COVID-19 INFORMATION What you need to know about the coronavirus if you are living in Japan or planning a visit.
politics

Putin, Abe to discuss peace treaty Thursday in Vladivostok

38 Comments

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

© KYODO

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

38 Comments
Login to comment

We're looking at total capitulation by Japan.

2 ( +9 / -7 )

Only a supreme optimist could see anything to Japan's advantage in these talks. Russia is well experienced in bullying,"standover tactics" and pullying the wool over people's eyes. Hopefully Japan can use these chacteristics to their own advantage.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

Will Shin-chan beg Putin for those islands again?

5 ( +9 / -4 )

Well, well, a picture speaks a thousand words. More than 25 bilateral talks? Is anyone bringing anything new to the table? If not, don't waste tax money.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

Squeeky wheels gets da lube...keep at them Abe san, costs nothing to be a whinge, eventually putin will see it's costing his country more in opportunities than the islands are worth to Russia.

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

Oh no! Abe is talking to an adversary! Capitulation!

Because not talking is working so well for South Korea. Lets keep that strategy.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Squeeky wheels gets da lube...keep at them Abe san, costs nothing to be a whinge, eventually putin will see it's costing his country more in opportunities than the islands are worth to Russia.

Excellently argued. I share your optimism that PM Abe can do a deal with Putin, who is a reasonable leader. Money talks, and Russia loves Japanese money. Japan can develop gas pipelines in the far east, and agree to purchase much more Russian gas. The Russians do not need those islands, they were siezed illegally after the war and are Japanese. Russia is holding back development in the Northern Territories.

-9 ( +5 / -14 )

We're looking at total capitulation by Japan.

How so? Why would anyone be against ending a state of war? A peace treaty can be signed without any territorial concessions on either side - countries around the world have territorial disputes with their neighbors without being at war. The current lack of a peace treaty serves nobody, and provides no leverage for anyone.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

It seems like every time Abe meets world leaders he sells off part of Japan. Please stay home, Mr Prime Minister.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

A peace treaty? Are they at war? It seems a little melodramatic for a territorial dispute that has been going for 70 odd years. Neither side will compromise, so there will never be a resolution to this issue.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Peace treaty is useless if peace constitution is abandoned in a second.

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

Historically Abes regime has had little luck with foreign affairs, South Korea, China. A success would be not loosing Hokkaido too, which considering the propensity of shooting themselves in the the foot might be on the cards.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Their faces seem to tell the whole story. No happy faces.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

The islands are Russians now,Putin made clear his mind.

Bur in the name of common sense and peace they could sign a peace threaty.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

The Russians do not need those islands, they were siezed illegally after the war and are Japanese. 

Nope. This is only taught in Japanese history books whilst thevrest of the world learns the truth.

The Treaty of San Francisco was signed by 49 nations, including Japan and the United States, on September 8, 1951. Article (2c) states:

"Japan renounces all right, title and claim to the Kurile Islands, and to that portion of Sakhalin and the islands adjacent to it over which Japan acquired sovereignty as a consequence of the Treaty of Portsmouth of 5 September 1905."

6 ( +10 / -4 )

Japan has been too friendly with the US to get thise islands back. I can imagine Japan will be conducting coalition military fire drill on those islands, provoking Russia and UK ships will be floating around to exhibit its "presence".

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Nope. This is only taught in Japanese history books whilst thevrest of the world learns the truth.

The Treaty of San Francisco was signed by 49 nations, including Japan and the United States, on September 8, 1951. Article (2c) states:

"Japan renounces all right, title and claim to the Kurile Islands, and to that portion of Sakhalin and the islands adjacent to it over which Japan acquired sovereignty as a consequence of the Treaty of Portsmouth of 5 September 1905."

Nope. The rest of the world knows nothing then. These 4 islands called Norther territories are not part of

Kurile islands and have got nothing to do with 1905 Treaty. National border drawn between Etorofu and Urup

by the Treaty of Shimoda 1855

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

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Japan has been too friendly with the US to get thise islands back.

Exactly. Add to this the Aegis Ashore system (easily reconfigured to launch Tomahawks), the ever recalcitrant fascists of Nihon Kaigi, attitudes of the Russian public, and there is no way a peace treaty will be agreed upon any time soon.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Concerning the Kurils (and North Korea for that matter), the Russians are like the lazy barnyard animals in the old children's classic 'The Little Red Hen'.

The US did all the grunt work knocking back Japan, and then those clowns came sliding in during the final days of the war and planted their flag.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Nope. The rest of the world knows nothing then. These 4 islands called Norther territories are not part of 

Kurile islands and have got nothing to do with 1905 Treaty. National border drawn between Etorofu and Urup

by the Treaty of Shimoda 1855

The 1952 peace treaty supersedes these treaties. The islands are not Japanese.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

The 1952 peace treaty supersedes these treaties. The islands are not Japanese.

Nope. 1952 Treaty cannot supersede the treaties peacefully concluded between nations or unless so specified as territories given up by Japan as Korean peninsula. 4 islands are not part of Kuril islands given up by Japan and hence nothing to do with 1952 Treaty.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

don't see them returning Crimea either

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Russia will never hand them back and Japan has nothing to offer that Japan wants. Give up the claim in return for a Russian LNG pipeline to Hokkaido.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

The 1952 peace treaty supersedes these treaties. The islands are not Japanese.

Wrong. The 1952 treaty was signed when Japan was still largely under USA occupation, so couldnt independantly consent to the be treaty. The 1855 Treaty of Shimoda applies. The Islands are inalienable Japanese Territory.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

According to your judgement then Italy which was under allies occupation due to the war can reclaim the whole peninsula of Pola and Germany can get back west-east Prussia and Königsberg.

This is not going to happen, If Japan as Italy and Germany didn’t initiate the second world conflict they could still retain these territories.

But ask them back in 2019 makes no sense.

Also Russia have no reason to return such important and strategic islands that border their eastern lands to a country that is military so tight with the U.S..

That would be a strategic and logistic suicide from Moscow.

So despite all our opinions the Islands are and will remain part of the Russian federation.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

@CaptDingleheimer

Funny that you would put it that way. Maybe history is a bit warped in U.S school since there seems to be vast belief over the pond that it was the U.S whom liberated Europe in World War 2 as well.

Russia (Soviet Union) however you wanna look at it, had some of the heaviest losses in WW2. Not only did Hitler's invasion nearly cripple Russia entirely but they moved almost all their forces from the far east and ramped up production tenfold to try and push them back, which they did all the way back to Germany.

Russia was almost on its knees when it focused its eyes on Japan after Germany's fall. So yeah, unlike the U.S who went into the war with an isolationist mindset, way over the Atlantic, somehow, very oddly, had more troops and equipment to mobilize at the time.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

@CaptDingleheimer

You are very wrong:

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

3 ( +4 / -1 )

@MiaTanaka

Funny that you would put it that way. Maybe history is a bit warped in U.S school since there seems to be vast belief over the pond that it was the U.S whom liberated Europe in World War 2 as well.

If it wasn't for the Americans, Great Britain would have fell. Actually it was the Allied Forces led by the Americans as the overall commander, in various leadership roles and on the ground that liberated Europe. Battle for Normandy D-Day the victory was due to the Americans as well as defeating the Japanese. We all know how the Americans defeated the Japanese.

the Russians are like the lazy barnyard animals in the old children's classic 'The Little Red Hen'.

Russia wasn't the lazy barnyard animal. It was actually fighting two fronts like Germany attempted to do. The Germans in the west and the Japanese in the east. Some of the things that slowed down what would have been the eventual fall of Stalin was the terrain/weather in addition to the Russian people not just the army and the Germans having to pull out to reenforce the lines in the west against the Allies. Stalin's army possessed lots of outdated equipment and not as effective as a military force. Not like he well oiled Germans. The average Russian took up arms like the militias in the Revolutionary war. What Russia had during the war that is even true til this day was a more advance covert/intelligence service. That is no wonder that the UK, US, and Japan are currently getting played by Putin. The current leaders are idiots, and Putin was a verified covert intelligence officer in one of the best intelligence services in the world. Hello! "Iron Curtain!"

They were opportunistic and made play to get something out of the war they really had no intentions of joining. Originally, Hitler gave the impression that he wasn't going to attack Russia, but honestly, no country was safe. It was actually intel from a Russian officer operating with some Japanese informants that helped Stalin get wind of Germany's plan.

If anything the British leadership during Normandy were the pathetic ones. Not the people on the ground or infantry men, but the leadership filled with royals and elites looking for fame and spotlight. The Americans did a lot of the work on the ground and as leaders.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Good luck with that, he is going to need it.

Look at the body language, that presages the outcome.

Silvafan, your perception of D Day and British leadership is so far from reality as to be too farcical to waste time correcting.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Russia wasn't the lazy barnyard animal. It was actually fighting two fronts like Germany attempted to do. The Germans in the west and the Japanese in the east. 

Please reset your timeline in order

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@englisc aspyrgend

Silvafan, your perception of D Day and British leadership is so far from reality as to be too farcical to waste time correcting.

Please do tell because Montgomery (Monty) the senior British leader during the campaign was a joke! There were several times that he was going to get fired for incompetence or avoidance of major conflicts. He spent most of the time trying to swoop in after the Americans did most of the work to try claim the glory and take any real losses. Every time Monty's butt was saved by Lord Alanbrooke because they didn't want Great Britain to look weak because the Americans who they believe are culturally inferior was saving them from the Germans.

Eisenhower, Bradley and Patton made the offensive that it was. If the British was so competent, then why were the Americans who was asked joined also put in charge for a military offensive in Europe right off the cost of Great Britain.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

@showchinmono

Please reset your timeline in order.

Why?

The bulk of Soviet fighting took place on the Eastern Front—including a continued war with Finland—but it also invaded Iran (August 1941) in cooperation with the British and late in the war attacked Japan (August 1945), with which the Soviets had border wars earlier up until in 1939.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Does Japan change the record of past history to suit the taste of modern people?

One content is inconsistent.

Are government documents, administrative records, or any legal documents on file.

Does the government not release records of history? 

If we accept history on the basis of individual records or claims, all nations of the world will rewrite history.

There is a difference between reading and understanding a full text and seeing and understanding just one part of a full text.

Who would believe Abe's claim to the Korean-Japanese treaty while ignoring the San Francisco Treaty, the source of the Korea-Japan treaty?

There is too much difference between Abe dealing with Korea and Abe dealing with Russia.

It's like an ugly person who can't say anything to a strong-looking person, ignore a weak-looking person and tell others that it's a strategy.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

SilvafanToday  08:35 pm JST

@showchinmono

Please reset your timeline in order.

Why?

Why what? Soviet didn't fight Germans and Japanese at the same time. Germans surrendered completely in May and Soviet took 3 month to move the forces and cowardly backstabbed Japan in August watching Hiroshima evaporated in a flash.

rlaalswlsToday  10:45 pm JST

Does Japan change the record of past history to suit the taste of modern people?

One content is inconsistent.

Are government documents, administrative records, or any legal documents on file.

Does the government not release records of history? 

If we accept history on the basis of individual records or claims, all nations of the world will rewrite history.

There is a difference between reading and understanding a full text and seeing and understanding just one part of a full text.

Who would believe Abe's claim to the Korean-Japanese treaty while ignoring the San Francisco Treaty, the source of the Korea-Japan treaty?

There is too much difference between Abe dealing with Korea and Abe dealing with Russia.

You are not making any sense here

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Today  11:05 pm JSTPosted in: Putin, Abe to discuss peace treaty Thursday in Vladivostok  See in context

SilvafanToday  08:35 pm JST

@showchinmono

Please reset your timeline in order.

Why?

Why what? Soviet didn't fight Germans and Japanese at the same time. Germans surrendered completely in May and Soviet took 3 month to move the forces and cowardly backstabbed Japan in August watching Hiroshima evaporated in a flash.

Not to mention these cowards did not respect the expiry of on-going pact which was September 1945 even if it didn't renew it

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Japan does not need those islands, but Abe needs to score points at home before he is prosecuted for corruption/thrown aside as Article 9 wipes political floor with him.

Russia does not need those islands, but Putin's regime needs worldwide recognition for diplomatic achievements and peaceful resolutions of conflicts. Which it hopefully won't get. And if it does get past this de-jure peace treaty, no one is getting fooled. Except two fools, right there.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

This is a poker game in which Putin has a royal flush while Abe has a pair of two's. Abe does his best to bluff but with the strongest hand possible Putin will not blink and he will win every time. Either no peace treaty will ever be signed or Japan must concede ownership to Russia of the Northern Territories.

The only way for Russia to give any of the 4 Islands back is for Japan to renounce its alliance with America and sign an alliance with Russia. Kicking all US forces out of Japan and start buying Russian defense equipment.

But then you get Russian sailor's based in Okinawa.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

A bomb blast occurred during a test of nuclear missile launches in Russia.

The scientists were exposed.

"It's true that scientists were exposed. 

" However, Not because of missile tests, but because they ate Fukushima crab. ”

The reason is that the name of the exposed radioactive material is cesium137.

Why can't Abe say anything? Is that true? Or is Russia a great power?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

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