The problem of the Kuril Islands in Russian-Japanese relations. Course work: the problem of belonging to the southern Kuril Islands. Should we wait for the Kuril Islands to return?

The question of ownership of the Kuril Islands is as ancient as Russian-Japanese relations themselves, however, despite its age, it still remains relevant. “First Unofficial” figured out how the Kuril issue developed throughout its history.

The problem of ownership of the Kuril Islands is no less than 230 years old. During this time, the disputed territories were part of both states claiming them, and for some time they were in joint ownership. At the moment, the situation is this: the entire Kuril ridge is part of Russia, but the Japanese side does not agree with this state of affairs.

The Kuril Islands are valuable primarily for the minerals that are hidden in their depths. There are deposits of rare earth metals, which are practically irreplaceable in the chemical, nuclear, steel and oil industries, mechanical engineering and radio electronics, as well as the production of explosives. For example, in the Kuril Islands there is a rich deposit of rhenium, a metal that is extremely refractory and resistant to chemicals. Rhenium is used in the manufacture of high-octane commercial gasoline, self-cleaning electrical contacts and jet engines. Being part of the alloy, rhenium increases the strength of the part, so its use is necessary in the manufacture of everything that needs to be super strong: space satellites, rockets, airplanes. The total gold resources on the Kuril Islands are estimated at 1867 tons, silver at 9284 tons, titanium at 39.7 million tons, and iron at 273 million tons.

The waters surrounding the Kuril Islands are home to a large number of commercial fish, crabs, shellfish and squid, which form the basis of the Japanese diet.

The geopolitical significance of the South Kuril Islands as points for monitoring the situation in the Pacific Ocean is especially important for Russia. The ice-free straits between the islands of the southern ridge are very valuable for our fleet.

A long time ago

In 1707, Peter the Great, together with the announcement of the annexation of Kamchatka to Russia, issued a decree on the exploration of nearby areas - the Kuril Islands and Japan. On August 1, 1711, Danila Antsiferov and Ivan Kozyrevsky with a detachment of 50 Cossacks and one Japanese guide, who had once been shipwrecked, left Bolsheretsk and headed to the Kuril Islands. They examined the island of Shumshu and Paramushir. Two more expeditions took place in 1713 and 1721. In total, five islands of the Kuril ridge were examined. Then, after Peter’s death, members of the Bering expedition carried out a topographic survey of the Kuril Islands and the northern coast of Japan, the Sea of ​​Okhotsk and Kamchatka.

For some time, the Russians and Japanese managed not to notice each other’s presence on the islands: Russian and Japanese merchants “entered” the future disputed territory from different ends and established trade contacts with the local population - the Ainu.

On May 4, 1786, Tokunai (a representative of the Japanese principality of Matsumae), arriving in the Kuril Islands, met with the Russian expedition and asked who they were and where they were from. One of the Russians, whose surname in Japanese sources is rendered as “Ijuyo” (which most likely corresponds to the Russian surname “Ezhov” written in katakana), replied that he and 60 other people arrived on the island of Urup to engage in fishing and hunting. Tokunai then asked if the Russians knew that the Japanese government prohibited foreigners from entering the country. Ijuyo answered him: “We know. However, this is not Japan. There are no Japanese government agencies on either Iturup or Urup.”

In 1798, a Japanese expedition installed pillars with the inscription “possession of great Japan” on Iturup, overturning the Russian border pillars already standing there. In 1800, government official Kondo arrived in Iturup and established a kind of Japanese prefecture there. Since the Russians preferred to make Urup their site, the strait between the two islands became a kind of dividing line between the two states. But in 1807, the Russians also left Urup, and since then a Japanese garrison consisting of 30 Japanese soldiers has always been on the island.

For some time, the Kuril issue lost its relevance: the Russian Empire was busy with events in Europe. Negotiations resumed only in 1855 with the conclusion of the first official diplomatic agreement between Russia and Japan - the Shimoda Treaty. The second article of the treaty stated that “from now on, the borders between Russia and Japan will pass between the islands of Urup and Iturup. The entire island of Iturup belongs to Japan, while the island of Urup and the other Kuril Islands to the north are the possession of Russia.” Sakhalin remained in joint ownership of the two countries.

The problem of post-war settlement

On February 11, 1945, the USSR, USA and Great Britain signed an agreement according to which the USSR pledged, after the surrender of Germany, to enter the war with Japan on the side of the allies that had already fought with it. Stalin agreed to wage war with Japan only on condition of compensation for all Russian losses under the Portsmouth Peace. The return of the southern part of Sakhalin Island and the transfer of the Kuril Islands to the Soviet Union was agreed upon.

On July 26, 1945, China, the USA, and Great Britain adopted the Potsdam Declaration outlining the terms of Japan's surrender. One of its conditions was the implementation of the Cairo Declaration of December 3, 1943, which provided for the limitation of Japanese sovereignty to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, and Shikoku.

In its act of surrender on September 2, 1945, Japan unconditionally accepted the Potsdam Declaration and the Cairo Declaration mentioned therein. It would seem that a solution to the issue has been found and there is nothing more to argue about here.

However, during the preparation of the peace treaty with Japan, relations between the allies in the anti-Hitler coalition cooled, and at the insistence of the United States, the text of the San Francisco Peace Treaty was as general as possible and contained very little specificity. For example, Japan was supposed to renounce all rights to the Kuril Islands, but under whose jurisdiction they should go was not specified in the agreement.

In 1956, the USSR and Japan were again at the negotiating table, which resulted in the Soviet-Japanese Declaration of October 19, 1956, according to which the state of war ended between the two states (more than 10 years after the end of hostilities!) and good neighborly relations were established. The USSR, demonstrating its desire to establish relations with its eastern neighbor as quickly as possible, offered Japan two of the disputed four islands - Shikotan and Habomai. Unfortunately, the signing of a peace agreement never took place: one of the conditions for the transfer of the islands was the withdrawal of all foreign troops from the territory of the Japanese state. However, the American military base is still located on the island. Okinawa has no plans to move yet.

Current state of affairs

Since 1956, there has been no significant progress in resolving the Kuril issue. Russia and Japan periodically hold bilateral meetings at different levels, during which they decide to “continue to negotiate.” For Russia, the concept of 1956 is currently working - the transfer of two islands in exchange for reciprocal concessions. Not long ago, a representative of the Japanese government spoke about the potential possibility of the Japanese side agreeing with this scenario, but no official statements were made. Moreover, Japan’s main line on the issue of the Kuril Islands remains very strict: the islands of the South Kuril chain are considered “illegally occupied” and must be returned to Japan as its “ancestral territories.”

Most likely, in the next few years the problem of ownership of the Kuril Islands will not be resolved. The outcome of negotiations on this issue will depend on the geopolitical situation in the Far Eastern region. It is likely that the emergence of a new strong player will force the parties to unite and come to a common denominator as soon as possible.

In preparing this article, materials from the following monographs were used:

1. Nakamura Shintaro Japanese and Russians. From contact history. M. 1983
2. Ponomarev S.I. Starting point – 1945 // Collection of documents for parliamentary hearings on the issue “The Soviet-Japanese Declaration of 1956 and the problems of national security of the Russian Federation.” Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk. 2001
3. Territorial question in the Afro-Asian world. / Ed. D.V. Streltsova. M. 2013 (Chapter 1, 1.2)

Briefly, the history of “belonging” to the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin Island is as follows.

1.During the period 1639-1649. Russian Cossack detachments led by Moskovitinov, Kolobov, Popov explored and began to develop Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands. At the same time, Russian pioneers repeatedly sailed to the island of Hokkaido, where they were peacefully greeted by the local Ainu aborigines. The Japanese appeared on this island a century later, after which they exterminated and partially assimilated the Ainu.

2.B 1701 Cossack sergeant Vladimir Atlasov reported to Peter I about the “subordination” of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands, leading to the “wonderful kingdom of Nipon”, to the Russian crown.

3.B 1786. By order of Catherine II, a register of Russian possessions in the Pacific Ocean was made, with the register being brought to the attention of all European states as a declaration of Russia's rights to these possessions, including Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands.

4.B 1792. By decree of Catherine II, the entire chain of the Kuril Islands (both Northern and Southern), as well as the island of Sakhalin officially included in the Russian Empire.

5. As a result of Russia’s defeat in the Crimean War 1854—1855 gg. under pressure England and France Russia forced was concluded with Japan on February 7, 1855. Treaty of Shimoda, according to which four southern islands of the Kuril chain were transferred to Japan: Habomai, Shikotan, Kunashir and Iturup. Sakhalin remained undivided between Russia and Japan. At the same time, however, the right of Russian ships to enter Japanese ports was recognized, and “permanent peace and sincere friendship between Japan and Russia” were proclaimed.

6.May 7, 1875 according to the Treaty of St. Petersburg, the tsarist government as a very strange act of “goodwill” makes incomprehensible further territorial concessions to Japan and transfers to it another 18 small islands of the archipelago. In return, Japan finally recognized Russia's right to all of Sakhalin. It is for this agreement the Japanese refer most of all today, slyly keeping silent, that the first article of this treaty reads: “... and henceforth eternal peace and friendship will be established between Russia and Japan” ( the Japanese themselves violated this treaty several times in the 20th century). Many Russian statesmen of those years sharply condemned this “exchange” agreement as short-sighted and harmful to the future of Russia, comparing it with the same short-sightedness as the sale of Alaska to the United States of America in 1867 for next to nothing ($7 billion 200 million). ), saying that “now we are biting our own elbows.”

7.After the Russo-Japanese War 1904—1905 gg. followed another stage in the humiliation of Russia. By Portsmouth peace treaty concluded on September 5, 1905, Japan received the southern part of Sakhalin, all the Kuril Islands, and also took away from Russia the lease right to the naval bases of Port Arthur and Dalniy. When did Russian diplomats remind the Japanese that all these provisions contradict the treaty of 1875 g., - those answered arrogantly and impudently : « War crosses out all agreements. You have been defeated and let's proceed from the current situation " Reader, Let us remember this boastful declaration of the invader!

8.Next comes the time to punish the aggressor for his eternal greed and territorial expansion. Signed by Stalin and Roosevelt at the Yalta Conference February 10, 1945 G. " Agreement on the Far East" provided: "... 2-3 months after the surrender of Germany, the Soviet Union will enter the war against Japan subject to the return to the Soviet Union of the southern part of Sakhalin, all the Kuril Islands, as well as the restoration of the lease of Port Arthur and Dalny(these built and equipped by the hands of Russian workers, soldiers and sailors back in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. naval bases were very convenient in their geographical location donated free of charge to “brotherly” China. But our fleet needed these bases so much in the 60-80s during the raging Cold War and the intense combat service of the fleet in remote areas of the Pacific and Indian Oceans. We had to equip the Cam Ranh forward base in Vietnam from scratch for the fleet).

9.B July 1945 in accordance with Potsdam Declaration heads of victorious countries the following verdict was adopted regarding the future of Japan: “The sovereignty of Japan will be limited to four islands: Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku, Honshu and those that WE SPECIFY.” August 14, 1945 The Japanese government has publicly confirmed its acceptance of the terms of the Potsdam Declaration, and September 2 Japan unconditionally surrendered. Article 6 of the Instrument of Surrender states: “...the Japanese government and its successors will honestly implement the terms of the Potsdam Declaration , give such orders and take such actions as the Commander-in-Chief of the Allied Powers requires in order to implement this declaration...” January 29, 1946 The Commander-in-Chief, General MacArthur, in his Directive No. 677 DEMANDED: “The Kuril Islands, including Habomai and Shikotan, are excluded from the jurisdiction of Japan.” AND only after that legal action, a Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR was issued on February 2, 1946, which read: “ All lands, subsoil and waters of Sakhalin and the Kul Islands are the property of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics " Thus, the Kuril Islands (both Northern and Southern), as well as about. Sakhalin, legally And in accordance with international law were returned to Russia . This could put an end to the “problem” of the Southern Kuril Islands and stop all further disputes. But the story with the Kuril Islands continues.

10.After the end of the Second World War US occupied Japan and turned it into their military base in the Far East. In September 1951 The USA, Great Britain and a number of other states (49 in total) signed Treaty of San Francisco with Japan, prepared in violation of the Potsdam Agreements without the participation of the Soviet Union . Therefore, our government did not join the agreement. However, in Art. 2, Chapter II of this treaty is written in black and white: “ Japan renounces all rights and claims... to the Kuril Islands and that part of Sakhalin and the adjacent islands , over which Japan acquired sovereignty by the Treaty of Portsmouth of September 5, 1905.” However, even after this, the story with the Kuril Islands does not end.

11.19 October 1956 The government of the Soviet Union, following the principles of friendship with neighboring states, signed with the Japanese government joint declaration, according to which the state of war between the USSR and Japan ended and peace, good neighborliness and friendly relations were restored between them. When signing the Declaration as a gesture of goodwill and nothing more it was promised to transfer to Japan the two southernmost islands of Shikotan and Habomai, but only after the conclusion of a peace treaty between the countries.

12.However The United States imposed a number of military agreements on Japan after 1956, replaced in 1960 by a single “Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security”, according to which US troops remained on its territory, and thus the Japanese islands turned into a springboard for aggression against the Soviet Union. In connection with this situation, the Soviet government declared to Japan that it was impossible to transfer the promised two islands to it.. And the same statement emphasized that, according to the declaration of October 19, 1956, “peace, good neighborliness and friendly relations” were established between the countries. Therefore, an additional peace treaty may not be required.
Thus, the problem of the South Kuril Islands does not exist . It was decided a long time ago. AND de jure and de facto the islands belong to Russia . In this regard, it might be appropriate remind the Japanese of their arrogant statement in 1905 g., and also indicate that Japan was defeated in World War II and therefore has no rights to any territories, even to her ancestral lands, except those that were given to her by the victors.
AND to our Foreign Ministry just as harshly, or in a softer diplomatic form you should have stated this to the Japanese and put an end to it, PERMANENTLY stopping all negotiations and even conversations on this non-existent problem that degrades the dignity and authority of Russia.
And again the “territorial issue”

However, starting from 1991 city, meetings of the President are held repeatedly Yeltsin and members of the Russian government, diplomats with Japanese government circles, during which The Japanese side every time persistently raises the issue of “northern Japanese territories.”
Thus, in the Tokyo Declaration 1993 g., signed by the President of Russia and the Prime Minister of Japan, was again the “presence of a territorial issue” was recognized, and both sides promised to “make efforts” to resolve it. The question arises: could our diplomats really not know that such declarations should not be signed, because recognition of the existence of a “territorial issue” is contrary to the national interests of Russia (Article 275 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation “ Treason»)??

As for the peace treaty with Japan, it is de facto and de jure in accordance with the Soviet-Japanese Declaration of October 19, 1956. not really needed. The Japanese do not want to conclude an additional official peace treaty, and there is no need. He more needed in Japan, as the side that was defeated in the Second World War, rather than Russia.

A Russian citizens should know that the “problem” of the Southern Kuril Islands is just a fake , her exaggeration, periodic media hype around her and the litigiousness of the Japanese - there is consequence of Japan's illegal claims in violation of its obligations to strictly comply with its recognized and signed international obligations. And Japan’s constant desire to reconsider the ownership of many territories in the Asia-Pacific region permeates Japanese politics throughout the twentieth century.

Why The Japanese, one might say, have their teeth in the Southern Kuril Islands and are trying to illegally take possession of them again? But because the economic and military-strategic importance of this region is extremely great for Japan, and even more so for Russia. This region of colossal seafood wealth(fish, living creatures, sea animals, vegetation, etc.), deposits of useful, including rare earth minerals, energy sources, mineral raw materials.

For example, January 29 this year. in the Vesti (RTR) program, short information slipped through: it was discovered on the island of Iturup large deposit of the rare earth metal Rhenium(the 75th element in the periodic table, and the only one in the world ).
Scientists allegedly calculated that to develop this deposit it would be enough to invest only 35 thousand dollars, but the profit from the extraction of this metal will allow us to bring all of Russia out of the crisis in 3-4 years . Apparently the Japanese know about this and that is why they are so persistently attacking the Russian government demanding that they give them the islands.

I must say that During the 50 years of ownership of the islands, the Japanese did not build or create anything major on them, except for light temporary buildings. Our border guards had to rebuild barracks and other buildings at outposts. The entire economic “development” of the islands, which the Japanese are shouting about to the whole world today, consisted in the predatory robbery of the islands' wealth . During the Japanese "development" from the islands seal rookeries and sea otter habitats have disappeared . Part of the livestock of these animals our Kuril residents have already restored .

Today, the economic situation of this entire island zone, as well as the whole of Russia, is difficult. Of course, significant measures are needed to support this region and care for Kuril residents. According to calculations by a group of State Duma deputies, it is possible to produce on the islands, as reported in the program “Parliamentary Hour” (RTR) on January 31 of this year, only fish products up to 2000 tons per year, with a net profit of about 3 billion dollars.
Militarily, the ridge of the Northern and Southern Kuriles with Sakhalin constitutes a complete closed infrastructure for the strategic defense of the Far East and the Pacific Fleet. They protect the Sea of ​​Okhotsk and turn it into an inland one. This is the area deployment and combat positions of our strategic submarines.

Without the Southern Kuril Islands we will have a hole in this defense. Control over the Kuril Islands ensures free access of the fleet to the ocean - after all, until 1945, our Pacific Fleet, starting in 1905, was practically locked in its bases in Primorye. Detection equipment on the islands provides long-range detection of air and surface enemies and the organization of anti-submarine defense of the approaches to the passages between the islands.

In conclusion, it is worth noting this feature in the relationship between the Russia-Japan-US triangle. It is the United States that confirms the “legality” of the islands’ ownership of Japan , against all odds international treaties signed by them .
If so, then our Ministry of Foreign Affairs has every right, in response to the claims of the Japanese, to propose that they demand the return of Japan to its “southern territories” - the Caroline, Marshall and Mariana Islands.
These archipelagos former colonies of Germany, captured by Japan in 1914. Japanese rule over these islands was sanctioned by the 1919 Treaty of Versailles. After the defeat of Japan, all these archipelagos came under US control. So Why shouldn't Japan demand that the United States return the islands to it? Or lack the spirit?
As you can see, there is clear double standard in Japanese foreign policy.

And one more fact that clarifies the overall picture of the return of our Far Eastern territories in September 1945 and the military significance of this region. The Kuril operation of the 2nd Far Eastern Front and the Pacific Fleet (August 18 - September 1, 1945) provided for the liberation of all the Kuril Islands and the capture of Hokkaido.

The annexation of this island to Russia would have important operational and strategic significance, since it would ensure the complete enclosure of the Sea of ​​Okhotsk by our island territories: Kuril Islands - Hokkaido - Sakhalin. But Stalin canceled this part of the operation, saying that with the liberation of the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin, we had resolved all our territorial issues in the Far East. A we don't need someone else's land . In addition, the capture of Hokkaido will cost us a lot of blood, unnecessary losses of sailors and paratroopers in the very last days of the war.

Stalin here showed himself to be a real statesman, caring for the country and its soldiers, and not an invader who coveted foreign territories that were very accessible in that situation for seizure.

In domestic historiography on the issue of ownership of the South Kuril Islands, much attention was paid to the development of these lands by Russian pioneers; almost nothing was said about the contribution made to this by the Japanese. Meanwhile, the topic seems extremely important for the speedy resolution of the territorial issue. In the Tokyo Declaration of 1993, the heads of the two countries agreed that the problem should be resolved on the basis of the principles of legality and justice, which implies careful study not only from the point of view of international law, but also from the point of view of history.

Taking advantage of the weakening of Russian positions in the southern part of the Kuril Islands, Japanese fish farmers first appeared in Kunashir in 1799, and the next year in Iturup, where they destroyed Russian crosses and illegally erected a pillar with a designation indicating that the islands belonged to Japan. Japanese fishermen often began to arrive on the shores of Southern Sakhalin, fished, and robbed the Ainu, which caused frequent clashes between them. In 1805, Russian sailors from the frigate "Juno" and the tender "Avos" placed a pole with the Russian flag on the shore of Aniva Bay, and the Japanese anchorage on Iturup was devastated. The Russians were warmly received by the Ainu.

In 1854, in order to establish trade and diplomatic relations with Japan, the government of Nicholas I sent Vice Admiral E. Putyatin. His mission also included the delimitation of Russian and Japanese possessions. Russia demanded recognition of its rights to the island of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands, which had long belonged to it. Knowing full well what a difficult situation Russia found itself in, waging a simultaneous war with three powers in the Crimea [Crimean War], Japan put forward unfounded claims to the southern part of Sakhalin. At the beginning of 1855, in the city of Shimoda, Putyatin signed the first Russian-Japanese Treaty of Peace and Friendship, in accordance with which Sakhalin was declared undivided between Russia and Japan, the border was established between the islands of Iturup and Urup, and the ports of Shimoda and Hakodate were opened for Russian ships and Nagasaki.

The Shimoda Treaty of 1855 in Article 2 defines: “From now on, the border between the Japanese state and Russia will be established between the island of Iturup and the island of Urup. The entire island of Iturup belongs to Japan, the entire island of Urup and the Kuril Islands to the north of it belong to Russia. As for the island of Karafuto (Sakhalin), it is still not divided by the border between Japan and Russia.”

Nowadays, the Japanese side claims that this treaty comprehensively took into account the activities of Japan and Russia in the area of ​​Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands up to the time of its conclusion and was concluded as a result of negotiations between Japan and Russia in a peaceful environment. The plenipotentiary representative of the Russian side at the negotiations, Admiral Putyatin, when signing the treaty, stated: “In order to prevent future disputes, as a result of careful study, it was confirmed that Iturup Island is Japanese territory.” Documents recently published in Russia show that Nicholas I considered the island of Urup to be the southern limit of Russian territory.

The Japanese side considers it erroneous to assert that Japan imposed this treaty on Russia, which was in a difficult situation during the Crimean War. It completely contradicts the facts. At that time, Russia was one of the great European powers, while Japan was a small and weak country that was forced by the United States, England and Russia to abandon the country's 300-year-old policy of self-isolation.

Japan also considers it erroneous that Russia allegedly has “historical rights” to the islands of Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and the Habomai ridge, confirmed by this treaty as Japanese possession, due to their discovery and expeditions. As stated above, both Nicholas I and Admiral E.V. Putyatin (1803 - 1883), based on the objective situation of that time, concluded a treatise, realizing that the southern limit of Russia is the island of Urup, and Iturup and south of it is the territory of Japan. Beginning in 1855, for more than 90 years, neither Tsarist Russia nor the Soviet Union ever insisted on these so-called “historical rights.”

There was no need for Japan to discover these islands, located at the shortest distance from it and visible from Hokkaido with the naked eye. A map of the Shoho era, published in Japan in 1644, records the names of the islands of Kunashir and Iturup. Japan was the earliest ruler of these islands.

Actually, Japan justifies its claims to the so-called “Northern Territories” precisely by the content of the Shimoda Treaty of 1855 and by the fact that until 1946 the islands of Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and the Habomai ridge were always the territories of Japan and never became the territories of Russia.

The government of Alexander II made the Middle East and Central Asia the main direction of its policy and, fearing to leave its relations with Japan uncertain in case of a new aggravation of relations with England, signed the so-called St. Petersburg Treaty of 1875, according to which all the Kuril Islands in exchange for recognition of Sakhalin Russian territory was transferred to Japan. Alexander II, who had previously sold Alaska in 1867 for a symbolic sum at that time - 11 million rubles, and this time made a big mistake by underestimating the strategic importance of the Kuril Islands, which were later used by Japan for aggression against Russia. The Tsar naively believed that Japan would become a peace-loving and calm neighbor of Russia, and when the Japanese, justifying their claims, refer to the 1875 treaty, for some reason they forget (as G. Kunadze “forgot” today) about its first article: “.. . and henceforth eternal peace and friendship will be established between the Russian and Japanese Empires." Then there was 1904, when Japan treacherously attacked Russia... At the conclusion of the peace treaty in Portsmouth in 1905, the Japanese side demanded Sakhalin Island from Russia as an indemnity. The Russian side stated then that this was contrary to the 1875 treaty. What did the Japanese respond to this?

“War crosses out all agreements, you have suffered defeat and let’s proceed from the current situation. Only thanks to skillful diplomatic maneuvers did Russia manage to retain the northern part of Sakhalin for itself, and southern Sakhalin went to Japan.”

At the Yalta Conference of the Heads of Power, countries participating in the anti-Hitler coalition, held in February 1945, it was decided after the end of the Second World War that South Sakhalin and all the Kuril Islands should be transferred to the Soviet Union, and this was a condition for the USSR to enter the war with Japan - three months after end of the war in Europe.

On September 8, 1951, in San Francisco, 49 countries signed a peace treaty with Japan. The draft treaty was prepared during the Cold War without the participation of the USSR and in violation of the principles of the Potsdam Declaration. The Soviet side proposed to carry out demilitarization and ensure democratization of the country. Representatives of the USA and Great Britain told our delegation that they came here not to discuss, but to sign an agreement and therefore would not change a single line. The USSR, and along with it Poland and Czechoslovakia, refused to sign the treaty. And what’s interesting is that Article 2 of this treaty states that Japan renounces all rights and title to the island of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands. Thus, Japan itself renounced its territorial claims to our country, confirming this with its signature.

Currently, the Japanese side claims that the islands of Iturup, Shikotan, Kunashir and the Habomai ridge, which have always been Japanese territory, are not included in the Kuril Islands, which Japan abandoned. The US government, regarding the scope of the concept of “Kuril Islands” in the San Francisco Peace Treaty, stated in an official document: “(They) do not include and there was no intention to include (in the Kuril Islands) the Habomai and Shikotan ridges, or Kunashir and Iturup, which previously have always been a part of Japan proper and should therefore be rightly recognized as being under Japanese sovereignty."

1956, Soviet-Japanese negotiations on normalizing relations between the two countries. The Soviet side agrees to cede the two islands of Shikotan and Habomai to Japan and offers to sign a peace treaty. The Japanese side is inclined to accept the Soviet proposal, but in September 1956 the United States sent a note to Japan stating that if Japan renounces its claims to Kunashir and Iturup and is satisfied with only two islands, then in this case the United States will not give up the Ryukyu Islands , where the main island is Okinawa. American intervention played a role and... the Japanese refused to sign a peace treaty on our terms. The subsequent security treaty (1960) between the United States and Japan made the transfer of Shikotan and Habomai to Japan impossible. Our country, of course, could not give up the islands for American bases, nor could it bind itself to any obligations to Japan on the issue of the Kuril Islands.

The history of relations between Russia and Japan in the twentieth century was not easy. Suffice it to recall that over the course of a little over 40 years (1904-1945), Japan and Russia fought 4 times. In 1904-1905 in Manchuria, in 1918-1922 in Siberia and the Primorsky Territory, in 1939 on the Khalkhin Gol River and Lake Khasan, and finally in 1945 in World War II. At present, the “territorial problem” continues to be persistently exploited by Japanese politicians with no less, but even greater intensity than before. True, now, unnoticed by a wide range of readers, it has acquired a fishing and marine focus. This vector was given to it by the summit meeting between the leaders of the two countries, B. Yeltsin and R. Hashimoto.

It took place on November 1 and 2, 1997 in Krasnoyarsk. Then, as you know, Yeltsin and Hashimoto agreed to give impetus to negotiations regarding granting fishing rights to Japanese fishermen in the Russian territorial sea in the area of ​​the South Kuril Islands.

Moreover, the Japanese side insists on fishing precisely on those islands to which it has made claims: Habomai, Shikotan, Kunashir and Iturup. In addition, the Japanese are essentially demanding that the Russian authorities provide them with so-called “safe fishing.” This term hides the desire to fish in our waters without recognizing our fishing rules. And we must give the Japanese their due - they will achieve this if the Agreement between Russia and Japan on certain issues of cooperation in the field of harvesting marine living resources, signed in 1998, comes into force. In order for the latter to happen, it is necessary to further consider a number of technical issues regarding the fishery and obtain approval of the Agreement by the Federal Assembly, since it concerns the Russian territorial sea. It will not be easy for those who lobbied for this Agreement to achieve this, although the text of the Agreement itself includes only 7 articles and one appendix, which fits on only 5 pages of typewritten text.

Violation of Russian territorial waters in the South Kuril Islands by Japanese fishing vessels began at the height of the Cold War. The peak of these violations occurred in the 70s-80s and early 90s, when there were up to 8-10 thousand cases per year. In Soviet times, border guards were prohibited from opening fire on Japanese intruders. Border guards detained such vessels. The captains were tried according to our laws, and they served their prison sentences with us. Essentially, these Japanese fishing captains were kamikazes of sorts. Our border guards came across, as a rule, Japanese slow-moving vessels. The majority of the violators, having high-speed vessels, escaped with impunity. True Japanese professional fishermen call these special fishermen on high-speed vessels “yakuza”. Judging by their equipment and the presence of expensive ship engines, the main goal of the Yakuza was not to obtain fish and seafood, but to violate our territorial waters in order to maintain tension in the area, constantly declaring Japan's territorial claims to Russia. The situation with Japanese violators has changed dramatically since 1994-1995, when the new Russia decided to defend its national interests in the South Kuril Islands by using weapons to stop high-speed violating vessels. Unfortunately, the Japanese were not injured either. The ardor of the violators began to cool, and the violations of our territorial waters themselves decreased from 10 thousand to 12-15 cases per year.

In order to maintain tension over the territorial issue, Japanese strategists put forward claims to the Russian side regarding ensuring so-called safe fishing for Japanese fishermen in the waters adjacent to the territories to which Japan has claimed, that is, the South Kuril Islands. At that time, the followers of Kozyrev’s conciliatory diplomacy, instead of rejecting such absurd claims and starting negotiations on economic cooperation in the field of fisheries between the two countries, as was proposed by representatives of the fishing industry, negotiated according to the Japanese scenario. In order to break the negative attitude towards such negotiations on the part of our fishermen, a massive discrediting of the fishing industry among our public was carried out, I believe, not without the help of the Japanese intelligence services, with extensive use of the press. What are the fictions about the fishing mafia and a number of tendentious speeches on this issue worth in both the radical and left-wing press? All these soap bubbles, unfortunately, produced negative results.

For the first time, Hokkaido fishermen were allowed to fish for seaweed off Signal Island in the early 60s. On this issue, an interdepartmental (I draw the readers’ attention not an intergovernmental) Agreement was then quickly and without delay concluded, according to which “Japanese seaweed fishermen ... must comply with the laws, regulations and rules of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics operating in this area, including regulations governing seaweed fishing.” This key provision, which had been in force for more than 30 years, disappeared in the text of the new Agreement. A completely inexplicable surrender of our positions. It turns out that it became beneficial for someone to weaken Russia’s position regarding its sovereignty in its territorial sea near the southern Kuril Islands. Let me suggest that it was precisely for this reason that such multi-round negotiations (13 rounds over 3 years) were started to develop a new Agreement, in which there was no place not only for the protection of Russia’s national fishing interests, but also its sovereignty in the territorial sea.

In addition, based on the provisions of the articles of the Agreement, the Russian side for the first time took an unprecedented step, as a result of which Japanese fishermen will essentially fish without permission in Russian territorial waters near the four islands of the southern Kuril Islands. Near the very islands - Habomai, Shikotan, Kunashir and Iturup - to which Japan claims. At the same time, Japan not only does not grant Russian fishing vessels similar rights to fish in Japanese territorial waters, for example, off the island of Hokkaido, but also has not undertaken any obligations to ensure that its citizens and courts comply with the laws and regulations of fishing in our waters. Moreover, in the text of the Agreement itself there is no mention of measures to control Japanese fishing by Russian fisheries authorities and border services. In addition, the fishing area itself, located in our territorial sea, received a nameless name under the Agreement - “Marine Area”. Apparently, the authors of this innovation believe that it is located far, far beyond the territory of our country. It turns out that Russia, under this Agreement, renounces its sovereignty in its own territorial sea in the South Kuril Islands (really another, though now without a single shot from the Japanese side, territorial Pearl Harbor for the novice politician Boris Nemtsov, who left his autograph on such a controversial document). Probably, the developers of this Agreement, realizing its vulnerability to criticism, decided to time its signing at the deadliest time for the political elite and observers - on Saturday, and its text itself still does not reach the general Russian public.

It is also interesting that almost simultaneously with the signing of the Agreement, it was announced that Japan would provide Russia with an untied loan of $1.5 billion “for the development of reforms.” Isn't this the price to pay for the Agreement, which is detrimental to Russia? In addition, it is planned to use part of these funds for the construction of housing for military personnel.

During the negotiations to develop the Agreement, the Japanese side had an undoubted advantage over the Russian side on the main issue - the clarity of its position. The Japanese openly declared and defended by all means available to them their territorial claims to the islands of Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and Habomai. One may not agree with this approach, but it is the openness and clarity of Japan's principled approach on this issue that does it credit, and it has always remained unchanged. Japan did not solve fishing problems during the negotiations on the Agreement, but sought and achieved strengthening of its position on territorial claims.

It is more difficult to understand Russia's position on this fundamental issue. We seem to recognize the existence of a territorial problem and at the same time cannot decide what we are going to defend. All this creates a kind of vacuum in our position, which is filled with improvisation by various kinds of officials from different departments participating in negotiations with Japan. Hence the precariousness of our positions, the ambiguity of the main goal - either to solve fishing problems, or to please temporary politicians?

As for cooperation between the two countries in the field of fisheries, it is really necessary for both our and Japanese fishermen. Such cooperation in the conditions of market relations is complex, since competition for resources is intertwined with the need to preserve them and, at the same time, with competition for sales markets. Therefore, fishing relations between Russia and Japan should be based on an equal and mutually beneficial basis without any connection with the so-called territorial problem.

Of course, Tokyo's position towards Russia has undergone some changes. She abandoned the principle of “inseparability of politics and economics,” that is, a strict link between the territorial problem and cooperation in the economic field, including fisheries. Now the Japanese government is trying to pursue a flexible policy, which means softly promoting economic cooperation and solving the territorial problem at the same time. In words there seems to be a change, but in practice there is again pressure and pressure. As before, only in fishing there are restrictions for Russian fishing vessels, such as calls at ports, import quotas for a number of fishing objects, closure of fishing areas, which does not allow us to choose even the quota allocated to our vessels in the 200-mile zone of Japan; There are difficulties in creating mixed enterprises in Japan, etc. True, here in Russia it is still quite difficult for Japanese entrepreneurs to do business. All this hinders fishing cooperation, and most importantly, does not create sustainable trust between business people. In general, in my opinion, the Japanese should change their image of Russia as a potential enemy, just as we have the Russian image of Japan as a constant aggressor in the past to the image of neighboring countries that can cooperate mutually beneficially. As a key link in such development of cooperation, fisheries, the fisheries of the two countries, including in the Kuril Islands region, should be chosen. Of course, as past experience has shown, this is not easy to do, especially in a short time. But we must try to realize this chance, and not invent non-existent problems of safe fishing. Much here depends on the Japanese side, on its lifting of all restrictions on such cooperation, including the removal of political demands on the territorial issue from this direction. After all, Japan managed to take this path with China and even concluded a peace treaty, although the problems regarding the ownership of the Senkaku (Diaoyudai) islands have not been resolved. A close analogy with the Kuril Islands.

On November 9, 2006, the Sakhalin Regional Duma adopted a resolution “On Japan's continuing cartographic aggression against the Russian Federation.” It reports that, contrary to bilateral and multilateral agreements, in the conditions of the Cold War, Japan, since 1969, began drawing up and distributing political maps on which the image of Russian territory was distorted: the Kuril Islands south of Urup Island began to be designated as Japanese territory, The national mapping department systematically includes the area of ​​the islands of the Lesser Kuril chain, as well as Kunashir and Iturup, in the total area of ​​Japan. The revision of political maps was followed by a revision of physical geography - the named islands on Japanese maps disappeared from the Kuril Archipelago

The only key to mutual understanding between the two countries is the creation of a climate of trust, trust and again trust, as well as broad mutually beneficial cooperation in a variety of areas of politics, economics and culture. Reducing the mistrust accumulated over a century to zero and starting to move towards trust with a plus is the key to the success of a peaceful neighborhood and tranquility in the border maritime areas of Russia and Japan. Will current politicians be able to realize this opportunity? Time will tell.

The authorities of Russia and Japan have been unable to sign a peace treaty since 1945 due to a dispute over the ownership of the southern part of the Kuril Islands.

The Northern Territories Problem (北方領土問題 Hoppo ryo do mondai) is a territorial dispute between Japan and Russia that Japan considers unresolved since the end of World War II. After the war, all the Kuril Islands came under the administrative control of the USSR, but a number of the southern islands - Iturup, Kunashir and the Lesser Kuril Ridge - are disputed by Japan.

In Russia, the disputed territories are part of the Kuril and South Kuril urban districts of the Sakhalin region. Japan claims four islands in the southern part of the Kuril ridge - Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and Habomai, citing the bilateral Treaty on Trade and Borders of 1855. Moscow's position is that the southern Kuril Islands became part of the USSR (which Russia became the successor of) results of the Second World War, and Russian sovereignty over them, which has the appropriate international legal registration, is beyond doubt.

The problem of ownership of the southern Kuril Islands is the main obstacle to the complete settlement of Russian-Japanese relations.

Iturup(Japanese: 択捉島 Etorofu) is an island in the southern group of the Great Kuril Islands, the largest island of the archipelago.

Kunashir(Ainu Black Island, Japanese 国後島 Kunashiri-to:) is the southernmost island of the Great Kuril Islands.

Shikotan(Japanese 色丹島 Sikotan-to:?, in early sources Sikotan; name from the Ainu language: “shi” - large, significant; “kotan” - village, city) is the largest island of the Lesser Ridge of the Kuril Islands.

Habomai(Japanese 歯舞群島 Habomai-gunto?, Suisho, “Flat Islands”) is the Japanese name for a group of islands in the northwest Pacific Ocean, together with the island of Shikotan in Soviet and Russian cartography, considered as the Lesser Kuril Ridge. The Habomai group includes the islands of Polonsky, Oskolki, Zeleny, Tanfilyeva, Yuri, Demina, Anuchina and a number of small ones. Separated by the Soviet Strait from the island of Hokkaido.

History of the Kuril Islands

17th century
Before the arrival of the Russians and Japanese, the islands were inhabited by the Ainu. In their language, “kuru” meant “a person who came from nowhere,” which is where their second name “Kurilians” came from, and then the name of the archipelago.

In Russia, the first mention of the Kuril Islands dates back to 1646, when N. I. Kolobov spoke about the bearded people inhabiting the islands ainah.

The Japanese received the first information about the islands during an expedition [source not specified 238 days] to Hokkaido in 1635. It is not known whether she actually got to the Kuril Islands or learned about them indirectly, but in 1644 a map was drawn up on which they were designated under the collective name “thousand islands.” Candidate of Geographical Sciences T. Adashova notes that the map of 1635 “is considered by many scientists to be very approximate and even incorrect.” Then, in 1643, the islands were explored by the Dutch led by Martin Friese. This expedition compiled more detailed maps and described the lands.

XVIII century
In 1711, Ivan Kozyrevsky went to the Kuril Islands. He visited only 2 northern islands: Shumshu and Paramushira, but he questioned in detail the Ainu who inhabited them and the Japanese who were brought there by a storm. In 1719, Peter I sent an expedition to Kamchatka under the leadership of Ivan Evreinov and Fyodor Luzhin, which reached the island of Simushir in the south.

In 1738-1739, Martyn Shpanberg walked along the entire ridge, plotting the islands he encountered on the map. Subsequently, the Russians, avoiding dangerous voyages to the southern islands, developed the northern ones and imposed tribute on the local population. From those who did not want to pay it and went to distant islands, they took amanats - hostages from among their close relatives. But soon, in 1766, centurion Ivan Cherny from Kamchatka was sent to the southern islands. He was ordered to attract the Ainu into citizenship without the use of violence or threats. However, he did not follow this decree, mocked them, and poached. All this led to a revolt of the indigenous population in 1771, during which many Russians were killed.

The Siberian nobleman Antipov achieved great success with the Irkutsk translator Shabalin. They managed to win the favor of the Kurils, and in 1778-1779 they managed to bring into citizenship more than 1,500 people from Iturup, Kunashir and even Matsumaya (now Japanese Hokkaido). In the same 1779, Catherine II, by decree, freed those who had accepted Russian citizenship from all taxes. But relations with the Japanese were not built: they forbade the Russians from going to these three islands.

In the “Extensive Land Description of the Russian State...” of 1787, a list of 21 islands belonging to Russia was given. It included islands as far as Matsumaya (Hokkaido), the status of which was not clearly defined, since Japan had a city in its southern part. At the same time, the Russians had no real control even over the islands south of Urup. There, the Japanese considered the Kurilians their subjects and actively used violence against them, which caused discontent. In May 1788, a Japanese merchant ship arriving at Matsumai was attacked. In 1799, by order of the central government of Japan, two outposts were founded in Kunashir and Iturup, and security began to be maintained constantly.

19th century
Representative of the Russian-American Company Nikolai Rezanov, who arrived in Nagasaki as the first Russian envoy, tried to resume negotiations on trade with Japan in 1805. But he too failed. However, Japanese officials, who were not satisfied with the despotic policy of the supreme power, hinted to him that it would be nice to carry out a forceful action in these lands, which could push the situation from a dead point. This was carried out on behalf of Rezanov in 1806-1807 by an expedition of two ships led by Lieutenant Khvostov and Midshipman Davydov. Ships were looted, a number of trading posts were destroyed, and a Japanese village on Iturup was burned. They were later tried, but the attack led to a serious deterioration in Russian-Japanese relations for some time. In particular, this was the reason for the arrest of Vasily Golovnin’s expedition.

In exchange for ownership of southern Sakhalin, Russia transferred all of the Kuril Islands to Japan in 1875.

XX century
After defeat in the Russo-Japanese War in 1905, Russia transferred the southern part of Sakhalin to Japan.
In February 1945, the Soviet Union promised the United States and Great Britain to start a war with Japan, subject to the return of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands.
February 2, 1946. Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR on the inclusion of South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands into the RSFSR.
1947. Deportation of Japanese and Ainu from the islands to Japan. 17,000 Japanese and an unknown number of Ainu were evicted.
November 5, 1952. A powerful tsunami hit the entire coast of the Kuril Islands, Paramushir was hit the hardest. A giant wave washed away the city of Severo-Kurilsk (formerly Kashiwabara). It was forbidden to mention this disaster in the press.
In 1956, the Soviet Union and Japan adopted the Joint Treaty, officially ending the war between the two countries and handing over Habomai and Shikotan to Japan. However, it was not possible to sign the agreement: the United States threatened not to give Japan the island of Okinawa if Tokyo renounced its claims to Iturup and Kunashir.

Maps of the Kuril Islands

Kuril Islands on the English map of 1893. Plans of the Kuril Islands, from sketches chiefly mand by Mr. H. J. Snow, 1893. (London, Royal Geographical Society, 1897, 54×74 cm)

Fragment of the map Japan and Korea - Location of Japan in the Western Pacific (1:30 000 000), 1945

Photo map of the Kuril Islands based on a NASA satellite image, April 2010.

List of all islands

View of Habomai from Hokkaido
Green Island (Japanese: 志発島 Shibotsu-to)
Polonsky Island (Japanese: 多楽島 Taraku-to)
Tanfilyeva Island (Japanese: 水晶島 Suisho-jima)
Yuri Island (Japanese: 勇留島 Yuri-to)
Anuchina Island (秋勇留島 Akiyuri-to)
Demina Islands (Japanese: 春苅島 Harukari-to)
Shard Islands
Rock Kira
Cave Rock (Kanakuso) - sea lion rookery on the rock.
Sail Rock (Hokoki)
Rock Candle (Rosoku)
Fox Islands (Todo)
Cone Islands (Kabuto)
Jar Dangerous
Watchman Island (Khomosiri or Muika)

Drying Rock (Odoke)
Reef Island (Amagi-sho)
Signal Island (Japanese: 貝殻島 Kaigara-jima)
Amazing Rock (Hanare)
Rock Seagull

Table of contents

There is also a diametrically opposite point of view regarding the role of the United States in the foreign policy of Russia and Japan. The famous American scientist Raymond L. Garthoff argued that the American leadership was not sufficiently informed about the intricacies of the geographical boundaries of the Southern Kuril Islands, therefore the boundaries of the Soviet occupation were drawn in such a way that the islands of Shikotan and Habomai were annexed to the Southern Kuril Islands, and not to Hokkaido, as they should have been was to be." The author believes that the United States has never taken any definite position in relations between Russia and Japan. For it, only a complete settlement of relations between them is important.

The first work in Soviet historical science that covers all aspects of Soviet-Japanese relations since 1917. to this day, this is a collective monograph edited by Doctor of Historical Sciences I.A. Latysheva.

A notable milestone in the historiography of the problem was the work of Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor A.A. Koshkin. He pays great attention to the analysis of agreements signed by the allied powers in 1943-1945, showing that Japan's current policy towards Russia is a policy based on the militaristic past of our Far Eastern neighbor.

Today, there are a number of rather complex problems in relations between Russia and Japan.

Firstly, there is the absence of a peace treaty due to the unresolved territorial issue.

However, on the pages of the press you can find an opinion that Russia does not need such an agreement. Doctor of Law A.N. Nikolaev notes in his article that “It is quite possible to do without a peace treaty with Japan, because we did without a similar treaty with Germany. The main thing has already been done: back in 1956, the Soviet Union and Japan made a joint statement on ending the state of war and restoring diplomatic relations.”

Most researchers believe that the problem exists and needs to be solved. Essentially, all recipes for solving the issue boil down to either Russia giving up the Kuril ridge or retaining rights to them. The arguments of supporters of the return of the islands to Japan can be summarized as follows:

The norms of international law and the image of Russia as a civilized state dictate the need to return the islands as a correction for a historical mistake, and free of charge, because bargaining on this issue would humiliate two great nations. The logic of history requires the completion of the dismantling that has begun in Europe. The Yalta system, moreover, Russia stated at the official level that it no longer considers its relations with Japan as relations between a winner and a loser.

The return of the islands will radically improve trade and economic relations with Japan. This will contribute to the success of reforms and will open up new opportunities for Russia to integrate into the economic structures of the Asia-Pacific region and thereby improve the living standards of the population, which is the main and long-term goal of any country

Opponents of resolving the territorial issue in favor of Japan believe that:

The return of the islands sets a precedent for many other territorial claims, which will significantly complicate its geopolitical position.

The economic damage from the return of the islands will exceed the possible benefits from cooperation with Japan, which is no longer interested in Russia as a source of raw materials and energy or a potential market for its high-tech goods.

Researchers find very compelling arguments in defense of their interests.

Having highlighted the main points related to the fate of these islands, which have a certain impact on the national security of Russia and its defensive potential, Makeev notes that the loss of these islands creates a serious gap in the unified defense system of Russian Primorye, reduces the safety of the forces of the Pacific Fleet and the possibility of their deployment to the Pacific ocean.

Japan's demands to give it the Kuril Islands, according to Gamazkov, are dictated by economic interests. He notes that a strong magnetic anomaly is observed in the Kuril Strait, suggesting that iron ore deposits are located here at shallow depths.

Japan is striving to expand its territory, Medvedev believes, hence the territorial demands.

The basis of the source study foundation of the study was: Joint agreements, periodicals, texts of the Yalta Agreement of the USA, USSR and Great Britain on issues of the Far East.

An integrated approach to the study of sources, their critical analysis, comparison and generalization of the results obtained made it possible to study the nature of the relationship between Russia and Japan.

The methodological basis of the work is determined by the principles of historicism and scientific objectivity. Methods of analysis, synthesis, and generalization serve as practical means of research.

Purpose Our research is to study the origins and causes of the territorial problem in the relationship between Russia and Japan.

Based on this, the following are put forward: tasks:

Find out when and by whom the discovery of the Kuril Islands was made and their development;

Determine the significance of the Kuril Islands in relation to Russia and Japan in the 19th century;

Identify the affiliation of the territories we are considering as a result of the Russian-Japanese War (1904-1905);

Analyze the transfer of the Kuril ridge to Russia as a result of the Second World War (1939-1945)4

Cover the Kuril problem in the 50s of the XX century.

Consider how the relationship between Russia and Japan is developing today;

Consider existing positions on the territorial issue.

The first European expedition to land on the Kuril and Sakhalin coasts was the expedition of the Dutch navigator M.G. Friese in 1643. He not only explored and mapped the southeast of Sakhalin and the Southern Kuril Islands, but also proclaimed Urup the possession of Holland, which, however, remained without any consequences. Russian explorers also played a huge role in the study of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands.

First, in 1646, the expedition of V.D. Poyarkov discovers the northwestern coast of Sakhalin, and in 1697, V.V. Atlasov learns about the existence of the Kuril Islands. Already in the 10s. XVIII century The process of studying and gradually annexing the Kuril Islands to the Russian state begins. Russia's successes in the development of the Kuril Islands became possible thanks to the enterprise, courage and patience of D.Ya.Antsiferov, I.P.Kozyrevsky, I.M.Evreinov, F.F.Luzhin, M.P.Shpanberg, V.Valton, D.Ya Shabalin, G.I. Shelikhov and many other Russian explorers. Simultaneously with the Russians, who were moving along the Kuril Islands from the north, the Japanese began to penetrate into the Southern Kuril Islands and the extreme south of Sakhalin. Already in the second half of the 18th century. Japanese trading posts and fishing grounds appeared here, and since the 80s. XVIII century - scientific expeditions begin to work. Mogami Tokunai and Mamiya Rinzou played a special role in Japanese research. At the end of the 18th century. Research off the coast of Sakhalin was carried out by a French expedition under the command of J.-F. La Perouse and an English expedition under the command of V.R. Broughton.

The first Russian settlements in the Kuril Islands at that time are reported in Dutch, Scandinavian and German medieval chronicles and maps. The first reports about the Kuril lands and their inhabitants reached the Russians in the middle of the 17th century.

In 1697, during the expedition of Vladimir Atlasov to Kamchatka, new information about the islands appeared; the Russians explored the islands as far as Simushir (an island in the middle group of the Great Ridge of the Kuril Islands).

Decrees of 1779, 1786 and 1799 - confirmed the entry of the Kuril Islands, including the southern ones, into the Russian Empire.

The Decree of 1786 is of greatest importance. It was published on the basis of a memorandum prepared by the President of the Commerce Board A. Vorontsov and a member of the Board of Foreign Affairs A. Bezborodko, and assigned to Russia vast possessions in Asia, including the Kuril Islands.

The decree, in particular, said: “As a generally accepted rule, those peoples who made the first discovery of them have the right to unknown lands, as in former times....... it was usually done that any European people who found unknown land, they put their mark on it...., which is the whole proof of the right to take possession, then as a result of this they must undeniably belong to Russia: ... The Kuril Islands range." Provisions of the Decree of 1786 were confirmed in 1799.

Thus, in accordance with official Russian documents at the end of the 18th century, the entire Kuril Ridge was considered as part of Russian territory.

Of the 3 main conditions developed by G. Viton, the presence of which gave the state a “legal title,” Russia at the end of the 18th century had almost all of their elements. This is compliance with the provisions of the “First Discovery”, repeated descriptions and mapping, including official publications of maps, installation of cross signs with inscriptions, notification of other states (Decree of 1786). Carrying out research, including geological exploration and economic development of the Kuril Islands by introducing fish and animal fishing there, experiments with agriculture, establishing settlements and winter huts, fully complies with the provision on “first development - first occupation”.

Administrative management of the islands from Kamchatka, systematic collection of tribute from local residents.

By the end of the 18th century, Russia, in accordance with the then existing norms of international law, had sufficient grounds to consider the entire Kuril Ridge as its own territory. At the same time, not a single Japanese legislative act of the 18th and early 19th centuries is known that would talk about the inclusion of the southern Kuril Islands into Japan.

Based on the above, the following conclusions can be drawn. The Kuril Islands were discovered in 1643 by a European expedition led by Martin Gerriteson de Vries. But there were no consequences as such. Russian travelers and sailors played a huge role in their study.

In 1874, with the arrival in St. Petersburg of Japan's Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to Russia, Enomoto Takeaki, negotiations began again. He brought two projects to resolve the main problem of the negotiations - ownership of Sakhalin Island. According to the first, in exchange for Southern Sakhalin, Russia had to cede to Japan the island of Urup with adjacent islets and compensate for Japanese real estate on Sakhalin. According to the second, Japan was supposed to receive all the Kuril Islands. On May 7, 1875, Russian Chancellor A. M. Gorchakov and Japanese envoy Enomoto Takeaki signed a Treaty between Russia and Japan, called the St. Petersburg Treaty. In his art. 1 stated: “His Majesty the Emperor of Japan, for himself and his heirs, cedes to His Majesty the Emperor of Russia part of the territory of the island of Sakhalin, which he now owns... From now on, the entire said island of Sakhalin will completely belong to the Russian Empire, and the border line between the Russian and Japanese empires will be pass through these waters through the Strait of La Perouse." Article 2 stated: “In return for the cession of Russia’s rights to the island of Sakhalin... His Majesty the All-Russian Emperor for himself and his heirs cedes to His Majesty the Emperor of Japan a group of islands called the Kuril Islands... This group includes the following 18 islands, namely : 1. Shumshu, 2. Alaid, 3. Paramushir, 4. Makanrushi, 5. Onekotan, 6. Kharimkotan, 7. Ekarma, 8. Shiashkotan, 9. Mussir, 10. Raikoke, 11. Matua, 12. Rastua, 13 The islands of Sredneva and Ushisir, 14. Ketoy, 15. Simusir, 16. Broughton, 17. The islands of Cherpoy and Brat Cherpoev, 18. Urup, so the border line between the Russian and Japanese empires in these waters will pass through the strait located between the cape The Shovel of the Kamchatka Peninsula and the Shumshu Island.” According to other articles of the St. Petersburg Treaty, all residents of the ceded territories were given the right to retain their previous citizenship or return to their homeland, but at the same time they fell under the jurisdiction of the country to which the corresponding territory passed. In the ports of the Sea of ​​Okhotsk and Kamchatka, Japan received the same rights for navigation, trade and fishing as countries that had the status of the most favored nation. In addition, Japanese ships calling at the port of Korsakov were exempt from port fees and customs duties for a period of 10 years. A Japanese consulate was opened there. The Russian side paid Japan over 112 thousand rubles for real estate in South Sakhalin.

The Russo-Japanese Treaty of 1875 evoked mixed reactions in both countries. Many in Japan condemned him, believing that the Japanese government exchanged Sakhalin, which had important political and economic significance, for the “small ridge of pebbles” that they imagined the Kuril Islands to be. Others simply stated that Japan had exchanged "one part of its territory for another." The famous Japanese writer and publicist Shimei Futabatei (1864-1909) wrote: “Public opinion was seething. The feelings that had been hidden in me since early childhood, the feelings of a man of the Restoration, began to boil within me. The public outrage over the treaty and my feelings merged into one. In the end, I decided that the greatest danger to Japan's future was Russia." S. Futabatei believed that the day would come when Japan would fight Russia.

Similar assessments were heard from the Russian side: many believed that both territories belonged to Russia by right of discoverer. The 1875 treaty did not become an irrevocable act of territorial demarcation between Russia and Japan and could not prevent further conflicts between the two sides.

As for the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian-Japanese Treaty of 1875, it was quite high, since the Russian government counted on improving foreign trade relations with Japan after the resolution of the Sakhalin problem. The cession of the Kuril Islands was not considered serious because the government of the Russian Empire underestimated their strategic importance.

Based on the above, we can conclude that the situation with the Kuril Islands, which had existed for many years, became official with the adoption of the Shimoda Treaty of 1855. Its result was that Sakhalin became undivided, and Japan, in turn, received the rights to Habomai, Shikotan, Kunashir and Iturup.

As for the St. Petersburg tract, there was talk about the exchange of the Kuril Islands for Sakhalin, i.e. practical surrender of the Kuril Islands without any compensation. The next point in Russian-Japanese relations was the Russian-Japanese War.

By imposing the unjust, predatory Treaty of Portsmouth on Russia, Japan thereby crossed out previous treaties concluded with Russia and completely lost any right to refer to them. Therefore, the attempts of the Japanese ruling circles to use the Shimoda Treaty, trampled by the Japanese military, to justify their territorial claims to the Soviet Union are completely untenable.

While recalling the first Russian-Japanese treaties, Japan at the same time prefers to “forget” about the barbaric aggression committed by Japanese imperialism against our country - the Japanese intervention in the Soviet Far East in 1918-1922. The Japanese invaders first occupied Vladivostok, and then occupied Primorye and the Amur region, Transbaikalia and Northern Sakhalin (which remained under Japanese occupation until 1925). Japan concentrated 11 infantry divisions (out of 21 it had at that time) numbering about 175 thousand people, as well as large warships and marines, in the Soviet Far East.

The Japanese intervention caused deep wounds to the Soviet people and enormous destruction to the Soviet country. According to the calculations of a special commission, the damage caused by the Japanese interventionists in the Soviet Far East amounted to a colossal amount of several tens of billions of rubles. This shameful action is now virtually hushed up in Japan; the younger generation of Japanese, who continue to be frightened by the “Soviet threat,” knows almost nothing about the Japanese intervention against Soviet Russia. Mentions of it in Japanese textbooks are kept to a minimum.

Having intervened in Soviet Russia, Japan finally deprived itself of all moral rights to refer to the treaties of 1855 and 1873, which it itself annulled.

Thus, we can conclude that Japan, as a result of the Russo-Japanese War, received the desired territories in the Far East. Japan achieved the predatory separation of a number of the Kuril Islands from Russia, despite previous peace treaties. But one can also say that the Portsmouth Treaty was not entirely competent, because by attacking Russia, Japan violated paragraph one of the Shimoda Treaty of 1855 - “From now on, let there be permanent peace and sincere friendship between Russia and Japan.” Also, the 1905 treaty practically terminated the 1875 treaty, which the Japanese are trying to refer to. Because its meaning was that Japan was giving up Sakhalin in exchange for the Kuril Islands. The 1875 highway between Japan and Russia becomes, most likely, a historical monument, and not a document on which to rely. The next stage in Russian-Japanese relations will be the Second World War.

On February 11, 1945, the leaders of the USSR, USA and Great Britain signed an agreement in Crimea that 2-3 months after the surrender of Germany and the end of the war in Europe, the USSR would enter the war against Japan on the side of the allies, subject to: “Restoration of rights belonging to Russia, violated by the treacherous attack of Japan in 1904, namely the return of the southern part of Sakhalin Island and all adjacent islands; transfer of the Kuril Islands” The heads of government of the USSR, USA and Great Britain signed this agreement, in which they stated that the claims of the USSR should be satisfied.

When he took office, Truman was informed of secret work to create an atomic bomb. Truman had no doubt that the entry of the Soviet Union into the war would finally convince Japan of the inevitability of its complete defeat, and then atomic weapons would not be needed. However, the thought of removing the USSR from the post-war settlement in East Asia haunted him. Truman's famous statement on this matter is: "If the bomb goes off, which I think it will, I will certainly have a club for these guys."

On August 6 and 8, 1945, the Americans, without any military necessity, dropped two atomic bombs on the peaceful, densely populated Japanese cities of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. However, this did not force Japan to capitulate. The Japanese government hid the message about the American use of the atomic bomb from the people and continued to prepare for a decisive battle on its territory. In strict accordance with the promises made in Crimea, exactly three months after the surrender of Germany, the USSR government declared war on Japan on August 8. On August 9, at an emergency meeting of the Supreme Council for the Management of the War, Japanese Prime Minister Suzuki said: the entry of the Soviet Union into the war this morning puts us completely in a hopeless situation and makes it impossible to continue the war.

On September 2, 1945, in Tokyo Bay, on board the American battleship Missouri, representatives of the allied nations, including Soviet Lieutenant General K.N. Derevianko and representatives of Japan signed a historic pact on the unconditional surrender of Japan.

The United States issues two official statements in August 1945: General Order No. 1 and Initial US Policy in Japan after the Surrender. Japan was defined as consisting of the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu and Shikoku and such small individual islands as are defined by the Cairo Declaration. With his declaration of intent, Washington openly introduced an ideological element into the American-Soviet struggle for influence on the post-war world.

The peace treaty package with Japan developed by the United States included a provision that Japan renounced all rights, title and claims to the Kuril Islands and to that part of Sakhalin Island and the adjacent islands over which Japan acquired sovereignty under the Treaty of Portsmouth. But this provision puts the issue of South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands in limbo, since according to this agreement, Japan renounces South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands, but at the same time does not recognize the sovereignty of the USSR over these territories. And this happened when Southern Sakhalin and all the Kuril Islands, in accordance with the Yalta Agreement, were already officially included in the USSR.

Thus, the United States provided for in the San Francisco Treaty the absence of a genuine peace settlement between Japan and the USSR, since such a settlement was supposed to include the final resolution of all problems, including territorial ones. On July 12, 1951, a joint American-British draft peace treaty with Japan was published.

Head of the Soviet delegation A.A. Gromyko, speaking on September 5, emphasized that the American-British draft treaty does not satisfy any state that, not in words but in deeds, stands for the establishment of lasting peace. So Moscow refused to join the signing of the peace treaty.

Thus, at the Yalta and Potsdam conferences, agreements were developed according to which the USSR was obliged to enter the war with Japan subject to the return of its rights to the southern part of Sakhalin Island and the Kuril Islands. Fulfilling its allied duty, the USSR declares war on Japan. After the surrender of Japan, the United States embarked on a path of violent opposition to Soviet influence. Only in 1956, thanks to the political and social forces of Japan, diplomatic relations between the United States and Japan were restored.

As historians note, for the Soviet Union the “Kuril issue” was closed once and for all, as was repeatedly stated by the head of the Soviet Ministry of Foreign Affairs A.A. Gromyko. And only short-sightedness and lack of competence, and perhaps the desire to outplay the last Soviet Japanese diplomatically - Gorbachev - Shevardnadze and, especially, the first leaders of the Russian Federation - Yeltsin - Kozyrev, led to the fact that it began to be discussed again at the official level to the untold joy of the Japanese and Americans and all the obvious and hidden ill-wishers of our country within it and abroad.

Thus, we can conclude that in the 50s of the 20th century another stage in the history of the Kuril Islands passed. In 1956 N.S. Khrushchev signed the Moscow Declaration. The attitude towards her is ambivalent. On the one hand, the state of war was ended, and an attempt was made to establish diplomatic and consular relations with Japan. On the other hand, the USSR announced its agreement to transfer the islands of Hamboy and Sikotan to Japan, but after the conclusion of a peace treaty. But the Japanese violated the terms of the declaration and entered into a military cooperation agreement with the United States, which secured the presence of American armed forces on Japanese territory. Despite all the short-sightedness of Khrushchev’s statements, they were talking about “transfer” and not “return”, that is, readiness to dispose of their territory as an act of goodwill, which does not create a precedent for revising the results of the war. This declaration has become a “stumbling block” in our relations with the Japanese today.

In Japan, these territories are simply called the “Northern Territories,” making it clear that they belong to Japan and there is nothing to argue about.

What arguments does Japan make? Japan's position is based, first of all, on the assertion that historically the four islands of Urup, Iturup, Habomai and Shikotan are primordially Japanese land and remain so, despite their occupation by the USSR in 1945. At the same time, they refer to the Synod Treaty of 1855, according to which the Russian-Japanese border in the Kuril Islands area was established between the islands of Urup and Iturup, with Iturup and the islands to the south of it being recognized as the possessions of Japan, and Urup and the islands to the north - of Russia.

In international legal terms, Japan's position is based on a legalistic argument, namely, these 4 islands are not part of the Kuril Islands, but a continuation of Hokkaido. Therefore, Japan states, when it signed the peace treaty, it did not give up these islands. Thus, Japan bases its claims on the assertion that the islands are not part of the Kuril Islands. If we turn to the history of the signing of the San Francisco Treaty between Japan and the United States, we will see that the American draft peace treaty left the territorial issue open, because there was no precise definition of the limits of the Kuril Islands.

The territorial issue was officially announced on October 19, 1951. The head of the treaty department of the Japanese Foreign Ministry, Kumao Nishimurana, at a meeting of the special committee on the peace treaty of the House of Representatives of the Japanese Parliament, clarified the concept of “Kuril Islands”, saying: “I believe that the territorial limits of the Kuril Islands, which are referred to in the treaty, include both the Northern Kuril Islands and southern Kuril Islands"

But even in Japan there are scientists who have an opinion different from the official point of view. For example, the Hokkaido Shimbun newspaper published the opinion of professors S. Muroyama and H. Wada, who express doubts about the validity of the statement of the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs that in the concept The “Kuril Islands”, which Japan renounced under the San Francisco Peace Treaty, do not include the islands of Kunashir and Iturup, which the Japanese Foreign Ministry’s reference to the Synod Treaty of 1885 in order to confirm the official position is untenable, since, as they believe, at that time In all diplomatic documents, Kunashir and Iturup are included in the concept of the Kuril Islands, and the Japanese Foreign Ministry referred to the Japanese text of the treatise, which represents a translator’s error.

Today, the media often hear statements that the USSR allowed the forcible seizure of islands belonging to Japan, and the question of their return is raised, and all kinds of historical evidence and sociological surveys are conducted in favor of this.

N.S. Khrushchev was one of the first to make such an assessment in his memoirs: “If we had previously given a correct assessment of the conditions that emerged after the defeat of Japanese militarism and signed a peace treaty developed by the American side without our participation, but taking into account our interests, we They would have opened an embassy right away. We were invited to sign a peace treaty with Japan, but we refused. An unclear situation has developed that continues to this day.

Thus, the position of our state, like that of Japan, is completely justified, but it must be remembered that the disputed territories belong to us. And the fate of these territories depends on the policy of our state.

http://archive.mid.ru//bl.nsf