Kuriles: history with geography. The problem of ownership of the Kuril Islands

The name of the islands "Kuril" does not come from "smoking" volcanoes. It is based on the Ainu word "kur", "kuru", meaning "man". This is how the Ainu, the indigenous inhabitants of the islands, called themselves, this is how they presented themselves to the Kamchatka Cossacks, and they called them “Kurils”, “Kuril men”. Hence the name of the islands.

The Ainu gave a suitable name to each island: Paramushir means "wide island", Kunashir - "black island", Urup "salmon", Iturup - "big salmon", Onekotan - "old settlement", Paranay - "big river", Shikotan - " the best place". Most of the Ainu names have been preserved, although there have been attempts from both the Russian and Japanese sides to rename the islands in their own way. True, neither side sparkled with fantasy - both tried to assign serial numbers to the islands as names: the First Island, the Second, etc., but the Russians counted from the north, and the Japanese, naturally, from the south.
Russians, like the Japanese, learned about the islands in the middle of the 17th century. The first detailed information about them was provided by Vladimir Atlasov in 1697. At the beginning of the 18th century. Peter I became aware of their existence, and expeditions began to be sent to the Kuril Land one after another. In 1711, the Cossack Ivan Kozyrevsky visited the two northern islands of Shumshu and Paramushir, in 1719 Ivan Evreinov and Fyodor Luzhin reached the island of Simushir. In 1738-1739. Martyn Spanberg, walking along the entire ridge, put the islands he saw on the map. The study of new places was followed by their development - the collection of yasak from the local population, the attraction of the Ainu into Russian citizenship, accompanied, as usual, by violence. As a result, in 1771 the Ainu rebelled and killed many Russians. By 1779, however, it was possible to establish relations with the smokers and bring more than 1,500 people from Kunashir, Iturup and Matsumai (present-day Hokkaido) into Russian citizenship. All of them were freed by Catherine II from taxes. The Japanese, however, did not like this situation, and they forbade the Russians to appear on these three islands.
By and large, the status of the islands south of Urup was not clearly defined at that time, and the Japanese also considered them theirs. In 1799 they founded two outposts on Kunashir and Iturup.
At the beginning of the 19th century, after the unsuccessful attempt by Nikolai Rezanov (the first Russian envoy to Japan) to resolve this issue, Russian-Japanese relations only worsened.
In 1855, according to the Shimodsky Treaty, Sakhalin Island was recognized as “undivided between Russia and Japan”, the Kuril Islands north of Iturup were Russian possessions, and the southern Kuriles (Kunashir, Iturup, Shikotan and a number of small ones) were Japanese possessions. Under an 1875 treaty, Russia handed over all the Kuril Islands to Japan in exchange for an official renunciation of claims to Sakhalin Island.
In February 1945, at the Yalta conference of the heads of powers of the anti-Hitler coalition, an agreement was reached on the unconditional transfer of the Kuril Islands to the Soviet Union after the victory over Japan. By September 1945, Soviet troops occupied the South Kuriles. However, in the Act of Surrender, signed by Japan on September 2, nothing was directly said about the transfer of these islands to the USSR.
In 1947, 17,000 Japanese and an unknown number of Ainu were deported to Japan from the islands that became part of the RSFSR. In 1951, Japan began to make claims to Iturup, Kunashir and the Lesser Kuril Ridge (Shikotan and Habomai), which were given to her under the Shimoda Treaty in 1855.
In 1956, diplomatic relations between the USSR and Japan were established and a Joint Treaty on the Transfer of the Shikotan and Habomai Islands to Japan was adopted. However, the actual transfer of these islands must be made after the conclusion of a peace treaty, which has not yet been signed due to Japan's remaining claims to Kunashir and Iturup.

The ridge of the Kuril Islands is a special world. Each of the islands is a volcano, a fragment of a volcano or a chain of volcanoes that have merged with their soles. The Kuriles are located in the Pacific Ring of Fire, in total there are about a hundred volcanoes on them, 39 of them are active. In addition, there are many hot springs. The ongoing movements of the earth's crust are evidenced by frequent earthquakes and seaquakes, causing tidal waves of enormous destructive tsunami power. The last powerful tsunami was formed during the November 15, 2006 earthquake and reached the coast of California.
The highest and most active of the Alaid volcanoes on Atlasov Island (2339 m). Actually, the whole island is the surface part of a large volcanic cone. The last eruption occurred in 1986. The volcano island has an almost regular shape and looks incredibly picturesque in the middle of the ocean. Many find that its forms are even more correct than those of the famous one.
Near the eastern underwater slopes of the Kuril Islands, there is a narrow deep-water depression - the Kuril-Kamchatka Trench, up to 9717 m deep and 59 km wide on average.
The relief and nature of the islands are very diverse: bizarre forms of coastal cliffs, multi-colored pebbles, large and small boiling lakes, waterfalls. A special attraction is Cape Stolbchaty on the island of Kunashir, which rises above the water with a sheer wall and consists entirely of columnar units - giant basalt five- and six-sided pillars formed as a result of the solidification of lava that poured into the water column and then raised to the surface.
Volcanic activity, warm and cold sea currents determine the unique diversity of flora and fauna of the islands, strongly elongated from north to south. If in the north, in a harsh climate, woody vegetation is represented by shrub forms, then coniferous and broad-leaved forests with a large number of lianas grow on the southern islands; Kuril bamboo forms impenetrable thickets and wild magnolia blooms. There are about 40 endemic plant species on the islands. There are many bird colonies in the South Kurils region, one of the main bird migration routes passes here. Salmon spawn in the rivers. Coastal zone - rookeries of marine mammals. The underwater world is particularly diverse: crabs, squids and other molluscs, crustaceans, sea cucumbers, sea cucumbers, whales, killer whales. This is one of the most productive areas of the oceans.
Iturup is the largest of the Kuril Islands. On an area of ​​about 3200 km 2 there are 9 active volcanoes, as well as the city and the unofficial "capital" of the islands, due to its central location, Kurilsk, founded in 1946 at the mouth of the river with the "speaking name" Kurilka.

Three administrative districts with centers in Yuzhno-Kurilsk (Kunashir).

Kurilsk (Iturup) and Severo-Kurilsk (Paramushir).
Largest island: Iturup (3200 km 2).

Numbers

Area: about 15,600 km2.

Population: about 19,000 people (2007).

highest point: Alaid volcano (2339 m) on Atlasov island.

The length of the Great Kuril Ridge: about 1200 km.
The length of the Lesser Kuril Ridge: about 100 km.

Economy

Mineral resources: non-ferrous metals, mercury, natural gas, oil, rhenium (one of the rarest elements of the earth's crust), gold, silver, titanium, iron.

Fishing (chum salmon, etc.) and sea animals (seals, sea lions).

Climate and weather

Moderate monsoonal, severe, with long, cold, stormy winters and short, foggy summers.

Average annual rainfall: about 1000 mm, mostly in the form of snow.

A small number of sunny days occur in autumn.
Average temperature:-7°С in February, +10°С in July.

Attractions

■ Volcanoes, hot springs, boiling lakes, waterfalls.
■ Atlasov Island: Alaid volcano;
■ Kunashir: nature reserve "Kurilsky" with Tyatya volcano (1819 m), Cape Stolbchaty;
■ Rookeries of fur seals and seals.

Curious facts

■ In 1737, a monstrous wave about fifty meters high rose in the sea and hit the shore with such force that some rocks collapsed. At the same time, new rocky cliffs rose from under the water in one of the Kuril Straits.
■ In 1780, the ship "Natalia" was thrown by a tsunami deep into the island of Urup, 300 meters from the coast. The ship remained ashore.
■ As a result of an earthquake on the island of Simushir in 1849, water suddenly disappeared from springs and wells. This forced the inhabitants to leave the island.
■ During the eruption of the Sarychev volcano on the island of Matua in 1946, lava flows reached the sea. The glow was visible for 150 km, and the ashes fell even in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky. The thickness of the ash layer on the island reached four meters.
■ In November 1952, a powerful tsunami hit the entire coast of the Kuriles. Paramushir suffered more than other islands. The wave practically washed away the city of Severo-Kurilsk. The press was forbidden to mention this catastrophe.
■ On Kunashir Island and the islands of the Lesser Kuril Ridge in 1984, the Kurilsky Nature Reserve was established. 84 species of its inhabitants are listed in the Red Book.
■ A patriarch tree grows in the north of Kunashir Island, it even has a proper name - “Sage”. This is a yew, its trunk diameter is 130 cm, it is believed that it is over 1000 years old.
■ The infamous tsunami of November 2006 “noted” on Shikotan Island, according to instruments, with a wave of 153 cm high.

The history of the end of the Second World War is interesting.

As you know, on August 6, 1945, the US Air Force dropped a nuclear bomb on Hiroshima, and then on August 9, 1945, on Nagasaki. The plans were to drop several more bombs, the third of which would be ready by August 17-18 and would have been dropped if such an order had been given by Truman. Tom did not have to solve the dilemma, since on August 14-15 the Japanese government announced its surrender.

Soviet and Russian citizens, of course, know that by dropping nuclear bombs, the Americans committed a war crime, purely to scare Stalin, and the Americans and the Japanese - that they forced Japan to capitulate in World War II, which saved at least a million human lives, mostly military and Japanese civilians, and, of course, allied soldiers, mostly Americans.

Imagine for a moment, did the Americans scare Stalin with a nuclear bomb, even if they suddenly set such a goal? The answer is obvious - no. The USSR entered the war with Japan only on August 8, 1945, i.e. 2 days after the bombing of Hiroshima. The date of May 8 is not accidental. At the Yalta Conference on February 4-11, 1945, Stalin promised that the USSR would enter the war with Japan 2-3 months after the end of the war with Germany, with which [Japan] had a neutrality pact concluded on April 13, 1941 (see. the main events of World War II according to the author of this LJ). Thus, Stalin fulfilled his promise on the last day of the promised 2-3 months after the surrender of Germany, but immediately after the bombing of Hiroshima. Would he have fulfilled this promise or not without it, is interesting question, perhaps historians have an answer to it, but this is not known to me.

So, Japan announced its surrender on August 14-15, but this did not lead to the end of hostilities against the USSR. The Soviet army continued to advance in Manchuria. Again, it is obvious to Soviet and Russian citizens that hostilities continued because the Japanese army refused to surrender because some did not reach the surrender order, and some ignored it. The question is, of course, what would happen if the Soviet army stopped offensive operations after August 14-15. Would this lead to the surrender of the Japanese and save about 10 thousand lives of Soviet soldiers?

As is known, between Japan and the USSR, and after Russia, there is still no peace treaty. The problem of a peace treaty is linked to the so-called "northern territories" or the disputed islands of the Lesser Kuril Ridge.

Let's start. Under the cut, a Google earth image of the territory of Hokkaido (Japan) and now Russian territories to the north - Sakhalin, the Kuriles and Kamchatka. The Kuril Islands are divided into the Big Ridge, which includes large and small islands from Shumshu in the north to Kunashir in the south, and the Small Ridge, which includes Shikotan in the north to the islands of the Habomai group in the south (limited in the diagram by white lines).

From the blog

To understand the problem disputed territories let's plunge into the deaf history of the development of the Far East by the Japanese and Russians. Before those and others, local Ainu and other nationalities lived there, whose opinion, according to the good old tradition, does not bother anyone because of their almost complete disappearance (Ainu) and / or Russification (Kamchadals). The Japanese were the first to enter these territories. First they came to Hokkaido, and by 1637 they had mapped Sakhalin and the Kuriles.

From the blog

Later, Russians came to these places, drew up maps and dates, and in 1786 Catherine II declared the Kuriles her possessions. Sakhalin thus remained a draw.

From the blog

In 1855, namely on February 7, an agreement was signed between Japan and Russia, according to which Urup and the islands of the Great Kuril ridge to the north went to Russia, and Iturup and the islands to the south, including all the islands of the Lesser Kuril ridge - to Japan. Sakhalin, speaking modern language, was a disputed possession. True, due to the small number of Japanese and Russian populations, the issue was not so serious at the state level, except that merchants had problems.

From the blog

In 1875, the issue of Sakhalin was settled in St. Petersburg. Sakhalin passed completely to Russia, in return Japan received all the Kuril Islands.

From the blog

In 1904, the Russo-Japanese War began in the Far East, in which Russia was defeated, and as a result, in 1905, the southern part of Sakhalin passed to Japan. In 1925 the USSR recognizes this state of affairs. After there were all sorts of minor skirmishes, but the status quo lasted until the end of World War II.

From the blog

Finally, at the Yalta Conference on February 4-11, 1945, Stalin discussed the issue of the Far East with the Allies. I repeat, he promised that the USSR would enter the war with Japan after the victory over Germany, which was already just around the corner, but in return the USSR would return Sakhalin, as illegally conquered by Japan during the war of 1905, and would receive the Kuriles, though in an indefinite amount.

And here the most interesting begins in the context of the Kuril Islands.

August 16-23 with fights Soviet army breaks the Japanese grouping in the Northern Kuriles (Shumshu). On August 27-28, without a fight, since the Japanese surrendered, the Soviet Army takes Urup. On September 1, there is a landing on Kunashir and Shikotan, the Japanese do not offer any resistance.

From the blog

September 2, 1945 Japan signs its surrender - World War II is officially over. And here comes the Crimean operation to seize the islands of the Lesser Kuril Ridge, located south of Shikotan, known as the Habomai Islands.

The war is over, and the Soviet land continues to grow with native Japanese islands. Moreover, I never found when Tanfilyev Island (a completely deserted and flat piece of land off the very coast of Hokkaido) became ours. But it is certain that in 1946 a frontier post was organized there, which became a well-known massacre, which was staged by two Russian border guards in 1994.

From the blog

As a result, Japan does not recognize the seizure of its "northern territories" by the USSR and does not recognize that these territories have passed to Russia as the legal successor of the USSR. February 7 (according to the date of the agreement with Russia in 1855) celebrates the day of the Northern Territories, to which, according to the agreement of 1855, all the islands south of Urup belong.

An attempt (unsuccessful) to solve this problem was made in 1951 in San Francisco. Japan, under this treaty, must renounce any claims to Sakhalin and the Kuriles, with the exception of Shikotan and the Habomai group. The USSR did not sign the treaty. The United States signed the treaty with the proviso: It is envisaged that the terms of the Treaty will not mean the recognition for the USSR of any rights or claims in the territories that belonged to Japan on December 7, 1941, which would prejudice the rights and legal foundations of Japan in these territories, nor will any however there were provisions in favor of the USSR with respect to Japan contained in the Yalta Agreement.»

Soviet comments on the treaty:

Gromyko's (USSR Foreign Minister) remark on the treaty: The Soviet delegation has already drawn the conference's attention to the inadmissibility of such a situation when the draft peace treaty with Japan says nothing about Japan's recognition of sovereignty Soviet Union over South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands. The project is in gross contradiction with the obligations in respect of these territories undertaken by the United States and Britain under the Yalta Agreement. http://www.hrono.ru/dokum/195_dok/19510908gromy.php

In 1956, the USSR promised Japan to return Shikotan and the Habomai group if Japan did not lay claim to Kunashir and Iturup. Whether the Japanese agreed with this or not, opinions differ. We say yes - Shikotan and Habomai are yours, and Kunashir and Iturup are ours. The Japanese say that everything south of Urup is theirs.

UPD Declaration text: At the same time, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, meeting the wishes of Japan and taking into account the interests of the Japanese state, agrees to the transfer of the Habomai Islands and the Shikotan Islands to Japan, however, that the actual transfer of these islands to Japan will be made after the conclusion.

The Japanese then played back (like under pressure from the Americans), linking together all the islands south of Urup.

I do not want to predict how history will unfold further, but most likely Japan will use ancient Chinese wisdom and wait until all the disputed islands sail to them themselves. The only question is whether they will stop at the 1855 treaty or go further to the 1875 treaty.

____________________________

Shinzo Abe announced that he would annex the disputed islands of the South Kuril chain to Japan. “I will solve the problem of the northern territories and conclude a peace treaty. As a politician, as a prime minister, I want to achieve this at all costs,” he promised his compatriots.

According to Japanese tradition, Shinzo Abe will have to do hara-kiri if he does not keep his word. It is quite possible that Vladimir Putin will help the Japanese prime minister live to a ripe old age and die a natural death.

In my opinion, everything goes to the fact that the long-standing conflict will be settled. The time to establish decent relations with Japan was chosen very well - for the empty hard-to-reach lands, which their former owners now and then look nostalgically, you can get a lot of material benefits from one of the most powerful economies in the world. And the lifting of sanctions as a condition for the transfer of the islands is far from the only and not the main concession, which, I am sure, our Foreign Ministry is now seeking.

So the quite expected surge of quasi-patriotism of our liberals, aimed at Russian President should be prevented.

I have already had to analyze in detail the history of the islands of Tarabarov and Bolshoy Ussuriysky on the Amur, the loss of which Moscow snobs cannot come to terms with. The post also discussed the dispute with Norway over maritime territories, which was also settled.

I also touched upon the secret negotiations between the human rights activist Lev Ponomarev and the Japanese diplomat about the "northern territories", filmed on video and posted online. Generally speaking, one of this video it is enough for our caring citizens to bashfully swallow the return of the islands to Japan, if it takes place. But since concerned citizens will definitely not keep silent, we must understand the essence of the problem.

background

February 7, 1855 - Shimoda Treatise on Commerce and Frontiers. The now disputed islands of Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and the Habomai group of islands have been ceded to Japan (therefore, February 7 is annually celebrated in Japan as Northern Territories Day). The question of the status of Sakhalin remained unresolved.

May 7, 1875 - Petersburg Treaty. Japan transferred the rights to all 18 Kuril Islands in exchange for the entire Sakhalin.

August 23, 1905 - Treaty of Portsmouth by results Russo-Japanese War. Russia ceded the southern part of Sakhalin.

February 11, 1945 - Yalta Conference. The USSR, the USA and Great Britain reached a written agreement on the entry of the Soviet Union into the war with Japan on the condition that South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands be returned to it after the end of the war.

On February 2, 1946, on the basis of the Yalta Agreements, the Yuzhno-Sakhalin Region was created in the USSR - on the territory of the southern part of Sakhalin Island and the Kuril Islands. On January 2, 1947, it was merged with the Sakhalin Oblast of the Khabarovsk Territory, which expanded to the borders of the modern Sakhalin Oblast.

Japan enters the Cold War

On September 8, 1951, the Peace Treaty between the Allied Powers and Japan was signed in San Francisco. Regarding the now disputed territories, it says the following: "Japan renounces all rights, titles and claims to the Kuril Islands and to that part of Sakhalin Island and the islands adjacent to it, sovereignty over which Japan acquired under the Portsmouth Treaty of September 5, 1905."

The USSR sent a delegation to San Francisco headed by Deputy Foreign Minister A. Gromyko. But not in order to sign a document, but to voice their position. We formulated the mentioned clause of the treaty as follows: “Japan recognizes the full sovereignty of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics over the southern part of Sakhalin Island with all the islands adjacent to it and the Kuril Islands and renounces all rights, titles and claims to these territories.”

Of course, in our wording, the treaty is specific and more in line with the spirit and letter of the Yalta agreements. However, the Anglo-American version was adopted. The USSR did not sign it, Japan did.

Today, some historians believe that the USSR should have signed the San Francisco Peace Treaty in the form in which it was proposed by the Americans - this would strengthen our negotiating position. “We should have signed a contract. I don’t know why we didn’t do this - perhaps because of vanity or pride, but above all, because Stalin overestimated his capabilities and the degree of his influence on the United States, ”N.S. wrote in his memoirs .Khrushchev. But soon, as we shall see later, he himself made a mistake.

From today's standpoint, the lack of a signature under the notorious treaty is sometimes considered almost a diplomatic failure. However, the international situation of that time was much more complicated and was not limited to the Far East. Perhaps, what seems to someone a loss, in those conditions became a necessary measure.

Japan and sanctions

It is sometimes erroneously believed that since we do not have a peace treaty with Japan, we are in a state of war. However, this is not at all the case.

On December 12, 1956, a ceremony for the exchange of letters took place in Tokyo, marking the entry into force of the Joint Declaration. According to the document, the USSR agreed to "the transfer of the Habomai Islands and the Shikotan Islands to Japan, however, that the actual transfer of these islands to Japan will be made after the conclusion of a peace treaty between the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and Japan."

The parties came to this wording after several rounds. long negotiations. Japan's initial proposal was simple: a return to Potsdam - that is, the transfer of all the Kuriles and South Sakhalin to it. Of course, such a proposal by the losing side of the war looked somewhat frivolous.

The USSR was not going to cede an inch, but unexpectedly for the Japanese, Habomai and Shikotan suddenly offered. This was a reserve position, approved by the Politburo, but announced prematurely - the head of the Soviet delegation, Ya.A. On August 9, 1956, during a conversation with his counterpart in the garden of the Japanese embassy in London, the reserve position was announced. It was she who entered the text of the Joint Declaration.

It must be clarified that the influence of the United States on Japan at that time was enormous (however, as now). They closely monitored all her contacts with the USSR and, undoubtedly, were the third participant in the negotiations, although invisible.

At the end of August 1956, Washington threatened Tokyo that if, under a peace treaty with the USSR, Japan renounces its claims to Kunashir and Iturup, the United States will forever retain the occupied island of Okinawa and the entire Ryukyu archipelago. The note included a wording that clearly played on the national feelings of the Japanese: “The US government has come to the conclusion that the islands of Iturup and Kunashir (along with the islands of Habomai and Shikotan, which are part of Hokkaido) have always been part of Japan and should rightly be considered as belonging to Japan ". That is, the Yalta agreements were publicly disavowed.

The affiliation of the "northern territories" of Hokkaido, of course, is a lie - on all military and pre-war Japanese maps, the islands have always been part of the Kuril ridge and have never been designated separately. However, the idea was well received. It was on this geographical absurdity that entire generations of politicians in the Land of the Rising Sun made their careers.

The peace treaty has not yet been signed - in our relations we are guided by the Joint Declaration of 1956.

Issue price

I think that even in the first term of his presidency, Vladimir Putin decided to settle all disputed territorial issues with his neighbors. Including with Japan. In any case, back in 2004, Sergey Lavrov formulated the position of the Russian leadership: “We have always fulfilled and will continue to fulfill our obligations, especially ratified documents, but, of course, to the extent that our partners are ready to fulfill the same agreements . So far, as we know, we have not been able to reach an understanding of these volumes as we see it and as we saw it in 1956.

"Until Japan's ownership of all four islands is clearly defined, no peace treaty will be concluded," then Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi responded. The negotiation process has again reached an impasse.

However, this year we again remembered the peace treaty with Japan.

In May, at the St. Petersburg Economic Forum, Vladimir Putin said that Russia was ready to negotiate with Japan on the disputed islands, and the solution should be a compromise. That is, none of the parties should feel like a loser. “Are you ready to negotiate? Yes, ready. But we were surprised to hear recently that Japan has joined some kind of sanctions - and here Japan, I do not really understand - and is suspending the negotiation process on this topic. So we are ready, is Japan ready, I haven’t learned for myself, ”said the President of the Russian Federation.

It seems that the pain point is found correctly. And the negotiation process (I hope, this time in offices tightly closed from American ears) has been in full swing for at least six months. Otherwise, Shinzo Abe would not have made such promises.

If we fulfill the terms of the 1956 Joint Declaration and return the two islands to Japan, 2,100 people will have to be resettled. All of them live on Shikotan, only a frontier post is located on Habomai. Most likely, the problem of the presence of our armed forces on the islands is being discussed. However, for complete control over the region, the troops deployed on Sakhalin, Kunashir and Iturup are quite enough.

Another question is what reciprocal concessions we expect from Japan. It is clear that the sanctions should be lifted - this is not even discussed. Perhaps access to credits and technologies, expansion of participation in joint projects? Not excluded.

Be that as it may, Shinzo Abe faces a difficult choice. The conclusion of the long-awaited peace treaty with Russia, seasoned with "northern territories", would certainly have made him the politician of the century in his homeland. It will inevitably lead to tension in relations between Japan and the United States. I wonder what the Prime Minister would prefer.

And we will somehow survive the internal Russian tension that our liberals will inflate.

From the blog

The Habomai group of islands is labeled "Other Islands" on this map. These are several white spots between Shikotan and Hokkaido.

(The post was written more than two years ago, but the situation has not changed as of the current day, but talk about the Kuriles has intensified again in recent days, - ed.)

A ridge of islands located between the Kamchatka Peninsula and the island of Hokkaido and separating the Sea of ​​Okhotsk from the Pacific Ocean. Includes a total of 56 islands. All of them are part of the Sakhalin region of Russia.

In 1786 the Kuril Islands were declared Russian territory. In 1855, under the terms of the Shimodsky Treaty, the South Kuriles - Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and the Habomai group of islands - were ceded to Japan, and in 1875 - under the terms of the Petersburg Treaty - Japan got the entire Kuril ridge in exchange for South Sakhalin. In 1945, all the islands finally became part of the USSR. The ownership of the South Kuriles is still disputed by the Japanese side.

The first steps in the development of the Kuriles

Before the appearance of the Russians and the Japanese, the Ainu lived on the islands. The etymology of the name of the archipelago goes back to the word "kuru", which in translation from the Ainu language meant "a person who came from nowhere."

The Japanese received the first information about the islands during an expedition to Hokkaido in 1635. In 1644, a map was drawn up, on which the Kuril Islands were designated as "a thousand islands." In 1643, the Dutch expedition of Moritz de Vries visited the archipelago. The Dutch made more accurate and detailed maps islands and their description, mapped Urup and Iturup, but they were not assigned to themselves. Today, the strait between these two islands bears the name of Friz.

In 1697, members of the expedition of Vladimir Atlasov to Kamchatka compiled a description of the Kuril Islands from the words of local residents, which later formed the basis of the first Russian map of the archipelago, compiled in 1700 by Semyon Remezov.

In 1711, a detachment of Ataman Danila Antsiferov and Yesaul Ivan Kozyrevsky visited the islands of Shumshu and Kunashir. On Shumshu, the Ainu tried to resist the Cossacks, but were defeated. In 1713 Kozyrevsky led the second expedition to the islands. On Paramushir, he again faced armed opposition from the local population, but this time repelled the attacks. For the first time in the history of the archipelago, its inhabitants recognized the power of Russia over themselves and paid yasak. From the local Ainu and the Japanese, Kozyrevsky learned about the existence of a number of other islands, and also established that the Japanese were forbidden to swim north of Hokkaido, and the inhabitants of the Urup and Iturup islands "live autocratically and are not subject to citizenship." The result of the second campaign of Kozyrevsky was the creation of the “Drawing Map of the Kamchadal Prow and Sea Islands”, which for the first time depicted the Kuril Islands from Cape Lopatka in Kamchatka to the coast of Hokkaido. In 1719, the expedition of Ivan Evreinov and Fyodor Luzhin visited the Kuril Islands, it reached the island of Simushir. In 1727, Catherine I approved the "Opinion of the Senate" on the need to "take possession of the islands lying off Kamchatka."

In 1738-1739, the expedition of Martyn Shpanberg proceeded along the entire Kuril ridge. After this expedition, a new map of the Kuriles was compiled, which in 1745 was included in the Atlas of the Russian Empire. In 1761, the Senate decree allowed free fishing of sea animals on the islands with the return of a tenth of the production to the treasury. During the second half of the 18th century, the Russians actively explored the Kuril Islands. Sailing to the southern islands was dangerous, so the Russians focused on the development of the northern islands, regularly collecting yasak from the local population. Those who did not want to pay yasak and went south were taken hostages from among close relatives - amanats. In 1749, the first school for teaching Ainu children appeared on the island of Shumshu, and in 1756, the church of St. Nicholas, the first on the islands of the ridge, appeared.

In 1766, the centurion Ivan Cherny went to the southern islands, who was instructed to attract the Ainu into citizenship without the use of violence and threats. The centurion ignored the decree and abused his powers, as a result of which in 1771 the indigenous population rebelled against the Russians. Unlike Ivan Cherny, the Siberian nobleman Antipov and translator Shabalin managed to win over the inhabitants of the Kuriles. In 1778-1779, they brought into citizenship more than one and a half thousand people from the islands of Iturup and Kunashir, as well as from the island of Hokkaido. In 1779, Catherine II issued a decree on the release of those who accepted Russian citizenship from all taxes.

In 1786, Japan organized the first expedition to explore the southern islands of the Kuril chain. The Japanese, led by Mogami Tokunai, established that the Russians had founded their settlements on the islands.

Kuril Islands at the endXVIII- middleXIX century

On December 22, 1786, Catherine II ordered the Collegium of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Empire to officially declare that the lands discovered in the Pacific Ocean, including the Kuril Archipelago, belong to the Russian crown. By this time, Russia fulfilled all three conditions necessary, in accordance with the then accepted international norms, for positioning the territory as its own: first discovery, first development and long-term continuous possession. In the "Extensive land description of the Russian state ..." of 1787, a list of islands that belonged to Russia was given. It included 21 islands up to Matsumae (Hokkaido). In 1787, a large-scale expedition of G.I. Mulovsky was supposed to visit the Kuriles, but because of the outbreak of wars with Turkey and Sweden, it had to be canceled.

In 1795, the campaign of G. I. Shelikhov founded the first permanent Russian settlement in the Kuriles in the southeast of Urup Island. Vasily Zvezdochetov became its manager.

In 1792, the southern islands of the ridge were visited by a new Japanese expedition, Mogami Tokunai, and in 1798, another expedition led by Mogami Tokunai and Kondo Juzo. In 1799, the Japanese government ordered to place outposts with constant protection on Kunashir and Iturup. In the same year, the Japanese authorities officially included the northern part of the island of Hokkaido into the state. In 1800, the first permanent Japanese settlement appeared on Iturup - Xian (now Kurilsk). In 1801, the Japanese attempted to take control of Urup Island, but were resisted by local Russian settlers. In 1802, an office for the colonization of the Kuril Islands was established in the city of Hakodate in the south of Hokkaido.

In 1805, N. P. Rezanov, a representative of the Russian-American campaign, arrived in Nagasaki as an envoy. He tried to resume negotiations with Japanese diplomats on the establishment of the Russian-Japanese border, but failed: Rezanov insisted that Japan did not claim any of the islands north of Hokkaido, while the Japanese demanded territorial concessions.

In May 1807, the Russian vessel "Juno" arrived at Iturup Island, accompanied by the tender "Avos" (commanders - N. A. Khvostov and G. I. Davydov, respectively). The landing on the island destroyed the Japanese settlements, including the large settlement of Xiang, and defeated the local Japanese garrison. Following Iturup, the Russians expelled the Japanese from Kunashir. The government sharply condemned the violent actions taken by Khvostov and Davydov: for "willfulness against the Japanese" they lost their awards for participating in the war against Sweden. In 1808, the Japanese restored the destroyed settlements and significantly increased their military presence in the southern islands. In 1811, the Kunashir garrison captured the crew of the Diana sloop, headed by the ship's commander, V. M. Golovnin. A year and a half later, after the official recognition by Russia of the "arbitrariness" of the actions of Khvostov and Davydov, the sailors were released, and the Japanese troops left Iturup and Kunashir.

In 1830, the Russian-American Company established a permanent Kuril Detachment with headquarters on Simushir Island. In 1845, Japan unilaterally declared sovereignty over the Kuriles and Sakhalin.

Shimodsky Treaty and the Treaty of Petersburg

In 1853, a Russian diplomatic mission headed by Admiral E. V. Putyatin arrived in Japan in order to establish diplomatic and trade relations with Japan. The Russian government believed that the border between the countries should run along the La Perouse Strait and the southern tip of the Kuril chain, and the Kuriles themselves, respectively, belong to Russia. Japan considered the possibility of agreeing to these conditions, but after the entry of the Russian Empire into the Crimean War and the complications of its international position, it demanded that the South Kuriles and South Sakhalin be included in Japan. Putyatin, who, as a last resort, was allowed by the "additional instruction" to agree to recognize the southern islands for Japan, was forced to do so. On January 26 (February 7), 1855, the first Russian-Japanese trade treaty, the Shimoda Treaty, was signed in Shimodo. According to this agreement, the border between the countries was drawn between the islands of Iturup and Urup.

On September 2, 1855, the British and French frigates Peak and Sibylla took possession of Urup Island. The settlement of the Russian-American campaign on the island was devastated, and he himself was proclaimed a joint Anglo-French possession.

The terms of the Shimoda treaty were confirmed by the Yeda Treaty of Trade and Navigation signed by Russia and Japan in 1858. In 1868, when the activities of the Russian-American campaign was terminated, the Kuril Islands were effectively abandoned. On April 25 (May 7), 1875, after the power of the Shogunate fell in Japan, and Emperor Mutsuhito (Meiji) came to power, Russia and Japan signed the Treaty of Petersburg. Under its terms, Russia ceded to Japan the rights to the central and northern parts of the Kuril ridge in exchange for renunciation of claims to the southern part of Sakhalin.

Kuril Islands as part of Japan, the USSR and the Russian Federation

When the territory of the Japanese Empire, the Kuril Islands were under the control of the governorate of Hokkaido. The Japanese administration laid roads and telegraph lines on the Iturup (Etorofu) and Kunashir (Kunashiri) islands, established postal communications, and opened post offices. Fishing was actively developing: in each settlement there was a fish supervision and a salmon breeding enterprise. By 1930, the population of Kunashir was approximately 8,300 people, Iturup - 6,300 people.

In February 1945, as part of the Yalta Conference, the Soviet government promised the United States and Great Britain to start a war with Japan on the condition that the USSR would receive the southern part of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands. On August 9, 1945, the USSR declared war on Japan. On August 14, Emperor Hirohito issued a decree of surrender, but Japanese troops on Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands continued to resist. On August 18, Soviet forces launched the Kuril landing operation. By September 1, the islands of the Kuril archipelago were completely occupied by Soviet units. On September 2, Japan signed the act of surrender.

February 2, 1946 Presidium Supreme Council The USSR issued a decree on the inclusion of South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands in the RSFSR. For a short time, these territories formed the Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk region as part of the Khabarovsk Territory, and then, in 1947, they were merged with the Sakhalin Region and transferred to the direct subordination of the RSFSR. In the same year, the deportation of the Japanese and the few Ainu who remained on the islands was carried out.

On November 5, 1952, the coast of the Kuril Islands was badly damaged by a powerful tsunami. The most serious damage was inflicted on Paramushir: the city of Severo-Kurilsk was washed away by a giant wave. The tragedy was not advertised in the media.

The Kuril Islands in Japan's Relations with the USSR and the Russian Federation

On September 8, 1951, Japan signed the San Francisco Peace Treaty, according to which it renounced all possessions outside the Japanese islands, including South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands. The USSR did not sign the treaty, refusing to participate in the conference before its completion. Because of this, Japan's refusal from the Kuril Islands was not officially recorded. In 1955, when Soviet-Japanese peace talks began in London, Japan - largely under US pressure - put forward claims to the Kunashir, Iturup, Shikotan and Habomai Islands. On October 19, 1956, in Moscow, the USSR and Japan signed a joint declaration, which stated the cessation of the state of war between states, the restoration of peace and good neighborly relations, as well as the resumption of diplomatic relations. The terms of the agreement assumed the return of Shikotan Island and the Lesser Kuril Ridge (Habomai Islands) to Japan, but after the conclusion of a peace treaty. Already in 1960, the government of the USSR abandoned its previous intention and from then until 1991 considered the territorial issue with Japan finally resolved. Only on April 19, 1991, during a visit to Japan, M. S. Gorbachev admitted that there were territorial differences between the USSR and Japan.

In 1992, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation was preparing a visit by President Boris N. Yeltsin to Japan in order to negotiate the future of the South Kuriles. The trip, however, did not take place, largely due to the opposition of the deputies of the Supreme Council to the idea of ​​transferring part of the islands. On October 13, 1993, the President of Russia and the Prime Minister of Japan signed the Tokyo Declaration, and on November 13, 1998, the Moscow Declaration. Both documents stated that the parties should continue negotiations with a view to concluding a peace treaty as soon as possible and normalizing bilateral relations. The Moscow Declaration planned the conclusion of a peace treaty for the year 2000, but this never happened.

On July 3, 2009, the Japanese Parliament adopted an amendment to the law "On Special Measures to Help Solve the Problem of the Northern Territories", declaring Kunashir, Iturup, Shikotan and the Habomai Islands as Japan's "ancestral territories". The Federation Council protested about this. In November of the same year, the Japanese government called the southern islands of the ridge "illegally occupied" by Russia, which also led to a protest - this time from the Russian Foreign Ministry. In subsequent years, the Japanese side repeatedly protested against visits to the southern islands of the Kuril chain by high-ranking Russian officials and top officials of the state.

In the destructive euphoria of "perestroika," Russian diplomats inadvertently gave the Japanese government a reason to hope for a revision of the results of World War II, and although today Tokyo is showing subtle diplomatic flair, these hopes remain. The concession of the Kuriles, in addition to a blow to Russia's strategic positions in the Pacific, would become an extraordinary precedent for the resumption of territorial disputes around the world.

After the destruction of the Yalta-Potsdam order, active attempts are being made to achieve its legal revision. In connection with these disputes, we undertake to affirm decisively that the changes that have taken place do not at all entail the possibility of challenging the remaining territorial results of the Yalta-Potsdam agreements. Satisfying Japanese claims to "return" the islands would mean undermining the very principle of the inviolability of the results of World War II. This is especially dangerous now, when the US and NATO aggression against sovereign Yugoslavia has made the map of Europe unsteady.

The ideologists of perestroika considered it uncivilized to defend Russia's historical achievements. Under the communists, all phenomena and achievements were explained by the merit of the only true doctrine, which gave rise to jokes like: "The Party teaches that gases expand when heated." During perestroika, when heated, gases just as anecdotally ceased to expand, since the party that had lost power taught so. Russian grief thinkers again reached the point of absurdity, with pathos renouncing all the paternal coffins, not only of Soviet, but of all Russian history.

There are two Japans - before and after the war

The term "return" in relation to the subject of the territorial claims of the post-war Japanese state should be permanently removed from the official language of Russian officials. This term is a conceptual revision of the results of the war, meaning the indirect recognition of the new Japan as the legal successor (continuity) of the Japanese state that unleashed and lost the war.

Politicians and statesmen should remember some provisions of international law. Neither the FRG and the GDR, created after the war, nor Japan, nor even today's united Germany are the successors of the subjectivity of the pre-war states, do not have continuity in relation to them. They are new subjects of international relations and international law. Their succession in relation to the former states is limited by the decisions of the powers with quadripartite responsibility. This follows from the legal content of the principle of complete and unconditional surrender, incorporated in the post-war system.

Complete and unconditional surrender is fundamentally different from mere surrender in its legal, political and historical implications. Simple surrender means only the recognition of defeat in hostilities and does not affect the international legal personality of the defeated power. Such a state, albeit utterly defeated, retains sovereignty and itself, as a legal party, negotiates the terms of peace. But complete and unconditional surrender means the cessation of the existence of the subject of international relations, the dismantling of the former state, the loss of its sovereignty and all power, passing to the winners, who themselves determine the conditions for peace and the post-war order. In place of the former, a new subject of international law arises, which may have succession in relation to it. To what extent, limited or almost complete - the winners decide. The new states of the FRG, the GDR and Japan were created on the terms of the allies in new borders, with new constitutions and authorities. This is especially evident in the case of Germany, which even received a new official name. Neither the FRG nor the GDR had full sovereignty even after 40 years. Their sovereignty in terms of international law had a so-called derivative character - derived from the powers of the allies, who retained part of the powers in the form of quadripartite responsibility.

One can give an example of how the United States used its powers in relation to the FRG two decades after the victory. In 1973 during the Arab-Israeli war, Foreign Minister Walter Scheel officially objected to the sending of American weapons from the territory of the FRG to Israel and the use of its ports and airfields, and stated that the FRG did not want worse relations with the Arab world and chose the role of a neutral state. There was an immediate rebuff from Washington. The State Department, in an official note in harsh tones, stated, that the FRG does not have full sovereignty, and the United States, proceeding from its rights arising from the principles of post-war settlement, have the right, without notification, to carry out from the territory of the Federal Republic of Germany any actions that they deem necessary for their interests. The absence of full sovereignty and continuity in relation to the Reich was demonstrated even by the moment of the unification of Germany. It is unlikely that anyone could interfere with this process, however, in order for the new state to gain sovereignty, the four powers had to agree to unite and formally resign, which was done in the Two Plus Four Treaty.

The concept of the Japanese government proceeds from the non-recognition of precisely this basis for a post-war settlement. In the case of Japan, the external manifestations of the loss of sovereignty and the interruption of international legal personality are less obvious. Japan retained the former emperor. This fact is used to assert that the legal personality of Japan was not interrupted, that the preservation of the former imperial supreme power means the continuity of the state. However, in fact, there was no continuity, and the recognition of the succession of imperial power took place, but the source of the preservation of the imperial dynasty is completely different - this is the will and decision of the winners.

Japan's position that it cannot consider itself bound by the Yalta agreements does not stand up to scrutiny, since it was not a party to them. If we recognize the right of today's Japan to challenge the territorial decisions of the victors, is it possible to guarantee that in the future the Oder-Neisse line, drawn not by the Germans, but by the victorious powers, who did not ask for the consent of Field Marshal Keitel, will not be questioned. Today's Japan is a post-war state, and the settlement can proceed solely from the post-war international legal basis, especially since only this basis has legal force. Particularly interesting in this matter is the fact that all the historical treaties of the past, to which Japanese politicians refer, have lost their force in today's disputes, not even in 1945, but back in 1904, with the outbreak of the Russo-Japanese War.

History of the "Kuril issue" and international law

The entire "historical" layer of the Japanese side's argument has nothing to do with the rights of today's Japanese state, although, of course, it is related to the history of Japan. In this argument, a special place is occupied by references to the treaties of the 19th century - the Shimodsky trade agreement of 1855, according to which the border was drawn between the islands of Urup and Iturup, and Sakhalin remained undemarcated, as well as to the St. Sakhalin Russian all the Kuril Islands were transferred to Japan.

In modern Japanese literature, only those official historical studies and maps of the past are cited, where in one way or another the Kuriles are designated as possessions of Japan. However, Japanese historians of the past gave Russia an indisputable priority in the discovery and development of the islands and pointed out that until the middle of the 19th century, Japan did not consider its possessions not only the Kuriles and Sakhalin, which was considered a peninsula there, while from the Russian side it had already been studied in detail , but even the island of Hokkaido, which was not yet inhabited then. But already at the end of the XIX century. Japan seeks to oust the Russian settlers from the Kuril Islands, destroy their posts, evict the native inhabitants - the Ainu, who had not seen the Japanese before the appearance of the Russian pioneers and did not pay tribute to anyone.

Experts in the USSR, on the basis of archival materials, foreign sources, and cartographic data, gave a convincing answer to all Japan's unfounded attempts to distort the history of the discovery of the Kuril Islands. These works were prepared in the 60-70s, as a rule, for official use. They are meticulously documented and free from the propagandistic edge that the modern reader often suspects of being biased.

Japanese diplomats believe that in recent years they have received irrefutable proof of the "original" ownership of a number of the islands now disputed. We are talking about instructions to Admiral Putyatin, with which he went to negotiate with Japan in 1853. Under A. Kozyrev, this archival document was "kindly" provided to Japan from the archives of the Russian Foreign Ministry by employees of the Kozyrev school - an action that at all times was considered incompatible with the official and departmental ethics of a diplomat - simply a betrayal. In the instructions for the negotiations of 1854, Nicholas I considered it possible, under certain conditions, to agree to the insistence of Japan and recognize that "of the Kuril Islands, the most southerly one, belonging to Russia, is the island of Urup" ... so that "from our side, the southern tip of this island was (as it actually is now) border with Japan.

The Japanese side, and such "Russian" diplomats as G. Kunadze and others. interpret these words as proof that the disputed islands did not belong to Russia even before 1855, and that the Russian government itself knew this and supposedly did not consider the Kuriles south of Urup to be Russian territory. However, these words only mean that the Russian government proceeded from the generally recognized belonging to Russia of the islands north of Urup, and was aware that Japan disputed the belonging of the islands south of Urup.

The border between Russia and Japan by that moment had not yet been formally fixed in an international bilateral treaty, which was to be done. The very construction of the phrase "as it is now in fact is," just says that, in the opinion of the Sovereign, there was a discrepancy between the proper border due to the belonging of the islands to Russia, and the line that "in fact", that is, in actual circumstances had to be observed to avoid sharp clashes with Japan claiming the territories. Russia lacked a population sufficient and capable of self-defense, economic infrastructure and armed posts in the Far East, that is, there were no military-political opportunities to really exercise its sovereignty over these islands in the face of constant encroachments by the Japanese. The most difficult international situation on the eve of the Crimean War forced them to behave in such a way as not to intensify the sharpness of relations, that is, "in essence" to retreat from their historical rights.

The aforementioned Russo-Japanese treaties, like any territorial delimitation, are a reflection of the balance of forces and the international situation. The Treaty of Shimoda was concluded at the height of the Crimean War, when the English and French squadrons were in charge of the Sea of ​​Okhotsk. Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky was besieged, and although the English landing attack was repulsed, the port was even evacuated to Nikolaevsk-on-Amur. At any moment, the British could land on the Kuriles, which were not formally demarcated in an international treaty. For Russia, it was safer to make such a delimitation, in which part of the islands would be under the jurisdiction of Japan, which was weak in naval terms, but would not be occupied by the strongest naval power - Great Britain. In addition, Japan's agreement to trade food with Russia, which could not maintain its military posts on Sakhalin and the Kuriles due to chronic food shortages, was considered a great success. Japan, which pursued a policy of complete isolation, for a long time categorically refused to sell even salt and flour.

Even then, the United States played a frankly anti-Russian role, which began a massive infiltration into the Far East Pacific region. The United States considered Russia to be one of the main obstacles to its expansion, and Japan as an instrument against it. The American missions constantly persuaded Japan not to agree to the recognition of southern Sakhalin as Russian and inspired that Russia was striving to capture Hokkaido. Russian diplomats had to disavow these insinuations, and the Americans even had to make official apologies. American press in the 70s. 19th century openly expressed the hope that as a result of cooperation between the United States and Japan, "a reduction in Russia's possessions in the eastern part of Asia" would be achieved.

The same situation persisted during the conclusion of the St. Petersburg Treaty of 1875 on the exchange of territories. It was more important to consolidate the ownership of the entire Sakhalin to Russia in an international legal way and secure it from the shameless military expansion of the Western European powers. But even after the conclusion of these treaties, Japan almost never observed them, violating territorial waters and landing on other territories belonging to Russia, and later unleashed the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905. And this war in general crossed out all previous decisions, because international law says: a state of war between states terminates the validity of all and all treaties between them. It would be worth recalling this to today's Japan, as well as the fact that it was precisely this that was indicated by the Japanese side to Count S.Yu. Witte, who tried at the Portsmouth negotiations in 1905. save southern Sakhalin, referring to the 1875 treaty. According to the Portsmouth peace, Russia conceded to the victorious Japan both the Kuriles and southern Sakhalin, which Russian diplomacy has always regarded as a great defeat.

American ambassador to Russia as an informant for the Japanese in 1905

A real detective story is the diplomatic game of the United States during the Portsmouth negotiations following the results of the Russian-Japanese war lost by Russia. The United States, of course, "took to heart the cause of universal peace," which could lead to the much-desired "reduction of Russia's possessions in southern Asia." American President Theodore Roosevelt believed that American "future history will be more determined by our position in the Pacific towards China than by our position in the Atlantic towards Europe." The United States did not consider Japan itself a serious rival, but tried in every possible way to prevent the strengthening of Russian positions. Therefore, from the very beginning of the Russo-Japanese War, Theodore Roosevelt's sympathies were on the side of Japan.

By the time of the Portsmouth negotiations, Roosevelt had agreed with the Japanese government on the delimitation of spheres of influence. Under a secret agreement dated July 31, 1905, through an exchange of telegrams between T. Roosevelt and Katsura, the Japanese Prime Minister, Japan abandoned its "intentions" regarding the Philippines, leaving them to the will of the United States, and the United States agreed to Japan's right to establish control over Korea. (Against this background, it is inappropriate for Washington to be indignant at the Molotov-Ribbentropp pact, which allowed the USSR only to restore the territory of historical Russia lost due to the revolution, civil war and interventions). With such an "American-Japanese alliance" behind him, T. Roosevelt, who assumed the role of an "honest broker", could not be an impartial mediator. The real role of the United States is clarified by the very interesting memoirs of the largest Japanese diplomat of the early twentieth century. Kikujiro Ishii, a direct participant in the events, published in a brilliant translation by O.A. Troyanovsky and with excellent analysis by A.A. Troyanovsky senior. Ishii later became the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Japan and the author of the well-known agreement on special rights in China, the Lansing-Ishii Agreement of 1917.

At the Portsmouth Conference, the Japanese delegation demanded not only the entire Kuriles, but the entire Sakhalin, and monetary indemnity. Russia represented by Count S.Yu. Witte objected, showing, in the words of Ishii, "hysterical obstinacy", and refused to pay any indemnity at all. From the memoirs it is clear that Japan was so exhausted by the war and desired an early conclusion of peace that by the end of the negotiations she was ready to agree to the ownership of all of Sakhalin by Russia without any monetary compensation. This was unknown to either St. Petersburg or the Russian delegation, but it was the Japanese government that made the decision to yield. Corresponding instructions were sent to Portsmouth, instructing the Japanese delegation, in the event of further stubbornness of the Russian delegation, to agree to the preservation of all of Sakhalin for Russia.

At the moment when the Japanese government decided to retreat from its initial demands regarding Sakhalin, Russia was completely unaware of these intentions, while Washington was immediately aware of this unsatisfactory prospect, and the United States undertook to "help." How much the United States would like to "reduce Russia's possessions" is clear from T. Roosevelt's telegram to Nicholas II. The American "peacemaker" frightened Japan with irresistible claims and its determination to resume hostilities, threatening that "the continuation of the war could lead to the loss of all Russian territory east of Lake Baikal," that is, to stop the existence of Russia as a Pacific power. These days in St. Petersburg, the American ambassador to Russia Mayer asked for an audience and began to persuade Nicholas II to make concessions, promising the mediation of President T. Roosevelt in the matter of "persuading" Japan to renounce the indemnity. On the whole, Nicholas II "persisted", but then "in passing, as if to himself, he remarked that it would be possible to consider the possibility of transferring the southern part of Sakhalin to Japan ...". Information about Russia's potential readiness to cede southern Sakhalin was immediately passed on to President T. Roosevelt, and in less than a day it became known to the Japanese side. Ishii in his memoirs strongly denies the assumption (which naturally arises in the reader) that the American president could have passed this information to Tokyo, however, the facts indicate otherwise.

A lucky circumstance for Japan was the 14-hour time difference between Tokyo and Portsmouth. Ishii managed to meet with the Prime Minister, who at first doubted the accuracy of the information. The Minister of War warned Ishii that he would have to commit hara-kiri if the information turned out to be false. But Ishii was confident in the reliability of the communication channel. It can be assumed that this same channel has already established itself by informing Roosevelt of the Japanese decision to accept the conditions of the Russians. Of course, Ishii describes the receipt of this information as pure "accident" in the course of a conversation with "a friend" "in one of the foreign missions in Tokyo", in which he "learned about what happened during the royal audience." Ishii insisted that the old instructions be immediately withdrawn and new instructions sent. The Japanese delegation postponed the next meeting, then, following the new instructions, made the following statement: "The imperial government has decided, as a sign of its peacefulness, to renounce the demands for the whole of Sakhalin and is making the last concession, being satisfied with the southern half of the island." From everything it is clear that the diplomacy of Witte, who received the nickname "Count of Polusakhalinsky", was not successful. With some firmness, Russia would not have lost the southern part of Sakhalin.

What was decided in Yalta, Potsdam and San Francisco?

The only valid and legally binding international legal documents that should be the basis of the current approach to the problem of the Kuril ridge are the decisions of the powers in Yalta, Potsdam and the San Francisco Peace Treaty with Japan, signed in 1951 by 51 states led by the United States. In accordance with the decisions of the Yalta Conference, all the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin Island "forever" returned to the Soviet Union. This was also confirmed by the Potsdam Declaration of the USA, Great Britain and China, which was later joined by the USSR.

The text, drawn up even without the USSR, stated that "after the complete and unconditional surrender, the sovereignty of Japan will be limited to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku and those smaller islands, which we indicate". Last words illustrate the legal consequences of the principle of complete and unconditional surrender - Japan's loss of international legal personality and the right to negotiate peace terms. Based on these documents, the US military administration in Japan sent directive N677 of January 29, 1946. indicating that all the Kuril Islands, including Sikotan and Habomai, are excluded from Japanese jurisdiction.

The USSR did not sign the San Francisco Peace Treaty with Japan. International relations in Asia after the war were extremely difficult due to the completely new role of communist China, relations with which in Asia were extremely important for the USSR. The West, on the other hand, recognized the Taiwanese Kuomintang government. As a result, the United States managed to impose many provisions in this treaty that were contrary to the interests of the Soviet Union. This treaty does not contain an indication that the territories in question are transferred to the USSR. But this does not change the indisputable fact that in Article 2 of this treaty, Japan "renounces all rights, titles and claims to the Kuril Islands and that part of Sakhalin Island and the islands adjacent to it, sovereignty over which Japan acquired under the Portsmouth Treaty of the 5th September 1905". This Treaty and this clause of it bears the signature of the United States.

Since it seems impossible to circumvent the provisions of the San Francisco Treaty, and their direct undermining would explode the territorial stability in Asia - the status of Outer Mongolia, the independence of Korea, and others, Japan and the United States invented a new argument in the mid-50s, which is being intensively imposed on the world community . Now the islands of Sikotan and Habomai allegedly belong to the Hokkaido island system, and the concept of the Kuril Islands allegedly does not cover the "special geographical unit" - the "Southern Kuriles" (with a capital "Yu") - Kunashir and Iturup. This is, of course, a geographical "innovation", even the British Encyclopedia unequivocally points to Kunashir and Iturup as "the largest of the Kuril Islands." Any geographical atlas considers the Kuriles as a single geographical concept, since the Kuril ridge has all the signs of such a classification.

However, the United States and Japan are completely clear that in the San Francisco Treaty, Japan renounced all Kuril Islands, no doubt. Thus, the book by the American author D. Reese "The Seizure of the Kuril Islands by the Soviets" is stored in Japanese libraries in a special depository - it contains an excerpt from the US Navy reference book, released in 1943. in case of military operations in the area. The directory lists all the "Kuril Islands" with their description from the point of view of military navigation. Among them are the very islands that Japan now declares not belonging to the Kuril chain. The book cites a recording of A. Dulles' conversation with Yoshida, the then Minister of Foreign Affairs of Japan, who asked if it was possible to present the matter in such a way that the Yalta-Potsdam decision did not apply to the southern islands of the Kuril chain. Dulles responded that such a drastic change in previous agreements would require years of disputes, which would delay Japan's full sovereignty indefinitely. So Japan was aware of what islands it was losing.

High-ranking Japanese official Nishimura, Director of the Peace Treaty Department of the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, while presenting the terms of the San Francisco Treaty in the Japanese Parliament, explained that "the concept of the Kuril Islands, which appears in the treaty, includes all the islands, both northern and southern." In response to the reproaches of the nationalists, Nishimura replied in parliament that "the loss of sovereignty entails for Japan the loss of the right to speak out about the final ownership of the territory."

The Soviet-Japanese Declaration of October 19, 1956, which ended the state of war, and also announced the consent of the USSR to transfer the islands of Habomai and Sikotan to Japan, but after the conclusion of a peace treaty, should also be treated calmly. A declaration is different from a contract and is a protocol of intent. During this time, Japan concluded an agreement on military cooperation with the United States, which secured the indefinite presence of American armed forces on its territory. The troops of a third party, the United States, would not fail to appear on the islands. For all the short-sightedness of Khrushchev's statement, it is not about "return", but about "transmission", that is, readiness to dispose of their territory as an act of good will, which does not create a precedent for revising the results of the war. Statements that a peace treaty is allegedly necessary for normal relations are also groundless. There are instances in international law where a post-war settlement has done without one. There was no peace treaty with Germany, the state of war with which was unilaterally terminated by the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR and the legal acts of the allied powers.

The principle of the inviolability of the results of the Second World War should form the basis of a new stage in Russo-Japanese relations, and the term "return" should be forever forgotten. But perhaps it is worth letting Japan create a museum of military glory on Kunashir, from which Japanese pilots fantastically bombed Pearl Harbor. Let the Japanese more often remember what the Americans did to them in response, and about the US base in Okinawa, but they feel the tribute of the Russians to the former enemy.

The Kuril Islands, which are part of the Sakhalin Region, consist of 56 large and small islands of volcanic origin. Stretching from north to south, from Kamchatka to Japanese island Hokkaido, these islands are of much more important geostrategic importance for Russia than it might seem at first glance.

Non-freezing straits

Between the islands of the Kuril chain there are only two straits that do not freeze during the cold season. These are the Catherine Strait, located between the islands of Iturup and Kunashir, as well as the Friza Strait between the islands of Iturup and Urup. If these southern islands belonged to another country, it is difficult even to imagine how the transport communication would be carried out between, for example, Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky and Vladivostok in winter. In addition, do not forget about the Russian navy in the Far East. Ships from Vladivostok will not be able to enter the Pacific Ocean in winter without the consent of third countries.

Mineral deposits

Despite their small size, the islands of the Kuril chain contain significant amounts of explored minerals. Here found ores of non-ferrous metals, mercury, and in coastal zone- hydrocarbon deposits. In addition, the richest mineral deposit of rhenium in the world was found on Iturup Island. Rhenium is contained here in the form of the mineral rhenite, the extraction of metal from which is more promising than extraction by traditional methods. In addition, rhenium is a very rare metal with a number of unique properties and therefore it is highly valued in the world market.

Status of the Sea of ​​Okhotsk

In 2014, one of the most important events of recent times took place in the field of regulating the legal status of Russian shelf territories. The UN Commission on the Continental Shelf recognized the Sea of ​​Okhotsk as an inland sea Russian Federation, and, accordingly, the rights to all natural resources that this territory contains. These are not only the richest deposits of hydrocarbons, but also biological resources - fish, crabs and other seafood. It is not difficult to guess that if at least part of the Kuril Islands belonged to another country, Russia would have to share these riches with a neighbor.

Fishing for bioresources

The coastal waters of the Kuril Islands are the richest reserves of king crabs, salmon and many other valuable biological resources. The increased interest in this territory from other countries is eloquently evidenced by regular cases of poaching of foreign ships in the coastal waters of the archipelago.

Population of the Kuril Islands

Ice-free straits and natural resources are, of course, very important. But the main wealth of the Kuril Islands is the people who live here. According to 2017 data, more than 19 thousand people live in the territory of two cities and several villages. This is quite a lot, given the island specifics of the region and certain difficulties caused by transport accessibility. The islands are a special world, and the people who inhabit the Kuriles love their small homeland very much.