In Soviet Russia, he doesn't give to you, you give in to him! Just ask Crimea. Just ask Trump.
Yep, of course because of that terrible russians. But what about that Russia solved territorial dusputes with China(380 sq km area) in 2004 and with Norway(175000 sq km area) in 2010? Russia has common borders with 18 countries and only with 3 of them has territorial disputes. Japan has territorial disputes with all neighbours, even there are not so much of neighbours.
2 ( +4 / -2 )
Soooo slow... Except of Russia and China, in Central Asia active countries are Turkey, Germany, France, South Korea, UAE and etc. Japanese businessmen are too cautious and have a lack of initiative. They are losing battles for new markets.
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
The occupying forces of the Allies shall be withdrawn from Japan as soon as these objectives have been accomplished and there has been established, in accordance with the freely expressed will of the Japanese people, a peacefully inclined and responsible government
So why USA returned Okinawa to Japan administration only in 1972?
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Go to RT.com, the mouthpiece for the Russian government.
Go to Fox News, CNN, Deutsche Welle, Sankei and etc. You will see variety of articles about horrible Russia(a.k.a. Osoroshia), evil Putin, "look, russians put their country near our military bases, seems like they threaten us" and etc. You think that only Russians have positions, which is relic of Cold War? And all other countries fluffy, their leaders poop rainbows and puke butterflies?
0 ( +2 / -2 )
Russia's paranoia about NATO is because the Russians think that the U.S. is always on the verge of invading. It sounds silly to us in the West, but the Russians are fed that propaganda for breakfast every day.
Really? Vietnam, Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria and etc. Except Serbia and Vietnam, other countries demolished, still in civil war, a lot of refugees. There is also good article in wiki "Timeline of United States military operations", where you can find bunch of small vile operations for "peace, freedom and democracy". Yeah, US missiles contain a lot of democracy, so they will never regret money for war.
6 ( +6 / -0 )
Merkel is just another leader with imperial habits. She is just hiding it under the guise of european values and humanism. She is really cunning and mercantile politician, politics it's just that thing without humanism. Actually, Western Europe invented humanism and european values to hide their imperialism. They can dictate a lot of things to another states "in the name of european values and humanism". If a country does not agree just start to bomb this state in the name of humanism. Humanitarian bombing - hobby of EU and another western countries!
-1 ( +2 / -3 )
Ceasefire means everybody stops firing and stand on the lands they occupy. That means Eastern troops keep their lands and Ukraine troops keep their lands. So there's no danger of a town being taken over unless one side violates the ceasefire first, not the other way around (take over a town, then have a ceasefire).
Ukrainian troops in salient. So they're trying to escape from salient(Debaltsevo) with their vehicles, armor and guns. Eastern troops suggested to ukraininans get out from salient unarmed. This condition seems like reasonable, but ukrainians try to continue fight.
1 ( +4 / -3 )
Europe receive twice cheaper pipeline gas than LNG in Asia. China will receive huge amount of Russian gas. Price is classified, but seems like that will be similar to the price for Germany. Cheap energy will make chinese industry more competitive. Also Russia trying to get the opportunity to run railway transit through North Korea to South Korea, even there are a lot of political problems. This will allow access for korean industry to Trans-Siberian Railway.
Japan wastes a lot of time trying to tie territorial disputes with economical relations. And now trade between Russia and Japan similar with trade between South Korea and Russia, even economy of Japan 3 times bigger than korean economy. In most cases korean companies overtaken japanese in Russian market. If Japan thinks that it doing a favor, when trades with Russia, Japan risks losing its influence and competitiveness. So, it is better to separate territorial disputes from economical issues.
1 ( +2 / -1 )
You are a comedian?
You are comedian, volland, aren't you? At first, I pointed that peak of energy generation is not representative. So enthusiasm with 74% of peak generation is just stupid. In long-term only 20-25% of energy generation is "green". But the more developed "green" energy industry you have, while shutting down nuclear plants - the more traditional energy consumption you will have. So you'll just get increase of petroleum and LNG import. Because you will not watch TV and surf internet only at time when nature privide you wind and sun9couse there is no way of accumulation of "green" energy). You will consume energy all time, without a difference "green" or not. And here we are = more trade deficit.
Only way to decrease trade deficit in Japan is restart nuclear plants. If you'll just increase expensive green energy generation = you'll increase energy costs for industry = Japanese industry becomes uncompetitive = decrease of export = increase of trade deficit. Germany compensates such problem with much cheaper traditional energy industry. Japan can not.
You're so naive, if you think that developing of "green" energy industry is solution of japanese problems. Japanese problems much more complex.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
Last April, Germany generated 74% of its energy needs (though it was on a Sunday) from wind and solar. Unlike Germany, we have no wind. Or sunlight. Or tides. Or geothermal. Or biomass. Such a pity. If we did have all these resources, Japan could a renewables leader.
Germany subsidizes renewable energy generations from traditional energy industry. And traditional energy industry in Germany much more effective than japanese, because it works on cheap pipeline gas from Russia and Norway. Japan will import extremely expensive LNG from Qatar and also should subsidize renewable energy? I think after that decision japanese taxpayers become poor, literally.
Actually, after start of developing "green" energy in Germany, import of gas in Germany increased, because renewable energy generation is really unstable, so if there is no wind or sun, you should use traditional energy - you always need stable besement of energy generation. And it's switch on and off game in traditional energy generation makes them angry and poor(they also subsidize "green" energy).
Also energy generation is concentrated on the north of Germany, but consumption in south(Bavaria). So there is actually some energy transportation issues, which still not solved. Now Germany is one of the weakest link of common european energy system.
So you took one peak of energy generation of Germany and think that it will be solution for Japan. Actually in long period only 20-25% of energy production made by "green" technologies. The more you have "green energy" in your balance - more you have to keep traditional energy reserves. So, at first, you invest plenty of money into "green energy"(cause it's really expensive - deal with it), after you also should invest into traditional energy development (preferably gas, cause it's easier to switch on or off) - welcome to the country with one of the most expensive energy price in Europe (more expensive only in Denmark, which more obsessed with "green energy").
4 ( +7 / -3 )
the war ended when Japan surrendered;
Blah-bla-blah, some guy, who japanese people call imperator for a no reason said that Japan surrendered. But it doesn't mean that japanese soldiers stop the fight, battles continued till september. So surrendered de-jure, but doesn't surrendered de facto. Also, after surrender US keep occupation policy and for example, separated in february 1946 Amami island from Japan. So US just like USSR stole islands from surrendered Japan. How rude, muricans!
Russia, get lost! Your forces are "old fashioned!" Japan will invade & get their islands back soon! Ha-ha-ha. You know that Russia's military doctrine allow use nuclear bomb against countries, which doesn't own nuclear bombs? So how much of population Japanese government ready to lost for getting back 4 islands? 50 mln? 70? 126? After invasion Japan will be not only country that suffered nuclear bombing, but also will be country which fully destroyed by nuclear power. Keep in mind that Russia still has nuclear bombs t destroy not only Japan, but also half of world.
God, why after ending Cold War people in the west became such stupid, during Cold War they were at least realistic and knew about risk of angering the bear.
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
So because they lost a few soldiers fighting the Nazis, that gives them the right to STEAL from an opponent who has SURRENDERED?
Which right Japan used, when it occupied Manzhou or Taiwan and etc.? Sword-law. So when USSR used sword-law against Japan - it becames some especial case?
And yeah, Japantoday's moderator are hate truth about Japan's crime during WWII, so they deleted my previous comment?
3 ( +4 / -1 )
And, incredibly, they still haven't returned them.
Incredibly, South Korea still haven't returned Dokdo. Incredibly, US army didn't left Okinawa even in 60-80-th, when in East Asia was little chance of Chinese agression and okinawans wanted to leave 'em alone. :)
0 ( +0 / -0 )
variety of Russian accents from all over the country among the rebel fighters.
Lol. Russia is not Japan where is a lot of dialects and accents. Even there is more common in accent of between eastern ukrainians and russian in south of european part. From European part of Russia till Far East Russia speaks commonly the same, except people in Saint-Petersburg, which use sometimes another words. That should be reporters from AP with extra-linguistic skills in Russian.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
country with one of the most sophisticated and powerful militaries in Asia
Are you serious? Maybe I misunderstand you, but are you really think that Japanese JSDF is powerful? South Korea has more vehicle and manpower(conscription). So South Korea has power to defense themself, also they have agreements with US, but South Korea doesn't have any agreement with Japan, Japan has no chance and no obligations to help South Korea in theoretical conflict. Politically there is no reason for South Korea keep good relationship with Japan, economically - maybe, but economic ties are not such thing that easy to cut off, so Japan will tolerate political provocations.
-8 ( +6 / -14 )
Seems like that Japanese government wanna boost, but have no idea how to boost tourism and reach 20 mln. So now they're risk with illegal imigration - even South Korea(really risky country in visa easing) doesn't waived wisa regime with those countries.
It seems like Japanese government doesn't know or ignore ex-USSR countries(cause of territorial diputes?). South Korea, for example, waived visa with Russia and seems like wanna waive visa with Kazakhstan - totally it's about 165 people with low risk of illegal imigration(even in this 2 countries about 250000 ethnical koreans). But despite of it Japan has most strict visa policy to ex-USSR countries(wiki's article - Japan visa policy) . If Japanese government wanna use visa waive in territorial dispute talks - they're stupid. They need to separate the issues and accept that prospect of visa waiving will not be an incentive for Russia in territorial talks. Territorial disputes with Korea doesn't prevent bilateral visits. Last year about 200000 Russians visited South Korea and only 60000 - Japan. This year after bilateral visa waiving there are more than 30% boost of russian tourists in Korea. And Russia is №4 in International tourism expenditures after Germany and ahead of the UK. So Japan just ignoring Russian piece of pie in World Tourism.
2 ( +2 / -0 )
Obama has to go to war with Russia
Oh my God, really? Are western people became such stupid, that admit the thought of war with Russia, which still has nuclear bombs to destroy half of the world? Mutual destroying, yeah, brilliant end of the world! I wanna back to Cold War period, 'cause at least people knew that better not to piss off Russia, because it has nuclear bombs.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
But after 1954 they were citizens of Ukraine, no?
They were citizens of USSR. They thought that decision of Hushev is just formality, they never thoungt that in 1991 they'll becaome citizens of Ukraine.
Is there any PROOF of this?
If you can not find proof because of your laziness of lack of knowledge it doesn't mean, that there is no proof. In site of Japanese embassy in Moscow. Search, read, if you understand Russian. Not everything written in english wikipedia. In site of Japanese embassy there is good chronology of talks about South Kuril islands.
Japan is not aggressive
Yeah, visiting Yasukuni, trying to change laws and status of JSDF - they're just pretending to be peacefull. Just let them behave that they want and they'll start sending their troops to "protect peace" and help "peaceful ally U.S." somewhere in Middle East or Eastern Asia :)
since as Obama said, Russia is just a regional power
Yeah, listen more yout black master, Obama, who received Nobel Peace Prize and killed people in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, wanna send "democratical bombs" to Syria. That's regional power, as Obama said, can still destroy US with nuclear bombs. So, yeah, good to be regional power :)
1 ( +3 / -2 )
Kungaa Mergen -- that is only a small part of the issue. Russia/Putin was emboldened to do as it pleased in Crimea because of its energy position. Many of the major European countries, especially Germany, had its hand-tied when it came to backing strong sanctions due to its reliance on Russia for gas. And don't think he would not use this power in a minute with Japan in the future if it benefited him.
How does Russia use his position of gas-supplier with Germany? Russia did not nothing with Germany, not even threatened to stop suppliment and try to collapse Germanese economy. Or you consider fears of germanese people that gas sanction to Russia will collapse not only Russia's, but also Germany's economy, as a manipulation of Putin? Haha, so yeah, in this case to country will be better has 0 connection with another countries, because economical connections will discourage reckless actions.
What a lot of rot you do talk, Russia did not and had no intention of returning any of the STOLEN islands back toJapan in 2004, now or ever
Lavrov, minister of foreign afairs of Russia, offered that Russia could talk with Japan about territorial dispute relying on previous agreements. Translation from diplomatical language to normal: we offer to you start talks and solve issue by depending on Soviet-Japanese Joint Declaration. That time Japan ignored propose of Russia. Russia always suggested, but japanese diplomats behaved as a selfish childs and offered 0 suggestions of solving problem except "give back all islands". U.S. maybe can give back all occupied islands, but Russia/USSR is not U.S. Why Russia even should give back island to aggressive country (Japan has territorial dusputes with all 4 country in East Asia, Russia has territorial disputes only with Japan)?
0 ( +1 / -1 )
after an unprovoked declaration of war
Obligations at Potsdam Conference to allies such as U.S., Great Britain. So japanese should ask for it to closest ally - U.S. :) They also should ask for using nuclear bomb and other funny things, such as raping girls in Okinawa.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
What makes you say that? Japan almost agreed to the return of just the two lower islands once before. The deal was wrecked by the U.S. suggesting that a return of Okinawa may not be in the cards if Japan went ahead with it. Today, it's up in the air what the U.S. position would be. While Russia is certainly more of an adversary than an ally by any stretch of the imagination,. it isn't the middle of the Cold War either.
Russia offered to return back 2 islands in 2004 and always says that Soviet-Japanese Joint Declaration (first time, when USSR/Russia offered to give back 2 islands) will be best option. From 2008-2012 there wasn't negotiations, because president Medvedev didn't wanna give back islands. Japanese had a chance to get back 2 islands from 2000- to 2008 and from 2012 to nowadays, but they prefer to negotiating with 0 results than agree with offer of Putin and Russian MOFA.
Russia doesn't need Japan as an ally, Russia need only neighborly relationships, like relationships between Russia and South Korea.
All that will do is make Japan subject to the same kind of political/diplomatic/economic coersion that Russia has waged on countries like Ukraine based on oil/gas supplies. Anyone who wants to get in bed with Putin is a moron.
Yeah, Germany, Italy, Turkey, China are morons! Russia never stopped gas supply by own decision, it always was problem of Ukraine. First gas war between Russia and Ukraine started when Ukraine unilaterally demanded improve transit payments, while Ukraine received at $ 50 per cubic meter, when other European countries received at $150-200. Second gas war also started because of ukraininan demands. Only with Ukraine there are such problems, other 20-25 receivers of Russian gas has no problem. So anyone who wants to get in bed with ukrainian politicians is a moron.
0 ( +3 / -3 )
Russia is too much isolated and he also realize that Russia- China alliance may not work it out in case of global conflict and that is why he is reaching out to Japan.
Too much isolated in East Asia is Japan, which has bad relationship with Russia, China, both of Korea. Also, why Russia should expect that there will be Russia-Japan alliance? Japan entirely depends on U.S., and there will be more chance to make alliance between Russia and China rather than with Japan. Also, Russia still has nuclear bombs to destroy half of the world and one of the biggest army in the world. Likely that Russia can stay by own.
So it's mostly economy and trying to keep balance in region, which probably can became place of big conflict.
-2 ( +2 / -4 )
Do not get sucked in unless Russia is ready to give up all islands to Japan. Japan needs to keep it mind that these islands were STOLEN by them. Putin should not be trusted, PERIOD.
Okinawa was stolen by US? Yeah, of course, US "give back" islands to Japan(de-jure, de-facto there are still US army bases). USSR and US were winner in the war. Not only US defeated Japan in sea, but also USSR in China, Korea, Sakhalin, Kuril islands. Winner can occupy all territory, which he want, so USSR did with South Kuril and US did with Okinawa and other territories. It's right of winner. If you wanna challenge with this right, so you should fight one more, welcome to Russo-Japanese war 2? Actually after first Russo-Japanese war Japan occupied South Sakhalin and all Kuril islands, so why Russia can not occupy South Kuril? And Japan was lucky that USSR didn't occupied Hokkaido, for example.
It's realpolitic, my japanese friends. If you wanna get back territory you should go and take it by your gun and blood. Russia get back South Sakhalin and Russian Kuril islands from Japan not by negotiations. US wanna protect his important geopolitical interests? US send his army, which will fight. Great Britain wanna get back his territory from Argentina? It will send his fleet to win and protect them!
South Korea offer to Japan 0 islands, China wanna get all Senkaku, no compromise. Even Taiwan claims that Senkaku is chinese territory. Japan offers 0 islands to neither to China or Taiwan, no compromise, Japan even does not negate claims to Dokdo rocks, no compromise. And here we are, Russia offer 2 islands. It's great generosity, actually in comparement to other countries. And it's only option, when Japan's territory becoming bigger. Or maybe you, my dear japanese friend, will come and try to get back by gun and blood? Russia will offer you great zinc-lined coffins.
0 ( +3 / -3 )
Crimea from Ukraine
Ukraine took Crimea from Russia, which were given to Ukraine in 1954 by Hrushev, who was ukrainian. Hrushev violated laws of USSR by his decision. Also Crimea is more than 200 years is base of Russian fleet. Independent Ukraine from 2002 started intimidation of Russia and Russian fleet by attempts to join NATO, so It's some kind of punishment, because Ukraine always threatened Russia. It's better to save your fleet base than trying to keep good relationaship with russophobic country, which Ukraine were from first day of independence.
South Kuril islands are in other situation and giving back 2 islands is not problem. I think it will be not problem to come back to Kuril Islands talks next year or 2 years later. But what will be after 5 years? Because relationship between Russia and China, also between Russia and South Korea may became much more better and important that relationships between Russia and Japan. And in this situation better not to talk with Japan about territorial disputes and tacitly support China and South Korea in their territorial disputes.
0 ( +7 / -7 )
Of course the best that Russia will ever agree to would be returning the lower two islands anyway
Exactly, but Japanese wanna all islands back, which will be impossible, because russian will consider it as total loss. When Putin will return 2 islands he can at least claim that it's decision by Soviet-Japanese Joint Declaration from 1956. 2 islands is only option, when Japan return some territory.
Also Russina Ministry of Defence decided to rebuilt infrastructure on 2 other island, which Russia don't wanna return. So 99,9% that Russia will never return all islands, only 2 of them.
3 ( +4 / -1 )
National debt of Ukraine is about 160 bln US$. If japanese people think that it's just a loan - you're fool. Because Ukraine owe a lot of money to another countries, especially to Russia and EU. So if Ukraine will payback this loan it will be in far-far future, because nowadays Ukraine close to bankruptcy.
It's just political decision in favor of US foreign policy.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
all of the native Crimeans and many of the native Ukrainians. Are you seriously trying to suggest that native Ukrainians wanted to secede from Ukraine?
In Russia about 2 million of ukrainians, in fact more than 2 millions, because a lot of ukrainians mostly associate themselves with russians. Native people of Crimea is qirimlar, which are turkic and muslim. Second biggest nationality in Russia is tatar people, which also turkic and muslim - 5 million people. So what do you think - better live in rich multinational and multiconfessional country or in poor country with nationalistic leaders(search Svoboda party and Tyahnybok). At first day Pution introduced 3 official languages in Crimea, at first day after overthrow of Yanukovich new leaders cancelled law, which guaranteed official status of Russian and Qirim dil in Crimea. So what do you think, in which country better to live?
1 ( +4 / -3 )
Even US and EU doesn't impose any serious sanctions to Russia, because it could affect to their economy. French government thinking about not to sell warships to Russia, which cost 1,2 bln$. But even in this case they are not sure, just thinking. And here we're! Abe, which tried to establish relationship with Putin since last year, thinking about more another sanctions. Stupid move.
It seems like better to be silent like South Korean government. Yeah, maybe it's more harder to be neutral for Japan, which participate in G7. Even Angela Merkel didin't say anything, so maybe better to remain silent until he weet with another G7 leaders?
0 ( +4 / -4 )
Posted in: No emergency