern.” In response to the reproaches of the nationalists, Nishimura replied in parliament that “the loss of sovereignty entails for Japan the loss of the right to speak out about the ultimate ownership of the territory.”

We must also be calm about the Soviet-Japanese Declaration of October 19, 1956, which ended the state of war and also stated the USSR’s agreement to transfer the islands of Habomai and Shikotan to Japan, but after concluding a peace treaty. A declaration is different from a contract and is a protocol of intent. During this time, Japan concluded a military cooperation agreement with the United States, which secured the indefinite presence of American armed forces on its territory. Troops from a third party - the United States - would not fail to appear on the islands. Despite all the short-sightedness of Khrushchev’s statement, it is not about a “return”, but about "transfer", that is, readiness to dispose of one’s territory as an act of goodwill, which does not create a precedent for revising the results of the war. Statements that a peace treaty is supposedly necessary for normal relations are also unfounded. There are cases in international law where post-war settlements were achieved without it. There was no peace treaty with Germany, the state of war with which was ended unilaterally by the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR and legal acts of the Allied powers.

The principle of the inviolability of the results of the Second World War should be the basis of a new stage of Russian-Japanese relations, and the term “return” should be forgotten forever. But maybe it’s worth letting Japan create a museum of military glory on Kunashir, from which Japanese pilots fantastically bombed Pearl Harbor. Let the Japanese often remember what the Americans did to them in response, and about the US base in Okinawa, but they feel the Russians’ tribute to their former enemy.

Briefly, the history of “belonging” to the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin Island is as follows.

1.During the period 1639-1649. Russian Cossack detachments led by Moskovitinov, Kolobov, Popov explored and began to develop Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands. At the same time, Russian pioneers repeatedly sailed to the island of Hokkaido, where they were peacefully greeted by the local Ainu aborigines. The Japanese appeared on this island a century later, after which they exterminated and partially assimilated the Ainu.

2.B 1701 Cossack sergeant Vladimir Atlasov reported to Peter I about the “subordination” of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands, leading to the “wonderful kingdom of Nipon”, to the Russian crown.

3.B 1786. by order of Catherine II, a register of Russian possessions in the Pacific Ocean was made and the register was made available to everyone European countries as a declaration of Russia's rights to these possessions, including Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands.

4.B 1792. By decree of Catherine II, the entire chain of the Kuril Islands (both Northern and Southern), as well as the island of Sakhalin officially included in the Russian Empire.

5. As a result of Russia’s defeat in the Crimean War 1854—1855 gg. under pressure England and France Russia forced was concluded with Japan on February 7, 1855. Treaty of Shimoda, according to which four southern islands of the Kuril chain were transferred to Japan: Habomai, Shikotan, Kunashir and Iturup. Sakhalin remained undivided between Russia and Japan. At the same time, however, the right of Russian ships to enter Japanese ports was recognized, and “permanent peace and sincere friendship between Japan and Russia” were proclaimed.

6.May 7, 1875 according to the Treaty of St. Petersburg, the tsarist government as a very strange act of “goodwill” makes incomprehensible further territorial concessions to Japan and transfers to it another 18 small islands of the archipelago. In return, Japan finally recognized Russia's right to all of Sakhalin. It is for this agreement the Japanese refer most of all today, slyly keeping silent, that the first article of this treaty reads: “... and henceforth eternal peace and friendship will be established between Russia and Japan” ( the Japanese themselves violated this treaty several times in the 20th century). Many Russian statesmen of those years sharply condemned this “exchange” agreement as short-sighted and harmful to the future of Russia, comparing it with the same short-sightedness as the sale of Alaska to the United States of America in 1867 for next to nothing ($7 billion 200 million). ), saying that “now we are biting our own elbows.”

7.After the Russo-Japanese War 1904—1905 gg. followed another stage in the humiliation of Russia. By Portsmouth peace treaty concluded on September 5, 1905, Japan received southern part Sakhalin, all the Kuril Islands, and also took away from Russia the lease right to the naval bases of Port Arthur and Dalniy. When did Russian diplomats remind the Japanese that all these provisions contradict the treaty of 1875 g., - those responded arrogantly and impudently : « War crosses out all agreements. You have been defeated and let's proceed from the current situation " Reader, Let us remember this boastful declaration of the invader!

8.Next comes the time to punish the aggressor for his eternal greed and territorial expansion. Signed by Stalin and Roosevelt at the Yalta Conference February 10, 1945 G. " Agreement on the Far East" provided: "... 2-3 months after the surrender of Germany, the Soviet Union will enter the war against Japan subject to the return to the Soviet Union of the southern part of Sakhalin, all the Kuril Islands, as well as the restoration of the lease of Port Arthur and Dalny(these built and equipped by the hands of Russian workers, soldiers and sailors back in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. very comfortable in their own way geographical location naval bases were donated free of charge to “brotherly” China. But these bases were so needed by our fleet in the 60-80s of the raging Cold War and the intense combat service of the fleet in remote areas of the Pacific and Indian Oceans. We had to equip the Cam Ranh forward base in Vietnam from scratch for the fleet).

9.B July 1945 in accordance with Potsdam Declaration heads of victorious countries the following verdict was adopted regarding the future of Japan: “The sovereignty of Japan will be limited to four islands: Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku, Honshu and those that WE SPECIFY.” August 14, 1945 The Japanese government has widely confirmed its acceptance of the terms of the Potsdam Declaration, and September 2 Japan unconditionally surrendered. Article 6 of the Instrument of Surrender states: “...the Japanese government and its successors will honestly implement the terms of the Potsdam Declaration , give such orders and take such actions as the Commander-in-Chief of the Allied Powers requires in order to implement this declaration...” January 29, 1946 The Commander-in-Chief, General MacArthur, in his Directive No. 677 DEMANDED: “The Kuril Islands, including Habomai and Shikotan, are excluded from the jurisdiction of Japan.” AND only after that legal action was issued by the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR on February 2, 1946, which read: “ All lands, subsoil and waters of Sakhalin and the Kul Islands are the property of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics " Thus, the Kuril Islands (both Northern and Southern), as well as about. Sakhalin, legally And in accordance with international law were returned to Russia . At this point it would be possible to put an end to the “problem” of the Southern Kuril Islands and stop all further disputes. But the story with the Kuril Islands continues.

10.After the end of the Second World War US occupied Japan and turned it into their military base in the Far East. In September 1951 The USA, Great Britain and a number of other states (49 in total) signed Treaty of San Francisco with Japan, prepared in violation of the Potsdam Agreements without the participation of the Soviet Union . Therefore, our government did not join the agreement. However, in Art. 2, Chapter II of this treaty is stated in black and white: “ Japan renounces all rights and claims... to the Kuril Islands and that part of Sakhalin and the adjacent islands , over which Japan acquired sovereignty by the Treaty of Portsmouth of September 5, 1905.” However, even after this, the story with the Kuril Islands does not end.

11.19 October 1956 The government of the Soviet Union, following the principles of friendship with neighboring states, signed with the Japanese government joint declaration, according to which the state of war between the USSR and Japan ended and peace, good neighborliness and friendly relations were restored between them. When signing the Declaration as a gesture of goodwill and nothing more it was promised to transfer to Japan the two southernmost islands of Shikotan and Habomai, but only after the conclusion of a peace treaty between the countries.

12.However The United States imposed a number of military agreements on Japan after 1956, replaced in 1960 by a single “Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security”, according to which US troops remained on its territory, and thus the Japanese islands turned into a springboard for aggression against the Soviet Union. Due to this situation, the Soviet government told Japan that it was impossible to transfer the promised two islands to it.. And the same statement emphasized that, according to the declaration of October 19, 1956, “peace, good neighborliness and friendly relations” were established between the countries. Therefore, an additional peace treaty may not be required.
Thus, the problem of the South Kuril Islands does not exist . It was decided a long time ago. AND de jure and de facto the islands belong to Russia . In this regard, it might be appropriate remind the Japanese of their arrogant statement in 1905 g., and also indicate that Japan was defeated in World War II and therefore has no rights to any territories, even to her ancestral lands, except those that were given to her by the victors.
AND to our Foreign Ministry just as harshly, or in a softer diplomatic form you should have stated this to the Japanese and put an end to it, PERMANENTLY stopping all negotiations and even conversations on this non-existent problem that degrades the dignity and authority of Russia.
And again the “territorial issue”

However, starting from 1991 city, meetings of the President are held repeatedly Yeltsin and members of the Russian government, diplomats with Japanese government circles, during which The Japanese side every time persistently raises the issue of “northern Japanese territories.”
Thus, in the Tokyo Declaration 1993 g., signed by the President of Russia and the Prime Minister of Japan, was again “the presence of a territorial issue” was recognized, and both sides promised to “make efforts” to resolve it. The question arises: could our diplomats really not know that such declarations should not be signed, because recognition of the existence of a “territorial issue” is contrary to the national interests of Russia (Article 275 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation “ Treason»)??

As for the peace treaty with Japan, it is de facto and de jure in accordance with the Soviet-Japanese Declaration of October 19, 1956. not really needed. The Japanese do not want to conclude an additional official peace treaty, and there is no need. He more needed in Japan, as the side that was defeated in the Second World War, rather than Russia.

A Russian citizens should know that the “problem” of the Southern Kuril Islands is just a fake , her exaggeration, periodic media hype around her and the litigiousness of the Japanese - there is a consequence of Japan's illegal claims in violation of its obligations to strictly comply with its recognized and signed international obligations. And Japan’s constant desire to reconsider the ownership of many territories in the Asia-Pacific region permeates Japanese politics throughout the twentieth century.

Why The Japanese, one might say, have their teeth in the Southern Kuril Islands and are trying to illegally take possession of them again? But because the economic and military-strategic importance of this region is extremely great for Japan, and even more so for Russia. This region of colossal seafood wealth(fish, living creatures, sea animals, vegetation, etc.), deposits of useful, including rare earth minerals, energy sources, mineral raw materials.

For example, January 29 this year. in the Vesti (RTR) program, short information slipped through: it was discovered on the island of Iturup large deposit of the rare earth metal Rhenium(the 75th element in the periodic table, and the only one in the world ).
Scientists allegedly calculated that to develop this deposit it would be enough to invest only 35 thousand dollars, but the profit from the extraction of this metal will allow us to bring all of Russia out of the crisis in 3-4 years . Apparently the Japanese know about this and that is why they are so persistently attacking the Russian government demanding that they give them the islands.

I must say that During the 50 years of ownership of the islands, the Japanese did not build or create anything major on them, except for light temporary buildings. Our border guards had to rebuild barracks and other buildings at outposts. The entire economic “development” of the islands, which the Japanese are shouting about to the whole world today, consisted in the predatory robbery of the islands' wealth . During the Japanese "development" from the islands seal rookeries and sea otter habitats have disappeared . Part of the livestock of these animals our Kuril residents have already restored .

Today economic situation This entire island zone, like all of Russia, is in a difficult situation. Of course, significant measures are needed to support this region and care for Kuril residents. According to calculations by a group of State Duma deputies, it is possible to produce on the islands, as reported in the program “Parliamentary Hour” (RTR) on January 31 of this year, only fish products up to 2000 tons per year, with a net profit of about 3 billion dollars.
Militarily, the ridge of the Northern and Southern Kuriles with Sakhalin constitutes a complete closed infrastructure for the strategic defense of the Far East and Pacific Fleet. They protect the Sea of ​​Okhotsk and turn it into an inland one. This is the area deployment and combat positions of our strategic submarines.

Without the Southern Kuril Islands we will have a hole in this defense. Control over the Kuril Islands ensures free access of the fleet to the ocean - after all, until 1945, our Pacific Fleet, starting in 1905, was practically locked in its bases in Primorye. Detection equipment on the islands provides long-range detection of air and surface enemies and the organization of anti-submarine defense of the approaches to the passages between the islands.

In conclusion, it is worth noting this feature in the relationship between the Russia-Japan-US triangle. It is the United States that confirms the “legality” of the islands’ ownership of Japan , against all odds international treaties signed by them .
If so, then our Ministry of Foreign Affairs has every right, in response to the claims of the Japanese, to invite them to demand the return of Japan to its “ southern territories» - Caroline, Marshall and Mariana Islands.
These archipelagos former colonies of Germany, captured by Japan in 1914. Japanese rule over these islands was sanctioned by the 1919 Treaty of Versailles. After the defeat of Japan, all these archipelagos came under US control. So Why shouldn't Japan demand that the United States return the islands to it? Or lack the spirit?
As you can see, there is obvious double standard foreign policy Japan.

And one more fact that clarifies the overall picture of the return of our Far Eastern territories in September 1945 and the military significance of this region. The Kuril operation of the 2nd Far Eastern Front and the Pacific Fleet (August 18 - September 1, 1945) provided for the liberation of all the Kuril Islands and the capture of Hokkaido.

The annexation of this island to Russia would have important operational and strategic significance, since it would ensure the complete enclosure of the “fence” of the Sea of ​​Okhotsk by our island territories: the Kuril Islands - Hokkaido - Sakhalin. But Stalin canceled this part of the operation, saying that with the liberation of the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin, we had resolved all our territorial issues in the Far East. A we don't need someone else's land . In addition, the capture of Hokkaido will cost us a lot of blood, unnecessary losses of sailors and paratroopers in the most last days war.

Stalin here showed himself to be a real statesman, caring for the country and its soldiers, and not an invader who coveted foreign territories that were very accessible in that situation for seizure.

ALL PHOTOS

The territorial dispute between Russia and Japan is based on the following islands: Greater Kuril Ridge Kunashir - Kunashiri (Japanese name) Piko (Lovtsova) - Banton Iturup - Etorofu Swan Stone-Lion - Moekesi Lesser Kuril Ridge Shikotan (Spanberga)

In Japan, the disputed islands are called the “northern territories”, and in Russia - the “Southern Kuriles”. They are part of the large Kuril Islands archipelago (Japanese name Chishima-retto) and are a chain of volcanic islands between the Kamchatka Peninsula and the island of Hokkaido (Japan).

The islands separate the Sea of ​​Okhotsk from the Pacific Ocean. Length about 1200 km. The area is about 15.6 thousand square meters. km. They consist of two parallel ridges of islands - the Big Kuril and the Lesser Kuril.

Total area of ​​all disputed islands 5 thousand sq. km.

Most south island The Kuril ridge is perfectly visible from the northern tip of Japanese Hokkaido, even in rainy weather. Geographers are still arguing about the origin of the Kuril Islands. Russian experts consider them part of the Kamchatka shelf. The Japanese are confident that they are located on the shelf of the island of Hokkaido. Full list of the disputed islands is given at the end of the article.

About 4 thousand people live on Kunashir, 3 thousand people on Shikotan, 8 thousand people on Iturup. Habomai There is no civilian population - only Russian border guards. Their total number on the islands is about 5 thousand.

Kunashir- the southernmost island of the Kuril ridge. From here you can see Japanese island Hokkaido. The area of ​​Kunashir is about 1550 square meters. km. Height up to 1819 m. The island has active volcanoes(Tyatya, etc.) and hot springs, there is a geothermal power plant (GeoTES) with a capacity of 500 kW. The island is home to the village of Yuzhno-Kurilsk (about 5,500 people) and the Kurilsky Nature Reserve. Indigenous people- Ainu. In the Ainu language, Kunashir means “black island”.

Iturup- the largest island in area (6725 sq. km). Volcanic massif (height up to 1634 m): Kudryavy volcano and others. Bamboo thickets, spruce-fir forests, dwarf elfin trees. The city of Kurilsk is located on Iturup (about 2,700 people according to 1989 data). In the Ainu language, Iturup means “best place.”

Shikotan- most big Island in the Lesser Kuril Ridge (182 sq. km). Settlements- Malokurilskoye and Krabozavodskoye. Fishing and the extraction of marine animals are developed.

Some experts argue that control over the islands, in principle, makes it possible to block sea routes from the Far East to the US Pacific coast and seriously complicate the activities of any fleet in the region.

Economic geography: no money

The economic importance of the Kuril Islands is noticeably inferior to the strategic one. The budget of the USSR, and then Russia, never had money for the development of these islands. The deposits of valuable and rare earth metals located on Iturup have not yet been even explored. The cost of mining these ores is so high that their development is economically meaningless. Salmon is almost the entire economic wealth of this region.

The main occupation of the residents of the Southern Kuril Islands is fishing. Huge herds of salmon pass past these islands from the Pacific Ocean to the Sea of ​​Okhotsk. In autumn, during the spawning period, fish enter the local rivers. Off the coast of the Kuril Islands, crabs and seaweed are harvested. According to some estimates, the extraction of marine fauna in this area could bring Russia about 4 billion dollars a year, but in reality it brings in hardly a billion.

Fish processing plays a major role in the islands' economy. The leading enterprise, the Ostrovnoy Fish Processing Plant CJSC, is located in Shikotan (this is the largest enterprise in the industry in the Far East). Krabozavodsky CJSC is also located here. The South Kuril Plant LLC operates in Kunashir, and the Kuril Fish Factory operates in Iturup.

At the same time, the illegal export of seafood to Japan is in full swing: the Russians are poaching, and the Japanese are supplying illegal fishermen with equipment. According to the State Fisheries Committee, the total state losses from this business range from $700 million to $1 billion per year.

You can get to Kunashir and Iturup by plane from Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk ( regular flights Four times a week). With Shikotan air traffic No. The only way to get to the mainland is with a passing ship.

The territorial dispute between Russia and Japan is based on the following islands:

Great Kuril Ridge Kunashir - Kunashiri (Japanese name)
Pico (Lovtsova) - Banton
Iturup - Etorofu
Swan
Lion Stone - Moekeshi
Small Kuril ridge Shikotan (Spanberga) - Sikotan
group of islands Flat - Habomai
o. Tanfilyeva - Suisho
Yuri - Yuri
o. Anuchina - Akiyuri
Signal - Kaigara
Green - Shibotsu
o. Polonsky - Taraku

 

It might be useful to read: