Japan protests to Russia over man detained on disputed island

Is it illegal for the man to visit? If not, let him go. If so, hold him. The Russians, unfortunately, now have an extra chip -- not that they needed it -- in bargaining next week. The only thing there's no disputing is that the islands are Russian.

This report neglects to mention the man was found to be carrying four million yen in cash in a sealed box that was undeclared at customs. He claimed a third party asked him to carry a package to Japan, and he claims no to know anything regarding the contents of the package. It's common knowledge that one should not carry packages for others a cross borders.

The only thing there's no disputing is that the islands are Russian.

I'm not sure if you knew this but actually there is a dispute as to that exact point.

The only thing there's no disputing is that the islands are Russian.

You definitely need to do your homework, dear smithagainstjapan.

Possible Japanese agent.

Kevin, thanks. this certainly puts it into perspecrive. A pity that, once again, we cant rely on the news to tell us the real story. Par for the course these days.

Great fishing grounds.

the dude tried to break law , export undeclared goods and got caught, well done russian customs

The islands are Russian , hence their arresting him. They should put him in an immigration detention incommunicado for eons while investigating . As the Japanese do foreigners.

Talking to putin will solve nothing

He broke the law and got punished. Japan does the same to those who land illegally on the Senkaku/ Diaoyu islands. I don't see any issue here.

Concealing and not declaring four million yen in cash would get him detained in many other countries, including Japan.

A sideshow. Please everyone, I direct your attention to the center ring. I don't expect Putin and Abe to agree on anything, necessarily, but this kind of red herring hostage stuff is regularly whipped up by nationalists on both sides to raise interest.

Nothing has changed. And anyone who simply typed those three words on these northern territories threads for the last 70 years would look like a sage. Just as an exercise for people who are really curious about the world, what would the world have to look like for Japan and Russia to agree to let bygones be bygones? How far away are we from that world? What is really the major impediment? Once you look at it practically and objectively, it is hard to be optimistic.

And the humorous thing to me is that Russia actually expects to "get something" in exchange for the islands. It is like a guy with a 65 Buick who keeps telling his wife that someone is going to pay top dollar for it somewhere. So he leaves it rusting on blocks on the front lawn, waiting for the day that somebody comes along with enough cash. He puts a few thousand into it every five years or so just to keep it up. He has a party with an Archies cover band every few years to drum up interest in his 65 Buick. Guess what? The world is moving on. Russia used to be a strong steelworker with a great Buick, but now, it is just a pot-bellied old man waiting for someone to take the rust heap off his hands. Maybe if Russia takes a hostage, that will get Japan interested enough to buy the Buick.

Japan looks at it and wonders, "Do they even make tires for a 65 Buick anymore? Hmm. A Buick with fishing rights and gas development rights is still a rusty old Buick. Meh. Why bother?"

Welcome back to Asia, Vladimir Putin. Your place, however, is to be secondary to Xi Jin-ping The Great. According to the Chinese records, Russia has illegally occupied 1.5 million square kilometers of the Great Red Eastern Empire. Remember Mao Zedong's "naked asses" show?

Doubt this is espionage related, more likely Russian Mafia/Yakuza activity. Not sure why J-gov is protesting unless they have knowledge that it's not criminal activity, The four islands are considered "Japanese territory under Russian administration", and sometimes "Russian Occupation" by the United States, United Kingdom and the European Parliament. Just as the USSR grabbed eastern European territory they grabbed the "Southern Kuriles" in the last days of WWII.

5SpeedRacer

And the humorous thing to me is that Russia actually expects to "get something" in exchange for the islands

Your mistake and Japan's in that Japan expects to give something in exchange for all the islands.

Japan has nothing to offer Russia, which she can't get from someone else.

Russia at best might offer the 2 small islets because of the 1956 Hatoyama agreement and piece of mind, but I think Russia is getting tired of Japan's 'all or nothing' stance concerning the dispute. I know that I am.

'Administration' is de facto ownership. Unless challenged.

That's why China needs to show up near Senkaku/Diaoyu regularly to remind Japan and the world that the islands are disputed.

Frankly, it's time Japan start doing the same with disputed islands 'administered' by Russia and South Korea.

Russia, Japan, Korea, China should all just pick an island & make a deal. No one country is going to get all the islands it wants, and this blustering just makes them all look ridiculous. If I had 1 yen for each time I'd heard these countries assert they own "blah blah island" when in fact they have no control or possession whatsoever I'd have at least 110 yen by now...

And isn't Japan the one who thinks we should all get over WWII already? Don't see them doing that about the Kurils.

Strangerland: "I'm not sure if you knew this but actually there is a dispute as to that exact point."

Oh, I know of course that technically there is a dispute. But ask Russia if there is and they'd likely say there is not. Same with Senkaku -- ask Japan if there is a dispute, and they'll say not at all. Same with the Koreans and Dokdo. The difference is that with Russia and South Korea, they administer AND have people on the islands year-round (especially Russia), whereas Japan just circles the rocks they claim once in a while while 'administering' them.

Hence my comment -- can't be a dispute some times when it suits you and not other times when the argument is in your favour. Russia has the upper hand in this.

"Your mistake and Japan's in that Japan expects to give something in exchange for all the islands"

A riposte? I don't think so. In fact, this is exactly the problem. I have said repeatedly that Japan does not "expect" to give anything, so you are agreeing with me, I guess. Anyway, the negotiators have nothing to negotiate, and I was hoping to get people to get off their biases and look hard... because that it the real problem. There is no common ground that exists in the negotiation universe. The notions of perceived value are worlds apart.

Russia assigns some great value to the islands based on some kind of pride issue. Like a 65 Buick. In return for the Buick, it will want some high price and concessions, technology, energy deals. The price is absurd. And it is just a rusty Buick after all. A beleaguered outpost as far away from Moscow as one can get. But every Russian apologist posting here is just GEE WHIZ full of glowing appraisals of how much Japan needs the islands. Ha. If the islands are so great, why aren't the locals living like the Sultan of Brunei today?

Japan has no incentive whatsoever to see the 65 Buick as worth anything. Japan is not going to give anything. If anything, it is losing interest.

Oh it would be nice if some deal were worked out, but for whom? Nobody really. So we default. Russia is stuck paying for the islands' inhabitants, who have a lifestyle that is probably worse than 1950s Idaho: a dependent backwater producing dependent dependents. Japan just buys its coal and gas and fish from whomever, whenever. Life goes on. The Buick gets rustier.

Just for fun, consider... Toshiki Kaifu's overlord, Shin Kanemaru, was considering making a deal with the Russians in the early 1990s, and the Russians needed the cash. What was the dollar figure being bandied about for Japan's purchase of Habomai and Shikotan? Anybody? Anybody? Beuhler?

I will give you a hint. Not only are they not WORTH that much today, but Japan will not PAY that much today. Russia missed an opportunity then to unload the Buick for SOMETHING, earn some goodwill, and avoid 30 years of upkeep for the yokels. They blew it. And they keep blowing it. It has gotten so bad that Russia is looking like North Korea these days... a kidnapping here... a detainment there... ominous speeches by minor party functionaries... a party for Sudanese and Italians to raise interest in investments ... in Etorofu? Hardly a Dale Carnegie approach.

And at long last, I am sorry to hear that Gary Raynor is losing his patience with the issue. Settle in, Gary. If you live in Japan, you know that 70 years is the blink of an eye. I know how the issue is going to be resolved, and a lot will have to happen before we get there.

MlodinowAug. 22, 2016 - 09:40PM JST And isn't Japan the one who thinks we should all get over WWII already? Don't see them doing that about the Kurils.

No you are wrong. The entire world thinks we should get over WWII, except for China which uses it as a distraction while it gobbles up territory before everyone's eyes. A lot of territory was taken away from Japan at the end of WWII. The entire world backs Japan on the Southern Kuriles because the USSR was suppose to take the Kuriles down to where Japan had gotten them in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904/05. The 4 islands in question were always Japanese territory by Treaty with Russia in 1855. That is why the other Allied victors did not, and still don't agree with Russian occupation.

The difference is that with Russia and South Korea, they administer AND have people on the islands year-round (especially Russia), whereas Japan just circles the rocks they claim once in a while while 'administering' them. Hence my comment -- can't be a dispute

So Tell me. smithalwaysagainstjapan.

What else could Japan do to claim those islands all those years.

Fight with Bamboo Spear? Suicide Bomber?

The entire world backs Japan on the Southern Kuriles because the USSR was suppose to take the Kuriles down to where Japan had gotten them in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904/05.

Actually, the Japanese claim is popular but lacks legitimacy and it is mostly Russophobia that propels it in the Western world. In essence, the Soviet Union was promised the "Kuriles".

Next, Japan renounced its rights to "Chishima Retto" in San Franscisco. The patheticness is indicated when a distinction was attempted between Chishima and ... Minami Chishima. In short, the Japanese resorted to redefining words.

Oh please. I barf.

Barf all you want. But it's not just "the Japanese claim". No nation supports Russia's occupation of the four islands.

The USSR was promised the "Kuriles" in accordance with the Cairo Declaration. The text of the Cairo Declaration reads: "The Three Great Allies are fighting this war to restrain and punish the aggression of Japan. They covet no gain for themselves and have no thought of territorial expansion. It is their purpose that Japan shall be stripped of all the islands in the Pacific which she has seized or occupied since the beginning of the first World War in 1914, and that all the territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese, such as Manchuria, Formosa, and The Pescadores, shall be restored to the Republic of China. Japan will also be expelled from all other territories which she has taken by violence and greed."

The USSR took the southern islands for their own gain and territorial expansion. The Northern Kuriles were taken by Japan in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905. But prior to that war the 4 islands, or Southern Kuriles became Japanese by way of a negotiated treaty with Russia in 1855, in other words not by violence or greed. The USSR blatantly violated the meaning and intent of the declaration resulting ion the other WWII allied victors disagreeing with the USSR (and now Russia) to this day.

Japan really needs to get out of the land grabbing game be it with Russia or Korea.

The Kurils is as much Russian as the Senkaku is Japanese. Here's your daily dose of inconvenience.

let us not forget the damm russians expelled the Japanese residents of the islands when they annexed them

Tokyo “strongly protested through diplomatic channels” and demanded he be allowed to return home, said Suga, who is the >>government’s chief spokesman. He did not speculate as to why the man had been detained.

Personally I find rather alarming that an Agence France Presse news is either censored/stripped from their original content or incorrectly updated in order to make it appears like that Japanese person has been detained only because he is Japanese and that no reason has been presented. Are we witnessing a new mode of operation in reported news in Japan? Link to the complete/updated AFP news below :

https://www.yahoo.com/news/japan-protests-russia-over-man-detained-disputed-island-061428653.html

No nation supports Russia's occupation of the four islands.

You are likely right on this, but it is still something motivated by Russophobia rather than a correct analysis of the legal balance

The Northern Kuriles were taken by Japan in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905. But prior to that war the 4 islands, or Southern Kuriles became Japanese by way of a negotiated treaty with Russia in 1855

In other words, BOTH are "the Kurile islands".

The decisive moment in all this is when Japan surrendered "all claim" over "the Kurile islands " in San Franscisco. Technically, Japan has already violated that treaty in staking any claim thereafter. That the world seems to close its eyes to this does not change this fact.

The decisive moment in all this is when Japan surrendered "all claim" over "the Kurile islands " in San Franscisco. Technically, Japan has already violated that treaty in staking any claim thereafter.

4　islands have not been part of "Kurile" and Japan did clarify even when the treaty being drafted. Besides, Russia(aka Soviet Union) didnot even sign on it. If it adheres to the treaty, it should respect article25 too.

But as you can see above, they are called "the Southern Kuriles" or "Minami-Chishima". It is a most pathetic dodge to even try to say they "don't count".

Here's the funny thing about the Treaty. The Russians didn't sign it. However, that does not change their legal position for the worse because Japan did not cede its claim to anyone else. It just abandoned its claim. Japan cannot lay claim to it without breaking the treaty. The idea it is "Japanese territory under Russian administration" is completely contradictory to the wording of the treaty. It definitely is not "Japanese territory".