Kuriles: resuscitation of the Kozyrev formula for the surrender of the Russian islands. Putin will give the South Kuriles to the Japanese before the end of the year
16:12 — REGNUM
For two days now, the Russian media have been vying with each other commenting on a small publication in the Japanese newspaper Mainichi Shimbun, attributing to it a message about the alleged consent of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to sign a peace treaty with Russia, limiting itself to receiving only the Habomai island ridge and Shikotan Islands as part of the Japanese state. But in the Japanese article it is written not quite like that, or rather, not at all like that. The phrase taken out of context, according to the recognition of my old acquaintance of a journalist working at Mainiti, is indeed not very clear.
But even so, from it does not follow that Abe renounced claims to the largest and most developed islands of the Greater Kuril ridge - Kunashir and Iturup. Literally, the article says:
“I mean the idea to start with the confirmation (by Putin - A.K.) of the Joint Declaration of 1956, which provides for the transfer of Habomai and Shikotan after the conclusion of the peace treaty, and then - followed by a word that in this case is not entirely clear - to fill in or supplement ( apparently, an agreement) on the issue of ownership of two more islands - Kunashir and Iturup.
In any case, reports that we are talking about signing a peace treaty on the basis of an agreement 62 years ago are, to put it mildly, inaccurate. For the Japanese side, according to this “new plan”, does not refuse Kunashir and Iturup at all, but, in fact, is trying to revive the “idea” of the Yeltsin-Kozyrev Foreign Ministry about the surrender of the southern Kuriles, as it were, in installments - first Habomai and Shikotan, and then after some time - and Kunashir and Iturup. And although the formula for surrendering the Kuriles, “2 plus alpha”, developed in the depths of the then Russian Foreign Ministry, is not mentioned in the articles of the Russian media now, I quite clearly feel that Tokyo’s intention is to implement just such a formula for obtaining all the South Kuril Islands.
Why did it take a confirmation of Putin's commitment to resolve the "territorial problem" with Japan on the basis of the 1956 agreements? The fact is that his proposal to drop the preconditions and conclude a peace treaty before the end of the year was perceived in Japan, among other things, as the president’s intention to return to the Soviet position that the territorial problem had already been resolved and it did not exist in bilateral relations. This frightened those forces in Japan who believe that Putin is ready to give up Habomai and Shikotan, but we must not cheapen and continue trying to achieve the “return” of Kunashir and Iturup as well.
For in Tokyo they know that the position of the Russian president regarding the harassment of Japan can change and not always in favor of Japan. Here they remember and quote Putin's statement, made by him on September 27, 2005, during the TV Direct Line. It was then stated with certainty that Kurile Islands
"are under the sovereignty of Russia, and in this part she does not intend to discuss anything with Japan ... This is enshrined in international law, this is the result of the Second World War."
The statement then had the effect of a bombshell in Japan. Tokyo was baffled that Putin's remark did not even mention the so-called "compromise option" over Habomai and Shikotan. Is it fear of repetition Russian President these just words makes Prime Minister Abe seek confirmation by him at all costs of agreement to consider the conditions of 1956 as valid to this day?
There is not long to wait - the next meeting of the leaders of the two neighboring countries in Singapore is scheduled for tomorrow. In any case, the hasty claims of the Russian media that "Abe only agrees to two islands" will hardly be confirmed, because such a decision would be akin to political suicide for the Japanese prime minister. Yes, and the Russian side will not be satisfied with a peace treaty with the recognition of the unresolved issue of the ownership of Kunashir and Iturup, as suggested by some Japanese politicians and diplomats.
We have such a sad experience in the history of diplomatic relations between Japan and China. Forty years ago, when the Treaty of Peace and Friendship was signed at the suggestion of the then Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping, the territorial issue around the Diaoyu Islands (Senkaku) between the two countries was “frozen” for 20-30 years. How it ended, there is no need to explain. Now these islands have turned into a "hot spot" of the planet threatening armed conflict, and ways to reduce tension around these islands are not yet visible. The seriousness of the situation is aggravated by the fact that the Japanese government has obtained US consent to "defend Senkaku", and military maneuvers are already underway based on the "liberation of the islands captured by the enemy" scenario.
I would like the leaders of Japan and Russia to take into account this experience and not lay such "time bombs" for the generations of our children and grandchildren.
Tokyo — Moscow
The Japanese diplomat sent by Abe to Ukraine as an ambassador is frank.
In an effort to convince the President of the Russian Federation V. Putin and the entire Russian people in fabulous prospects for our country in the event of the surrender of the South Kuril Islands to Japan, the Prime Minister of Japan S. Abe does not spare colors and artificial delights. We recall his speech at the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok in September this year:
“This year, on May 25, at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, I attracted the attention of the audience with the words: “Let's dream.” I then urged the audience to hopefully imagine what will happen in our entire region when permanent stability is restored between Japan and Russia ...
Northern Arctic Ocean, Bering Sea, northern part Pacific Ocean, the Sea of Japan will then be able to become the main sea route of peace and prosperity, and the islands, which were once the cause of confrontation, will turn into a symbol of Japanese-Russian cooperation and open up favorable opportunities as a logistics hub, a stronghold. The Sea of Japan will also change, becoming a logistics highway.
And after that, perhaps, a vast macro-region controlled by free, honest rules will appear in China, the Republic of Korea, Mongolia - up to the countries of the Indo-Pacific region. And this region will be filled with peace, prosperity and dynamism…”
And so on and so forth.
And this is said by the head of state, who has declared to our country and is not going to lift illegal economic sanctions designed to further complicate the life of the people of Russia, to prevent its development. The head of state, considering, as the closest military ally of the United States, Russia as an enemy, which must be resisted in every possible way. Hearing such hypocritical speeches, right, it becomes embarrassing for Abe-san, and indeed for all the Japanese for frank insincerity and an attempt to achieve the desired goal with flattery and promises - to tear away from our country the Far Eastern lands that legally belong to it.
Recently, the Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Japan to Ukraine spoke about the true attitude towards our country Shigeki Sumi, who headed the diplomatic mission of the Country rising sun right after the "revolution of dignity" in 2014. In an interview (Ukrinform, Ukraine), he first said that, in response to the “annexation” of Crimea by Russia and the conflict in Donbas, “Japan imposed sanctions against the Russian Federation. I want to emphasize that at that time in Asia only Japan acted so decisively ... And Tokyo also began to provide assistance to Ukraine for a total of 1.86 billion US dollars. What this Japanese money went for, the ambassador does not specify, although it is quite possible that it was also used to wage war against the people of Donbass.
Insisting, contrary to facts and logic, on the alleged “forced” annexation of Crimea to Russia, the Japanese plenipotentiary states: “Firstly, the Japanese position is that it does not recognize and will not recognize in the future the “annexation” of Crimea, which Russia declared. Therefore, Japan will continue anti-Russian sanctions as long as the illegal annexation of Crimea by Russia continues.”
Shigeki Sumi in Ukraine
Important confession. Considering that Crimea has “returned to its native harbor” forever, the ambassador reports that his government, that is, the Abe cabinet, is by no means going to reconsider the decision on sanctions against Russia. How can one not recall the ironic remark of Russian President V. Putin that Tokyo imposed sanctions, apparently to "strengthen confidence between Japan and Russia."
But then the ambassador catches on, remembering, apparently, his boss's flirting with Moscow in the hope of getting the Kuriles. A clumsy justification follows: “The various actions of Russia against Ukraine, the issue of Crimea and the issue of Donbass should be separated from negotiations on the return of the Northern Territories. This is Japan's position. Friendly relations with Russia are needed precisely to resolve the issue of the Northern Territories, because Japan has been making efforts for this since the end of the Second World War ... "
Thank you, Mr. Ambassador, for acknowledging that Tokyo needs "friendship with Russia" precisely for bargaining for the Kuril Islands. I hope that the Russian authorities will pay attention to this meaningful and very frank confession.
“Secondly, the Japanese position regarding Donbass is that it is occupied by so-called armed groups. Japan does not recognize this long-term occupation, and therefore does not recognize the so-called "elections" that took place there. This is the position of Japan, and we publicly declare it,” the ambassador said.
During the interview, it also became clear that at the Russian-Japanese talks at the top, Tokyo, in fact, is trying to blackmail Moscow, threatening to continue sanctions: “Despite friendly relations, if a friend does something bad, then we say that this is wrong. And if he does not give up his actions, then, of course, we do something so that he comes to his senses. Of course, Japan imposes sanctions against Russia not for sanctions. On the contrary, if Russia returns Crimea to Ukraine and fulfills the Minsk agreements in order to resolve the issue in Donbass, decides everything positively, then the sanctions will end. We clearly explain this to Russia.”
And not a word about the responsibility of Kyiv and its Western patrons, including Japan, for unleashing a fratricidal war in Ukraine.
Some in Russia emphasize that the sanctions announced by Japan to our country are supposedly “symbolic” and do not have a serious impact on trade and economic relations between the two countries. This is only partly true, if we recall, for example, the refusal of Japanese companies to buy Russian aluminum for fear of US dissatisfaction. However, much more sensitive for Moscow is the political position of "Shinzo's friend", who in everything agrees with the decisions of the "Big Seven" on policy towards Russia. And at the same time, he draws bright prospects for the future of Japanese-Russian prosperity, promising all sorts of benefits after the surrender of the Kuriles.
Matsuoka in the presence of I.V. Stalin, V.M. Molotov and A.Ya. Vyshinsky signs the Soviet-Japanese neutrality pact. Moscow, April 1941
Seeing such, frankly, double-dealing policy, one again recalls the "exchange of courtesies" between Joseph Stalin and Japanese Foreign Minister Yosuke Matsuoka in April 1941 during negotiations on a bilateral non-aggression pact.
From the transcript of the negotiations: “...Matsuoka declares that he had an instruction that talked about the sale of Northern Sakhalin, but since the USSR does not agree, nothing can be done.
Tov. Stalin approaches the map and, pointing to Primorye and its outlets to the ocean, says: Japan holds in its hands all the outlets of the Soviet Primorye to the ocean - the Kuril Strait at southern cape Kamchatka, the La Perouse Strait south of Sakhalin, the Tsushima Strait near Korea. Now you want to take Northern Sakhalin and seal up the Soviet Union altogether. What are you, says Comrade. Stalin, smiling, want to strangle us? What kind of friendship is this?
Matsuoka says that this would be necessary to create a new order in Asia. Besides, says Matsuoka, Japan has no objection to the Soviet Union going through India to warm sea. In India, Matsuoka adds, there are Hindus that Japan can lead so that they don't get in the way. In conclusion, Matsuoka says, pointing to the USSR on the map, that he does not understand why the USSR, which has a huge territory, does not want to cede a small territory in such a cold place.
Tov. Stalin asks: why do you need the cold regions of Sakhalin?
Matsuoka replies that this will create calm in the area, and in addition, Japan agrees to the USSR's access to the warm sea.
Tov. Stalin replies that this gives peace to Japan, and the USSR will have to wage war here (points to India). It doesn't fit.
Further, Matsuoka, pointing to the region of the southern seas and Indonesia, says that if the USSR needs anything in this region, then Japan can deliver rubber and other products to the USSR. Matsuoka says that Japan wants to help the USSR, not interfere.
Tov. Stalin replies that taking Northern Sakhalin means interfering with the life of the Soviet Union.
To paraphrase the leader's statement, it is high time to say directly to Abe-san: "To take the Kuril Islands means to interfere with Russia's life."
As a result of an unprecedented in scale and coverage of various segments of the population (about 57,000 people) conducted by REGNUM news agency, a public opinion poll on the issue of Japanese claims to the Kuril Islands, it turned out that 89 percent of the inhabitants of our country oppose any territorial concessions to Japan. This includes all options for concessions - whether it be four, two or even one island. That is, concessions are unacceptable in principle.
Knowing full well that the Russian people will not allow Japan's territorial claims to the Kuril Islands to be satisfied, Russian President Vladimir Putin nevertheless leaves the door open for negotiations. At the same time, from time to time he throws "logs into the fire" of Japanese hopes and expectations, when he agrees to return to the "Khrushchev compromise" on the transfer of Japan as a goodwill gesture of all the islands of the Lesser Kuril Ridge - Shikotan Island and 18 small islands, shoals and sea stones, called Habomai in Japan, then puzzles the Japanese with a proposal to end the fight of "political judo" in a draw - the notorious "hikiwake". At the same time, we are constantly talking about a clearly unrealistic option to come to an "amicable agreement", in which "there will be neither winners nor losers."
In my opinion, the proposal to conclude a peace treaty before the end of the year without a final resolution of the issue of territorial delimitation has not been thought through to the end. The fact that the Japanese did not agree with this did not surprise me personally, because Tokyo needs a peace treaty that has long become an anachronism, useless for us, for the sole purpose of achieving the inclusion in such a treaty of Russia's consent to "return the northern territories." Without this, the Japanese do not need a peace treaty. Therefore, it would be more reasonable to propose signing an interim treaty on good neighborliness and cooperation, although it would not satisfy the Japanese side, which, no offense will be said, openly seeks to use such cooperation primarily to induce Moscow to agree to territorial concessions.
The fact that Abe proposed at the talks in Singapore to place emphasis in the search for a solution to the "territorial issue" precisely on the "Khrushchev compromise" is a manifestation of his fear about the possibility of Moscow's decision to otherwise completely stop the negotiations on territorial delimitation in view of their senselessness. Tokyo is beginning to realize that, not to mention Kunashir and Iturup, for which the Japanese have no legal grounds for claims, Habomai and Shikotan are far from “in their pocket”, as some people think. We have to explain that with all Putin’s love for Japan, the desire to resolve contradictions to “mutual satisfaction”, even if they agree to fulfill Khrushchev’s voluntaristic promise about Japan’s “gift” of the Lesser Kuril Ridge (Yeltsin promised “friend Ryu” to give all the southern Kuriles while fishing) Putin will take a serious political risk, because in this case, serious protests await him, both in parliament and outside it. The protesters will remember the surrender of the islands on the Amur and Ussuri, and the clearly flawed decision to transfer vast water areas rich in marine and energy resources in the Barents Sea to Norway, and concessions to other neighboring countries.
Recent personal experience communication with representatives of various strata of Japanese society shows that there are fewer and fewer people who support the uncompromising position of the ruling class on the strict demand of all the "northern territories" under the slogan "all or nothing". Particularly strong are the moods in favor of compromise agreements with Russia on the northern island of Hokkaido, where, back in Soviet times, and now even more so, local fishermen declare their interest primarily in safe fishing in the waters bordering Russia, the extraction of marine animals and shellfish, kombu seaweed (Japanese kelp), which is in great demand in Japan.
However, contrary to the obvious fact of Putin's unwillingness and inability to make unjustified and unapproved territorial losses, the Japanese government declares its intention to firmly achieve its goal - to demand the maximum satisfaction of its claims. Yoshihide Suga, Secretary General of the Cabinet of Ministers of the country, who voiced the position of the government and personally Prime Minister Abe, reiterated this today, stressing that "the basic position on the conclusion of a peace treaty after the decision on the ownership of the northern territories (of all the southern Kuriles - A.K.) remains unchanged." The maximum that the Japanese government can do is not to insist on the immediate surrender of the islands, that is, the willingness to postpone their "receipt". “We are ready to respond flexibly to the timing and circumstances associated with a specific transfer (of the islands). But our basic position is the conclusion of a peace treaty after the issue of ownership of the four northern islands, there are no changes on this item,” Suga emphasized. At the same time, according to TASS, he positively assessed the talks held on Wednesday in Singapore between Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and Russian President Vladimir Putin, noting that they "gave important inertia (?!) to the development of Japanese-Russian relations."
It is also reported that Abe, following a meeting with Putin in Singapore, told reporters that he would visit Russia in early 2019, and also expressed confidence that "the leaders of the two states will be able to resolve the territorial dispute and conclude a peace treaty."
As for the reaction of President Putin to the option of returning to the conditions of 1956, he was rather restrained. According to Interfax, Putin noted that the day before, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe indicated that Tokyo was ready to return to discussing the problem of a peace treaty based on the 1956 declaration. However, Putin continued, this work requires "a separate, additional, serious study, bearing in mind that the declaration itself is far from clear." “There, in principle, the problem is simply stated that the Soviet Union is ready to transfer two islands, but it is not said on what grounds, under whose sovereignty they fall. This is a matter of serious study. Moreover, Japan itself once refused to implement these agreements,” Putin stressed.
