politics

Russian PM to visit disputed isle off Hokkaido

20 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

20 Comments
Login to comment

Be very careful. The Russian government usually does this when they need help with something relating to the islands. In exchange for a huge amount of cash or assistance they usually offer vague promises of “future discussions” about the islands. Japan would be wise to pass.

1 ( +9 / -8 )

Putin is playing with the J-govt like like a cat with a ball.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

Yes, that’s what Sam wrote. They only want Japan doing the work and financing for the ecological and other environmental cleanup, that hasn’t been done for decades under Soviet and now Russian occupation. And they even try to sell it under ‘trust-building’. At the same time they install new military bases and sophisticated maybe also nuclear driven weapons and missile systems as well as submarines. Talking is of course better than war, but there’s surely not so much trust or hope to put into that talks and projects.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

Can we be serious? USA is the party preventing any kind of deal to return the islands. The US regime, (not sure if it was treedle-dee or tweedle-dum) specifically ruled out any kind of guarantee to not militarize those islands.

It suits Russia just fine. Those islands are never going to be part of Japan. It suits USA just fine in preventing the normalization of ties between Japan and Russia. There is one loser here. That is the occupied country.

0 ( +8 / -8 )

Be very careful. The Russian government usually does this when they need help with something relating to the islands. In exchange for a huge amount of cash or assistance they usually offer vague promises of “future discussions” about the islands. Japan would be wise to pass.

They already have their ally, China, to provide economic perks. Japan doesn't have anything to offer Russia unless it is the complete withdrawal of American forces from Japan.

0 ( +7 / -7 )

They were occupied by the Japanese as they pushed up into Hokkaido and subjugated the Ainu. Now the Russians have them. This, and indeed the rest, is history . . .

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

"last July's constitutional amendment barring the country from ceding territory to a foreign spower, "

But they have nothing barring them from taking territory from a foreign power.

The Southern Kuriles are Japandese territory under Russian administration (occupation). This is the official position of the 49 signatory nations to the 1951 San Franciso Peace Treaty, which the USSR never even atttended.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

If you think the island is yours put a tank on it. If you don't have the balls to do that then it isn't yours

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

Kuril islands are part of Russian federation.

this is fact.

as same as Crimea is part of Russia as well.

so what is all fuss about?

-6 ( +5 / -11 )

The Russians never attention where is "The southern Kurile Islands" if not the Japanese government keep pursuiting that issue up to an annoying level!

There was no peace treaty between the two countries since WW2 ends! Their relation was like a truce between US & North korea!

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

Only Japan questions the outcome of the Yalta Conference and the San Francisco Peace Treaty. Now they belong to Russia. From 1800s it was Japanese. Before it was not Japanese.

Japan signed the San Francisco Peace Treaty.

Imagine if Okinawa, for example, challenged the status quo.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

@Robert: Yalta Conference and the San Francisco Peace Treaty

Both events did not mention the repatriation of Japanese lands under a foreign occupation! Japan think Russia is in a very dire condition like Yeltsin-era which is stupid enough to take their "Bait"!

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

@Matej: what is all fuss about?

It is about Japanese face saving! At least a relief of their war victimhood! Any country willing to listen their claims!

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

However, the Soviets didn’t sign the San Francisco treaty, so that part isn’t of importance in the dispute. Also, Russia and Japan exist today, while the Soviet Union occupied the Northern territories but doesn’t exist anymore. So you cannot directly say, that Russia is the occupier. How can now a pragmatic solution look like? Exactly, we go back to 1916, the year before the Soviet Union started and again, like it is also now, Japan and Russia were the two countries there. Personally, the whole thing is crystal clear for me, the 4 islands are of course Japanese, the rest of the Kuril Islands up to Kamchatka as well as the southern parts of Kurafuto/ Sakhalin are still to negotiate as a package. That showed my school atlas decades ago (btw. within the Soviet Union controlled area, behind the iron curtain, so they’ve know it all very well themselves already then) and the same constellation shows a current atlas, everyone of you can buy here for only 110 yen at those one coin chain stores. Have a look and reconsider your versions, if you like, or of course don’t, if you have other valid arguments.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Dango bongToday  02:02 pm JST

If you think the island is yours put a tank on it. If you don't have the balls to do that then it isn't yours

ARTICLE 9. (1) Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.

So you obviously support removing Article 9 (1).

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Robert CikkiToday  04:01 pm JST

Only Japan questions the outcome of the Yalta Conference and the San Francisco Peace Treaty. Now they belong to Russia. From 1800s it was Japanese. Before it was not Japanese.

Wrong. The United Staters and UK do as well. The Conference stipulated that Japan would lose territory taken by war and greed. The Southern Kuriles were negotiated by Treaty with Russia in 1855 and are seen as exempt. Before 1800s it wasn't Russian either.

Japan signed the San Francisco Peace Treaty.

And the USSR did not even attend, much less sign it. The 49 signatories consider them Japanese territory. The USSR/Russia occupied foreign territory to which had and has no right under international law, a rather frequently seen Russian characteristic.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

The islands are legally Japan’s. They are occupied by Russia who have neither intention nor incentive to change that (the July constitutional amendment should tell you everything you need to know about what Russia intends and will do in respect of these islands) they see them as Russian territory and thus covered by the amendment so Japan can forget getting them back by any means short of violence which is rightly not on the cards. Russia will cheerfully take any money or economic development Japan is foolish enough to provide but will give nothing in return.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

It belongs to Russia. There was a war, Russia took over the land, and they kept it.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

these islands will be never japanese again so get it right and concentrate on more important domestic issues!

3 ( +5 / -2 )

@Matej

Agreed, same for Dokdo or whatever.

Meaningless rocks.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites