Russia holds military drills on disputed Kuril islands, Interfax says

JJEAug. 2  07:05 am JST

Refer to the 6:05pm post.

The islands were part of the agreement. Kuril Islands are the whole chain.

The Kuriles were the whole chain only in the mind of Stalin. And kept by Russia today as an excuse to continue occupation of these islands.

They Kuriles did not include the 4 islands of the Habomai -Shikotan range in the minds of the other Allied powers, and to this date that US, UK and EU consider them Japanese territory under Russian adnministration. Nothing in the Yalta Agreement or any other declarations support Russia's continued occupation.

Russian troops had practiced moving and camouflaging their vehicles on Matua island. 

Yeah 7 time zones away from the Ukrainian border is probably the safest place for Russia to be hiding its vehicles..

I thought Russia hand a man shortage. Do they have any men left to fight as Ukraine is sending them back in body bags

Japan is just going to take them back after Russia collapses due to it's inept failed invasion of Ukraine.

Thought the same thing, few more months and it's going to be all up for grabs.

Any sort of militarization of the Kurils serves no defensive purpose and is just for threatening Japan.

More of our JT keyboard expert friends analysis. "  Russian troops had practiced moving and camouflaging their vehicles on Matua island." Sounds mighty threatening, lol.

Russia offered to Japan two of the 4 islands if they signed a peace treaty...........Japan is just going to take them back after Russia collapses due to it's inept failed invasion of Ukraine.

How many more months do you predict before Japan takes them back? Will it be longer than those couple of months to drive Russians out of Crimea? Longer than Miley's 3 days prediction?

The Russians won’t be using any tanks in these exercises. Because they can’t spare any.

That's right. They ran out of them in Ukraine 2 years ago and are now reduced to using a few museum pieces as you and your expert friends told us numerous times. Ditto for running out of the missiles. Love those expert predictions. Rofl.

Mr KiplingToday 08:12 am JST

Was it Yeltsin that said if Japan wants the islands back, it needs to win them in war?

He was probably drunk but still speaking the truth.

At some point, Russia will wonder where its dignity went, and Japan can point to this issue.

Russia holds military drills on disputed Kuril islands, Interfax says

Article is wrong from headline.

Interfax did not say that Kuril islands are disputed.ones.

Kuril islands are part of RF/Russian federation/.You will need to update your informations.

Of course there's no dispute on the four islands as they are Japanese and simply have to be given back, although they are currently inhabited and governed by Russia since their annexation. There is an open dispute, but it is instead about the rest of the package, the Southern part of Kurafuto / Sakhalin plus all the other remaining Kuril islands up to Kamchatka. I mean, that is the real situation, such it has been taught in school's geography lessons and such it is depicted on all seriously printed maps and atlases. By the way, even the maps at school during the Iron curtain era showed it exactly as I have described, Japan with Northern territories and former USSR in usual colors, the area of other remaining Kuril islands and Southern Sakhalin in white and marked in red letters as under dispute. I therefore have learned it exactly such and so I do handle that.

Was it Yeltsin that said if Japan wants the islands back, it needs to win them in war?

He was probably drunk but still speaking the truth.

Gene ....

Japan is not a vassal state but an ally. 

When one "ally" is so unequal in the decision making process it becomes a vassal state. In Japan's case a willing one.

Refer to the 6:05pm post.

The islands were part of the agreement. Kuril Islands are the whole chain.

JJEAug. 1  08:52 pm JST

Reads like postwar whitewashing revisionism, which it is.

Yalta was the greenlight. A deal is a deal.

Your position can not be supported by denial.

" there appears no valid basis, either in the Yalta Agreement or in any other international understanding, justifying Soviet occupation of the Habomai-Shikotan area at the end of the war in addition to the Soviet occupation of the Kuril Islands. "

Russia is a world leader in historical revisionism. Their entire history is written in a looseleaf notebook. The USSR had no "right" under the Yalta agreement to take the 4 islands.

JJEToday  04:37 am JST

And the USSR did not sign the Treaty of San Francisco, thus is not bound by it.

I'm glad you agree nothing in there applies to Russia. It does show what Truman was thinking, though, not giving any goodies to Russia, even during the period of alleged alliance.

And the USSR did not sign the Treaty of San Francisco, thus is not bound by it.

JJEToday 04:12 am JST

Also Japan was not present for said discussion.

Asserting the Empire of Japan should have been invited to the Yalta Conference is pretty far out there.

But raises serious questions as to the Potsdam's legitimacy.

Kuril Islands means all of them quite literally. From Shumshu all the way down to Kunashir.

Not according to the Treaty of San Francisco. Russia just likes to claim this in contravention of the history.

Also Japan was not present for said discussion.

Asserting the Empire of Japan should have been invited to the Yalta Conference is pretty far out there.

Kuril Islands means all of them quite literally. From Shumshu all the way down to Kunashir.

JJEAug. 1 06:05 pm JST

The Yalta Conference specifically gave these islands to Russia (which incidentally transpired in Feb. 1945 in a place called Yalta, Crimea in the Russia SSR).

The Soviets wanted the return of South Sakhalin, which had been taken from Russia by Japan in the Russo-Japanese War in 1905, and the cession of Kuril Islands by Japan, both of which were approved by Truman. In return, Stalin pledged that the Soviet Union would enter the Pacific War three months after the defeat of Germany.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yalta_Conference

Yeah, which of the Kuril Islands is an important detail left out. Also Japan was not present for said discussion.

A deal is a deal.

So is the Budapest Memorandum and the Belovezh Accords.

No ex-Soviet state has any legitimate claim.

You're right: Japan has the overriding claim.

TokyoLivingToday 02:26 am JST

And if Japan continues to be the stupid servant of the US, it will not recover at least half of the northern territories.

Japan should not settle for half of what is theirs when the full humiliation can be applied to Russia.

Get a book..

You forgot your Lol.

Russia offered to Japan two of the 4 islands if they signed a peace treaty.

Japan is just going to take them back after Russia collapses due to it's inept failed invasion of Ukraine.

Boy, somebody used the word 'vassal' and now everyone uses it. How about a synonym once in a while? Japan is not a vassal state but an ally. It has a relationship with the US but is a US ally. But if you want to say vassal state, you are, yourself, being a vassal to someone else's vocabulary.

Russia was never returning anything anyways. Not without a puppet relationship with Japan.

Again your geopolitical ignorance..

Russia offered to Japan two of the 4 islands if they signed a peace treaty..

I remind you that Japan is the puppet of the US in far East, not Russia's..

Get a book..

And if Japan continues to be the stupid servant of the US, it will not recover at least half of the northern territories.

Mr KiplingAug. 1 10:33 pm JST

As long as Japan is "under the US umbrella" or a US vassal depending on your point of view, those islands will never be changing hands. This is a cold hard fact regardless of who should or should not own them.

Russia was never returning anything anyways. Not without a puppet relationship with Japan.

nikAug. 1 05:54 pm JST

who to the Russians. comes with a sword, he dies by the sword" it’s time to understand and remember. Ukraine is another clear example. There was no need to bomb the Dombas and there was no need for the Japanese to invade the Far East. Now “gather what they sowed.”

Literally talking about unjustified thefts while talking about dying by the sword. Seems to be a core Russian principle to steal what isn't nailed down.

This is not the time for states to give away their strategic territories. As long as there are American military bases in Okinawa, there can be no talk about the Kuril Islands. There is no point in raising this issue in the near future.

Any sort of militarization of the Kurils serves no defensive purpose and is just for threatening Japan.

As long as Japan is "under the US umbrella" or a US vassal depending on your point of view, those islands will never be changing hands. This is a cold hard fact regardless of who should or should not own them.

The Soviet Union took posession of the four islands in question so any and all ex Soviet nations have as strong a claim as Russia does to those island that should have been handed back to the Japanese owners at the breakup of the USSR.

Yes, and both Russia, which is a country created in 1991, and Ukraine claim to be successor states of the USSR. Russia is ignoring Ukraine's claim, but this could be fun in the future.

This is not the time for states to give away their strategic territories. As long as there are American military bases in Okinawa, there can be no talk about the Kuril Islands. There is no point in raising this issue in the near future.

Wrong again. The islands were incorporated into Sakhalin Oblast, Russia SSR, which is what they remain part of today - now a subject of the Russian Federation.

No ex-Soviet state has any legitimate claim. Complete nonsense.

The Soviet Union took posession of the four islands in question so any and all ex Soviet nations have as strong a claim as Russia does to those island that should have been handed back to the Japanese owners at the breakup of the USSR.

The should still be returned to their rightful owner, Japan.

Reads like postwar whitewashing revisionism, which it is.

Yalta was the greenlight. A deal is a deal.

JJEToday  06:05 pm JST

The Yalta Conference specifically gave these islands to Russia (which incidentally transpired in Feb. 1945 in a place called Yalta, Crimea in the Russia SSR).

*The Soviets wanted the return of South Sakhalin, which had been taken from Russia by Japan in the Russo-Japanese War in 1905, and the cession of Kuril Islands by Japan, both of which were approved by Truman. In return, Stalin pledged that the Soviet Union would enter the Pacific War three months after the defeat of Germany.*

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yalta_Conference

Dead Wrong. The U.S, did not consider these four islands to be part of what the Soviets called "the Kuriles".

"The United States supports Japan’s claim that the Habomais and Shikotan are not part of the Kuriles. Any action taken by Japan to establish this claim, such as presentation to the International Court of Justice, should not prejudice Japan’s claim vis-à-vis the Soviet Union that it has not renounced its claim to the Kuriles."

https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1955-57v23p1/d12

"The three-power agreement signed at Yalta on February 11, 1945,3 is the primary basis of the Soviet Union’s present position in southern Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands. This agreement provided for the entry of the Soviet Union into war against Japan two or three months after termination of the war in Europe, on several conditions one of which was that “The Kuril islands shall be handed over to the Soviet Union.” There was, however, no definition of the term Kuril Islands. Since the Habomai Islands and Shikotan Island have been traditionally regarded as an island group distinct from the Kuril archipelago, and under Japanese control had a local administration as a political subdivision of Hokkaido separate from the Kuril island local administration, there appears no valid basis, either in the Yalta Agreement or in any other international understanding, justifying Soviet occupation of the Habomai-Shikotan area at the end of the war in addition to the Soviet occupation of the Kuril Islands. "

https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1949v07p2/d106

The islands are Russian, not Japanese.

There is no dispute!

Russia porovoking Japan is not exactly a smart move by Putin who is increasingly making bad choices these days. Clearly Russia has no intentions of trying to have better relations with Japan, but why take actions to make them worse?

The Russians won’t be using any tanks in these exercises.

Because they can’t spare any.

I seem to remember that the nearest this matter got to being settled was during the Premiership of Shinzo Abe, when there were suggestions that there was a possibility that Russia would cede the two smaller islands to Japan whilst retaining 'ownership' of the two larger islands..... then came the CoronaVirus pandemic, followed by the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Everything seems to have gone south since then.

Clock is ticking and the sound of war drums fills the air.

The Yalta Conference specifically gave these islands to Russia (which incidentally transpired in Feb. 1945 in a place called Yalta, Crimea in the Russia SSR).

The Soviets wanted the return of South Sakhalin, which had been taken from Russia by Japan in the Russo-Japanese War in 1905, and the cession of Kuril Islands by Japan, both of which were approved by Truman. In return, Stalin pledged that the Soviet Union would enter the Pacific War three months after the defeat of Germany.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yalta_Conference

who to the Russians. comes with a sword, he dies by the sword" it’s time to understand and remember. Ukraine is another clear example. There was no need to bomb the Dombas and there was no need for the Japanese to invade the Far East. Now “gather what they sowed.”

"Stopped the red cannon fodder right in their tracks."

This is the view that the Truman administration cynically used the atomic bombs to gain a geo-political advantage over the USSR at the cost of hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians.

How interesting.

BellflowerToday  05:13 pm JST

Some people don't seem to understand what losing a war means.

The Japan militarists got lucky in 1945.

The Red Army could have liberated all the Ainu from Japanese imperialism, including Hokkaido

Ignorance of history begets ignorant comments. Ainu men were conscripted into the Imperial Japanese military during WWII just like every other Japanese national. The Ainu civilians living on those four islands were rounded up by the Red Army and deported to Japan.

The Russian Red Army's euphemistic idea of "liberating" is what kept Eastern Europe under their yoke for 1945 to 1991.

Some people don't seem to understand what losing a war means.

The war was finish, try to follow.

BellflowerToday 05:13 pm JST

Some people don't seem to understand what losing a war means.

The Japan militarists got lucky in 1945.

The Red Army could have liberated all the Ainu from Japanese imperialism, including Hokkaido (Ezo).

That is where the bomb you were p&ming about on the other article was indispensable. Stopped the red cannon fodder right in their tracks.

Some people don't seem to understand what losing a war means.

The Japan militarists got lucky in 1945.

The Red Army could have liberated all the Ainu from Japanese imperialism, including Hokkaido (Ezo).

Soviet troops took control of the four islands off Hokkaido - known in Russia as the Kurils and in Japan as the Northern Territories - at the end of World War II and they have remained in Moscow's hands since.

At the end of WWII.....after Japan declared their surrender and all other allied offensives were halted. The four islands which were Japanese since 1855 by Treaty with Russia and were exempt from the territorial actions dicated by the Cairo and Potsdam Agreements. The USSR/Russia not even attend the 1951 San Francsico Treaty much less sign it. Stolen, as clear as day.

Oh look, it is the favorite copypasta from the UN. The commentators that post that will have difficulty explaining the other country maps which clearly show Russian malfeasance. Also the commentators that claim that no coup can retain a country's territorial integrity and agreements will have difficulty explaining how Russian was allowed to maintain both post their self-coup in 1993.

Throwing an impudent military party on the islands don't make them any more legitimate Russian territory.

The Kuril Islands dispute is primarily a bilateral issue between Russia and Japan rather than a matter directly addressed by the United Nations.

the sooner putin is gone the better for the world

This article has some inaccuracies - the RMoD said the activities took place on Матуа Island. It's in the official press and video release which underpins the article. That is what they said.

The single most important provable fact here is these islands are indisputably UN-recognized territory of the Russian Federation. Here is the map:

https://www.un.org/geospatial/content/russian-federation

Now, certain quarters often get confused (or conflate) the Empire of Japan and postwar constitutional Japan, which is completely disingenuous.

The former, which doesn't exist, had and lost administration of the islands because of siding with the Axis powers in war. Indeed, the wartime agreements of the Allies would limit postwar Japan to the Home Islands and anything that was defined as part of that - these islands didn't meet that definition.

The latter didn't emerge till 1952 - not joining the UN until 1956 - and never enjoyed sovereignty over the islands for the specific reason listed above.

There is no actual bilateral territorial dispute in this area.