Will the Kurils be given to the Japanese. Islands of prestige: will Putin give the Kuriles to the Japanese side. The meanings of the southern Kuriles

The Southern Kuriles are a taboo subject. Putin decided to give the Kuriles to the Japanese ... And they will swallow everything, as usual.

Our Initiative Group "Against Japan's Claims to the South Kuriles" was banned from holding pickets and rallies, our 10 applications were denied and explained that we should not waste time, and there are problems with the premises for holding a press conference. It would seem that the Japanese Minister of Foreign Affairs rushed to the Russian Federation about the South Kuriles, the day before yesterday and yesterday he talked with Putin and Lavrov, and information has already been leaked about the transfer to the Japanese of the island of Shikotan and a bunch of islands of the Lesser Kuril ridge (Khabomai) - and again, not a sound in the media. I watched a talk show by Vladimir Solovyov on the Russia-1 TV channel with the participation of noteworthy patriots, but not a word about the islands, and yet their surrender is a deafening geopolitical event. I looked through today's newspapers "Rossiyskaya Gazeta" and "Moskovsky Komsomolets" - there is not a line about these important Saturday-Sunday negotiations with the Japanese on the "territorial issue"

Yes, there is no "territorial issue" imposed by the Japanese side! The Southern Kuriles are an inseparable part of the territory of Russia due to our victory in the war with Japan. Why wag, make excuses, repent! It must be stated once and for all that Russia's sovereignty over the South Kuriles is unshakable. The territory is like a body, and if you cut off a finger, they will feel the taste of blood and rush to gut from all sides, this is the alphabet, political behavior has not changed since the time of Abel and Cain.

Knowledgeable people say that the surrender of the South Kuriles is Putin's personal initiative, his special operation, a new KhPP. And as an excuse, he refers to the ill-fated Khrushchev Declaration of 1956, that is, he points the arrow at the communist. And we de, idiots, do not understand the highest state interests.

Yes, where! And what state interests, and not selfish-comprador deals, have been behind countless betrayals since the time of Gorbachev? What is the statist sense behind the surrender of the richest water areas of the Barents Sea to the Norwegians in 2012 (see note Putin and Medvedev gave Norway a shelf in the Barents Sea)? And what about the surrender of strategic islands on the Amur opposite Khabarovsk to the Chinese by Putin? And what about the surrender of our bridgeheads in Lourdes, Cam Ranh, space (Mir station), Georgia? I will generally keep silent about the HPP in Novorossia and the Minsk agreements ...

So we, independent-thinking citizens of the Russian Federation, have the right to ask and demand, and it is better to reckon with our arguments, there are no and cannot be infallible.

Frightened federal politicians and newly elected deputies of the State Duma of the Russian Federation hid in the bushes. But a wave of bewilderment and even indignation rises on Sakhalin. Here is the Sakhalin.info website published an article by Kirill Yasko Far Eastern scientists and Sakhalin deputies urged Vladimir Putin not to give Japan "a single inch of land" (10:54 December 5, 2016, updated 15:34 December 5, 2016):

"Representatives of the scientific community and Sakhalin deputies are sure that all the talk about economic and investment cooperation between Russia and Japan is nothing more than an attempt to get the cherished" disputed territories ", no peace treaty is needed to develop relations between the two countries ("this is an obvious anachronism" ), and all assurances of its necessity are nothing more than a propaganda trick of the politicians of the Land of the Rising Sun. Such a position, as well as an emotional call not to give Japan a single inch of Russian land, is contained in an open letter to the President of the Russian Federation, signed by almost three dozen scientists and several Sakhalin deputies The extensive list of signatories included, in particular, representatives of the Regional Duma Alexander Bolotnikov, Svetlana Ivanova, Evgeny Lotin, Alexander Kislitsin, Yuri Vygolov, Viktor Todorov, Galina Podoynikova, Doctor of Historical Sciences, full member of the Russian Academy of Sciences Vladimir Myasnikov, representative of the Nevelskoy Maritime State University Boris Tkachenko, Doctor of Biological Sciences, Professor Valery Efanov, Chairman of the Sakhalin Regional Branch of the Russian Geographical Society Sergey Ponomarev.

— On the eve of your upcoming visit to Japan, we are writing to you with this open letter. The development of the situation around Japan's territorial claims to the Russian southern Kuriles, which official Tokyo has been making to our country over the past sixty years - since the conclusion of the Soviet-Japanese joint declaration of 1956 - prompted us to once again outline the fundamental provisions that show the groundlessness and perniciousness of any concessions on the issue of Russian sovereignty over the Kuril Islands, including their southern group (Kunashir, Iturup, and the Lesser Kuril Ridge, which includes the island of Shikotan), no matter what "veiled" schemes this is clothed in, the letter says. - We proceed from the firm and repeatedly stated position of the Russian leadership on the legality of the Kuril Archipelago becoming part of Russia following World War II, in particular, your last statement about the indisputability of Russian sovereignty over all the Kuriles.

At the same time, the authors of the letter are concerned about the persistent attempts of the Japanese leadership to establish joint economic activities on the disputed islands, which is nothing more than an attempt to satisfy their territorial claims against our country. The two countries do not need a peace treaty either. After all, the scientists remind the president, we have not concluded it with Germany either - nevertheless, mutually beneficial cooperation between the two countries is growing stronger day by day.

- The state of war between our countries was terminated back in 1956, all the agreements necessary for the development of normal good-neighbourly, including economic, relations were concluded. Obviously, for Japan, the peace treaty is now not a goal, but a means of realizing its selfish and neither historically nor legally justified territorial claims to our country, which, we repeat, the leadership of the Russian Federation has repeatedly stated, the letter continues. - Any rash step at the upcoming talks in Tokyo would have irreversible fatal consequences for Russia. But in political terms, any concessions to Japanese territorial harassment or promises of such will necessarily lead to the activation of revanchist forces in Japan, acting, as you know, with claims not only to the group of southern islands, but also to the entire Kuril archipelago, as well as to the southern half of Sakhalin.

In addition, scholars assure the president, according to the Constitution, the territory of Russia is integral and inalienable, which also does not allow giving up either a single "island or a single inch of native land." All the "yen rains", grandiose investment projects and underwater energy rings at the same time are nothing more than sweet dreams of midnight, designed to blur the eyes and soften the hearts.

— Dear Vladimir Vladimirovich, we hope that in the course of your negotiations with the Japanese side you will proceed from the inviolability of Russian sovereignty over the Kuril Islands and from the fact that economic cooperation with Japan, like with any other foreign state in this region, — perhaps on the basis of mutual benefit without any linking it with political demands and references to events of the past long ago, the authors of the president admonish. - Any treaty with Japan, as well as the development of Russian-Japanese good neighborliness in general, should be the result of the recognition by both countries of the stable and clear borders that emerged as a result of the Second World War. There is no other way to resolve the territorial dispute between the two parties and there should not be.

Russian President Vladimir Putin's visit to Tokyo is scheduled for December 14-15. The list of topics of the official trip, published by the Russian Foreign Ministry, includes issues of bilateral cooperation, as well as the implementation of joint projects in the energy sector, the development of small and medium-sized businesses, the industrialization of the Far East, and the expansion of the export base, which were first identified in the "Cooperation Plan" developed in the Land of the Rising Sun in May of this year. Vladimir Putin's visit to Japan can be considered a kind of outcome of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's "new policy" aimed at developing relations between the two countries.

As the authors of the letter later added, the ex-Governor of the Sakhalin Region, Doctor of Economics, Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences Valentin Fedorov, Doctor of Technical Sciences Vladimir Pishchalnik, and a number of other persons have already managed to join the signatories of the initiative. The total number of those who left autographs under the appeal to the president thus exceeded 40 people.

anonymous 17:32 today
Our grandfathers lay down with their breasts here, and they just give it to the Japanese

Pitsuri 17:28 today
we won’t give up on our own, we’ll live, all this is our own. Especially for those who were born on Sakhalin.

and so on 16:58 today
And the rest of the "servants of the people"? Where is their principled position?

vivisektorrr 16:51 today
But around each given "hummock" they will circle a 12-mile line of territorial waters and a 200-mile economic one. around each.
(Added after 2 minutes)
And it will be all Japanese.

Why all the talk about the possible transfer of the Kuriles does not make sense yet.

The Japanese seem to have already decided everything. Sami. They have already handed over the Kuril Islands to themselves, and from the visit of the Russian president to Japan they are only waiting for a formal announcement about this. At least, the psychological picture in today's Japan is exactly this, many observers say. Then they ask themselves: but is Vladimir Putan ready to make such an announcement? And what will be the disappointment of the Japanese when the Russian president does not say anything about the transfer of the islands?
Or will he say? Maybe the Japanese know something that we Russians don't know?

What can the Japanese demand?

The main leitmotif in the Japanese press and Japanese discussions about the Kuriles is the readiness to exchange investments for the islands. They call this the "zero option": they say that the islands are ours anyway, but the bitterness of the loss of territories must be sweetened for the Russians. Their economic affairs are bad, so the multibillion-dollar Japanese investments will come in handy for the Russians. And the cherry on this cake will be the signing of a peace treaty, which, they say, will end the state of war between Japan and Russia.
And, in fact, what legal grounds do the Japanese have to dispute the ownership of the islands? What do they have besides a constant stubborn pressure?
“The Japanese made a claim to the islands immediately after the conclusion of the San Francisco Treaty between the allies and Japan, but there is no need to talk about any legal grounds,” said German Gigolaev, scientific secretary of the Institute of World History (IVI) of the Russian Academy of Sciences, in a conversation with Tsargrad. since the USSR did not sign this peace treaty with Japan then, in 1951, they made claims on this basis. Well, ears, probably, as always, stick out from the US State Department - they asked the Japanese to put forward claims, and they put forward."
That's all the reason: give it back, because we want it, and the owner ordered ...

True, there were voices that Tokyo might consider signing a peace treaty without transferring four (more precisely, three in bulk) islands from the Kuril chain. There were also voices that the Japanese government was ready to be satisfied with two of them. The authoritative Japanese newspaper "Kyodo" published a version of this, citing a source in the Cabinet of Ministers.
However, then these versions were refuted, and the picture remained the same: Japan should get everything! By the way, in the variant of a compromise with two islands, the strategy is aimed at all four. It's purely a matter of tactics. In the same article in "Kyodo" it is directly stated: the transfer of the two islands will be only the "first phase" of the settlement of the territorial issue. Similarly, the option of joint Russian-Japanese administration of the southern part of the Kuriles is no longer valid: the government resolutely refuted the corresponding report of the Nikkei newspaper back in October.
Thus, the position of Tokyo remains unchanged, and any compromise options turn out to be useless and meaningless: the winner, as they say, takes everything.
And the winner, of course, in any exchange of the islands for any financial "buns" will be - and will be announced - the Japanese. For money is nothing more than money, and territory is never less than territory. Let us recall what place Alaska occupies in the Russian national consciousness with the history of its sale. And it’s clear, it’s clear that in the middle of the 19th century it was unprofitable, inconvenient, practically uninhabited by Russian land, which the British or Americans would have taken away one way or another simply by the fact of its gradual settlement. And what kind of borders could have stopped them if gold had been discovered there earlier, when Alaska was still under Russian jurisdiction!
So it seems to be correct and inevitable - at least they received the money, and not just lost the land - Alaska should have been sold. But does anyone thank Tsar Alexander II for this today?

Kurile Islands. On the island of Kunashir. Fishing. Photo: Vyacheslav Kiselev/TASS

What can the Japanese give?

The only thing that can justify the transfer of the territory of the country to another state in the minds of the people is, perhaps, only an exchange for other territories. As, for example, they did this with the Chinese, correcting the status of individual islands on the Amur. Yes, they gave away some land, but they also received it, and even a little more. But what lands can the Japanese give us in exchange? Is it the island of Okinawa with American military bases? It is unlikely - there is hardly one among Japanese politicians who is capable of arranging such a "movement" ...
So, Japan has no land for us. Is there money?
And it depends what. Just recently, 10 billion dollars were received for a 19.5% stake in Rosneft. In total, the corporation promised "an overall effect, taking into account the capitalized synergies between PJSC NK Rosneft and PJSC ANK Bashneft, in the amount of more than 1.1 trillion rubles ($ 17.5 billion), cash receipts to the budget in the fourth quarter 2016 will amount to 1,040 billion rubles ($16.3 billion)."
Igor Sechin called this deal the largest in the history of the country. But these are just shares of just one state corporation, of which there are far more than one in Russia. Yes, as noted by a number of observers, sold at a fierce discount relative to the true value of the company.
Attention, the question is: how much money would Japan be willing to pay for our islands? Even if it's a tenfold higher amount - with $1.248 trillion in international reserves it can find it relatively painlessly - is it worth the candle? What economic effect will Japan get from the southern Kuril chain? It is clear that there will certainly be some effect - at least from the exploitation of marine resources in the adjacent water area. But the problem is that money is given - if given - by completely different people, far from the fishing industry.

Until the first shout of the owner ...

However, it's not about money - even if they really gave us money. What can be purchased with them? The most valuable thing in today's world for Russia is technology and machine tools. Will the Japanese give them to us? You can be sure - no. Serious technologies are a closed subject for us for reasons of secrecy. A similar problem is with machine tools: yes, we need them after the total destruction of industry in the 90s, much more important is the technology for their production. At one time, the USSR had already made a mistake when, after the war, it brought German machine tools to its territory as requisition. Rather, it was a forced measure - there were actually no good machine tools in the USSR before the war, and even more so after. But only in this way the industry turned out to be tied to obsolete models, but Germany, forcedly "undressed" in this respect, forcedly, but extremely effectively, modernized its machine park.
But even if we assume that the Japanese somehow get around other people's restrictions in this matter - and these are primarily American restrictions dictated, by the way, by interests and national security - how long will they be able to portray "nobility"? Until the very first independent movement of Russia, which Washington would not like. For example, the final capture of Aleppo. The coalition of Western countries has already threatened us with new sanctions for this and kept the old ones. Will the Japanese be able to disobey their main allies? Never!
Thus, everything turns out simply: even if Russia gives up the islands in exchange for money or technology, very soon it will not have either. And islands, of course.

What is Russia losing?

From a purely material point of view, the Kudryavy rhenium volcano alone on Iturup Island, which annually ejects $70 million worth of this valuable metal for defense needs, makes the loss of the islands a very mismanagement act. In Alaska, at least there was an excuse - the then Russian authorities did not know about either gold or oil in this distant land. According to the Kuriles, there is no such justification.
What happens if you give up the islands?

“Nothing good will happen,” the historian Gigolaev answers. “The zone of international waters in the Sea of ​​Okhotsk, which are not subject to our national jurisdiction, will immediately increase. Plus, several straits are blocked for our warships to exit through them from the Sea of ​​​​Okhotsk to the open ocean.”
Of course, the extraction of fish and seafood in the surrounding water area gives rather big incomes. At the same time, there is also the right to limit this production in the Sea of ​​Okhotsk for the same Japanese, Koreans, Chinese, because the possession of four islands makes this sea inland for Russia.
But these are still pleasant, but trifles against the background of what the loss of the islands in the geostrategic sense can turn into. As pointed out by German Gigolaev.
The thing is that since the Second World War, Japan has not been a sovereign power in the full sense of the word. It is under US military and political control. And if tomorrow the Japanese get at least one of the disputed islands, the day after tomorrow an American military base may appear on it. For example, with the missile defense system, which, as Tsargrad has already written more than once from the words of informed military experts, can be quickly and painlessly converted into an attack complex - just a canopy of Tomahawk cruise missiles. And no one can stop the Americans, and Tokyo in particular cannot.
By the way, they are not particularly eager to ban. Moreover, at the level of the prime minister, the government, and the Foreign Ministry, they have already officially denied any even attempts to make an exception from the security treaty with the United States regarding the South Kuril Islands, if Russia agrees to give them up. According to Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida, the security treaty with the United States "applies and will continue to apply to all territories and water areas that are under the administrative control of Japan."
Accordingly, if desired, access to the Pacific Ocean is blocked for the Russian military fleet, because there are straits that do not freeze in winter, which are now controlled by the Russian military, but will become American. So, as soon as the threatened period comes - and who guarantees that this will never happen? - Immediately the Pacific Fleet can be written off the balance sheet. After all, with the same success, a solid naval group led by an aircraft carrier could be based somewhere on Iturup.

Let's agree: the Japanese (or, more likely, their owners, the Americans) came up with a beautiful option. Insignificant for the area of ​​Russia, patches of land immediately deprive Russia of rhenium necessary in military production (in engine building, for example), and valuable resources of sea areas, and access to the ocean in a threatened period.
And this - in the complete absence of reasonable arguments for their rights to these islands! And if, under these conditions, Moscow decides to transfer the islands, then something more terrible will happen than the loss of fish, rhenium, and even access to the ocean.
Because it will become clear to everyone: pieces can be pulled out of Russia even without any reasonable justification. That is, pieces can be pulled out of Russia! From Russia! Can! She allowed...

Why all the talk about the possible transfer of the Kuriles does not make sense yet.

The Japanese seem to have already decided everything. Sami. They have already handed over the Kuril Islands to themselves, and from the visit of the Russian president to Japan they are only waiting for a formal announcement about this. At least, the psychological picture in today's Japan is exactly this, many observers say. Then they ask themselves: but is Vladimir Putan ready to make such an announcement? And what will be the disappointment of the Japanese when the Russian president does not say anything about the transfer of the islands?

Or will he say? Maybe the Japanese know something that we Russians don't know?

The main leitmotif in the Japanese press and Japanese discussions about the Kuriles is the readiness to exchange investments for the islands. They call this the “zero option”: they say that the islands are ours anyway, but it is necessary to sweeten the bitterness of the Russian loss of territories. Their economic affairs are bad, so the multibillion-dollar Japanese investments will come in handy for the Russians. And the cherry on this cake will be the signing of a peace treaty, which, they say, will end the state of war between Japan and Russia.

And, in fact, what legal grounds do the Japanese have to dispute the ownership of the islands? What do they have besides a constant stubborn pressure?

“The Japanese made a claim to the islands immediately after the conclusion of the San Francisco Treaty between the allies and Japan, but there is no need to talk about any legal grounds,” German Gigolaev, scientific secretary of the Institute of World History (IVI) of the Russian Academy of Sciences, noted in a conversation with Tsargrad. - But since the USSR did not sign then, in 1951, this peace treaty with Japan, then on this basis they put forward claims. Well, ears, probably, as always, stick out from the US State Department - they asked the Japanese to put forward claims, and they put forward.

That's all the reason: give it back, because we want it, and the owner ordered ...

True, there were voices that Tokyo might consider signing a peace treaty without transferring four (more precisely, three in bulk) islands from the Kuril chain. There were also voices that the Japanese government was ready to be satisfied with two of them. The authoritative Japanese newspaper Kyodo published a version of this, citing a source in the cabinet of ministers.

However, then these versions were refuted, and the picture remained the same: Japan should get everything! By the way, in the variant of a compromise with two islands, the strategy is aimed at all four. It's purely a matter of tactics. In the same article in "Kyodo" it is directly stated: the transfer of the two islands will be only the "first phase" of the settlement of the territorial issue. Similarly, the option of joint Russian-Japanese management of the southern part of the Kuril Islands is no longer possible: the government resolutely denied the corresponding report of the Nikkei newspaper back in October.

Thus, the position of Tokyo remains unchanged, and any compromise options turn out to be useless and meaningless: the winner, as they say, takes everything.

And the winner, of course, in any exchange of the islands for any financial "buns" will be - and will be announced - the Japanese. For money is nothing more than money, and territory is never less than territory. Let us recall what place Alaska occupies in the Russian national consciousness with the history of its sale. And it’s clear, it’s clear that in the middle of the 19th century it was unprofitable, inconvenient, practically uninhabited by Russian land, which the British or Americans would have taken away one way or another simply by the fact of its gradual settlement. And what kind of borders could have stopped them if gold had been discovered there earlier, when Alaska was still under Russian jurisdiction!

So it seems to be right and inevitable - even though the money was received, and not just lost the land - Alaska should have been sold. But does anyone thank Tsar Alexander II for this today?

Kurile Islands. On the island of Kunashir. Fishing. Photo: Vyacheslav Kiselev/TASS

What can the Japanese give?

The only thing that can justify the transfer of the territory of the country to another state in the minds of the people is, perhaps, only an exchange for other territories. As, for example, they did this with the Chinese, correcting the status of individual islands on the Amur. Yes, they gave away some land, but they also received it, and even a little more. But what lands can the Japanese give us in exchange? Is it the island of Okinawa with American military bases? It is unlikely - hardly among Japanese politicians there is at least one capable of arranging such a "movement" ...

So, Japan has no land for us. Is there money?

And it depends what. Just recently, 10 billion dollars were received for a 19.5% stake in Rosneft. In total, the corporation promised “an overall effect, taking into account the capitalized synergies between PJSC NK Rosneft and PJSC ANK Bashneft, in the amount of more than 1.1 trillion rubles ($ 17.5 billion), cash receipts to the budget in the fourth quarter 2016 will amount to 1,040 billion rubles ($16.3 billion).”

Igor Sechin called this deal the largest in the history of the country. But these are just shares of just one state corporation, of which there are far more than one in Russia. Yes, as noted by a number of observers, sold at a fierce discount relative to the true value of the company.

Attention, the question is: how much money would Japan be willing to pay for our islands? Even if it's ten times the amount—with $1.248 trillion in international reserves, she can find it relatively painlessly—is the game worth the candle? What economic effect will Japan get from the southern Kuril chain? It is clear that there will certainly be some effect - at least from the exploitation of marine resources in the adjacent water area. But the problem is that money is given - if it is given - by completely different people, far from the fishing industry.

Until the first shout of the owner ...

However, it's not about money - even if they really gave us money. What can be purchased with them? The most valuable thing in today's world for Russia is technology and machine tools. Will the Japanese give them to us? You can be sure - no. Serious technologies are a closed subject for us for reasons of secrecy. A similar problem is with machine tools: yes, we need them after the total destruction of industry in the 90s, much more important is the technology for their production. At one time, the USSR had already made a mistake when, after the war, it brought German machine tools to its territory as requisition. Rather, it was a forced measure - there were actually no good machine tools in the USSR before the war, and even more so after. But only in this way the industry turned out to be tied to already obsolete models, but Germany, forcedly “undressed” in this regard, was forcedly, but extremely effectively modernized its machine park.

But even if we assume that the Japanese somehow get around other people's restrictions in this matter - and these are primarily American restrictions dictated, by the way, by interests and national security - how long can they portray "nobility"? Until the very first independent movement of Russia, which Washington would not like. For example, the final capture of Aleppo. The coalition of Western countries has already threatened us with new sanctions for this and kept the old ones. Will the Japanese be able to disobey their main allies? Never!

Thus, everything turns out simply: even if Russia gives up the islands in exchange for money or technology, very soon it will not have either. And islands, of course.

What is Russia losing?

From a purely material point of view, the Kudryavy rhenium volcano alone on Iturup Island, which annually ejects $70 million worth of this valuable metal for defense needs, makes the loss of the islands a very mismanagement act. In Alaska, at least there was an excuse - the then Russian authorities did not know about either gold or oil in this distant land. According to the Kuriles, there is no such justification.

What happens if you give up the islands?

“Nothing good will happen,” replies the historian Gigolaev. - The zone of international waters in the Sea of ​​Okhotsk, which are not subject to our national jurisdiction, will immediately increase. Plus, several straits are being blocked for our warships to exit through them from the Sea of ​​Okhotsk to the open ocean.”

Of course, the extraction of fish and seafood in the surrounding water area gives rather big incomes. At the same time, there is also the right to limit this production in the Sea of ​​Okhotsk for the same Japanese, Koreans, Chinese, because the possession of four islands makes this sea inland for Russia.

But these are still pleasant, but trifles against the background of what the loss of the islands in the geostrategic sense can turn into. As pointed out by German Gigolaev.

The thing is that since the Second World War, Japan has not been a sovereign power in the full sense of the word. It is under US military and political control. And if tomorrow the Japanese get at least one of the disputed islands, the day after tomorrow an American military base may appear on it. For example, with the missile defense system, which, as Tsargrad has already written more than once from the words of informed military experts, can be quickly and painlessly converted into an attack complex - just a canopy of Tomahawk cruise missiles. And no one can stop the Americans, and Tokyo in particular cannot.

By the way, they are not particularly eager to ban. Moreover, at the level of the prime minister, the government, and the Foreign Ministry, they have already officially denied any even attempts to make an exception from the security treaty with the United States regarding the South Kuril Islands, if Russia agrees to give them up. According to Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida, the security treaty with the United States "applies and will continue to apply to all territories and waters that are under the administrative control of Japan."

Accordingly, if desired, access to the Pacific Ocean is blocked for the Russian military fleet, because there are straits that do not freeze in winter, which are now controlled by the Russian military, but will become American. So, as soon as the threatened period comes - and who guarantees that this will never happen? - Immediately the Pacific Fleet can be written off the balance sheet. After all, with the same success, a solid naval group led by an aircraft carrier could be based somewhere on Iturup.

Let's agree: the Japanese (or, more likely, their owners, the Americans) came up with a beautiful option. Insignificant for the area of ​​Russia, patches of land immediately deprive Russia of rhenium necessary in military production (in engine building, for example), and valuable resources of sea areas, and access to the ocean in a threatened period.

And this - in the complete absence of reasonable arguments for their rights to these islands! And if, under these conditions, Moscow decides to transfer the islands, then something more terrible will happen than the loss of fish, rhenium, and even access to the ocean.

Because it will become clear to everyone: pieces can be pulled out of Russia even without any reasonable justification. That is, pieces can be pulled out of Russia! From Russia! Can! She allowed...

On Saturday, November 19, Russian President Vladimir Putin will meet with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in the capital of Peru, Lima. In mid-December, Putin will also visit Japan directly. At the moment, consultations are ongoing between Russia and Japan on the conclusion of a peace treaty, the obstacle to which remains the problem of the so-called Northern Territories, as the Japanese side calls the Kuril Islands. Tokyo, as you know, considers the Kuriles occupied territory. In a September interview with an American agency Bloomberg Putin said that a search is underway for a solution that will suit everyone. This issue could also become a subject of discussion at the meeting of the newly elected US President Donald Trump with Abe, which took place on November 18 in New York. However, Russian publicist Leonid Radzikhovsky doubts that the United States, and even more so Trump, may be interested in the fate of the Kuril Islands. Nor does he believe Putin would be willing to sacrifice his tough-guy reputation by handing over the disputed islands to Japan.

At the meeting between Trump and Abe, any issue could be discussed. But, frankly, I don’t think that the Americans, and even more so Trump, who, it seems to me, is not so in the context of Russian-Japanese relations, has any definite opinion about the Kuril Islands. This is a question so infinitely distant from America that it is unlikely that Trump has any position. Will Russia and Japan conclude a peace treaty? It's hard for me to understand how this affects the US.

Context

Free hectare on a Japanese island

Is Russia ready to return two islands?

Kuril crystal ball

How will Moscow and Tokyo divide the Kuriles?

I do not believe that Putin will give the islands to Japan. This is so contrary to the image of a collector of Russian lands, a tough macho and a man who “outplayed everyone”, that Putin will not be able to outplay 150 million Russian citizens in this matter. Yes, Putin can easily give quite large chunks of territory to the Chinese. Because this territory is not noticeable, not symbolic. And because this is China, about which a common opinion has already been established in Russia, that this is our older brother, best friend and defender against the Americans. After all, China is China.

The Kuril Islands have a symbolic meaning. I don’t know if Russia needs them or absolutely not, and if they are needed, then for what. And no one in Russia knows about it. But these are symbolic islands. And I do not believe that Putin will be able to give them to anyone. These are islands of prestige. Just like Crimea is a peninsula of prestige. Although for Ukraine, Crimea, probably, is of somewhat greater importance: the resort where everyone went, after all.

I think when Putin spoke about the option that suits everyone, he could have in mind, as a last resort, the option of joint management of the Kuril Islands, which is quite beneficial for Russia and does not drop Putin's prestige. But, as far as I understand, there is no such example in the world that a territory belongs to two countries. Management is possible. Invite whoever you want. But the land belongs, through laws, citizenship and taxes, to one country. There may even be joint border guards and dual citizenship, but whose laws to follow? If someone stole a goat, will he be judged according to Japanese law or Russian? Therefore, joint management is beautiful words that do not understand what they mean.

I think Putin agrees to joint management. But to give even one or two islands to Japan is the loss of symbolic capital. And Putin, apart from symbolic capital, does not need any other capital. It is unlikely that there is a denouement here that will satisfy the vanity and ambitions of both sides.

The Japanese seem to have already decided everything. Sami. They have already handed over the Kuril Islands to themselves, and from the visit of the Russian president to Japan they are only waiting for a formal announcement about this. At least, the psychological picture in today's Japan is exactly this, many observers say. Then they ask themselves: but is Vladimir Putan ready to make such an announcement? And what will be the disappointment of the Japanese when the Russian president does not say anything about the transfer of the islands?

Or will he say? Maybe the Japanese know something that we Russians don't know?

What can the Japanese demand?

The main leitmotif in the Japanese press and Japanese discussions about the Kuriles is the readiness to exchange investments for the islands. They call this the "zero option": they say that the islands are ours anyway, but the bitterness of the loss of territories must be sweetened for the Russians. Their economic affairs are bad, so the multibillion-dollar Japanese investments will come in handy for the Russians. And the cherry on this cake will be the signing of a peace treaty, which, they say, will end the state of war between Japan and Russia.

And, in fact, what legal grounds do the Japanese have to dispute the ownership of the islands? What do they have besides a constant stubborn pressure?

“The Japanese made a claim to the islands immediately after the conclusion of the San Francisco Treaty between the allies and Japan, but there is no need to talk about any legal grounds,” said German Gigolaev, scientific secretary of the Institute of World History (IVI) of the Russian Academy of Sciences, in a conversation with Tsargrad. since the USSR did not sign this peace treaty with Japan then, in 1951, they made claims on this basis. Well, ears, probably, as always, stick out from the US State Department - they asked the Japanese to put forward claims, and they put forward."

That's all the reason: give it back, because we want it, and the owner ordered ...

True, there were voices that Tokyo might consider signing a peace treaty without transferring four (more precisely, three in bulk) islands from the Kuril chain. There were also voices that the Japanese government was ready to be satisfied with two of them. The authoritative Japanese newspaper "Kyodo" published a version of this, citing a source in the Cabinet of Ministers.

However, then these versions were refuted, and the picture remained the same: Japan should get everything! By the way, in the variant of a compromise with two islands, the strategy is aimed at all four. It's purely a matter of tactics. In the same article in "Kyodo" it is directly stated: the transfer of the two islands will be only the "first phase" of the settlement of the territorial issue. Similarly, the option of joint Russian-Japanese administration of the southern part of the Kuriles is no longer valid: the government resolutely refuted the corresponding report of the Nikkei newspaper back in October.

Thus, the position of Tokyo remains unchanged, and any compromise options turn out to be useless and meaningless: the winner, as they say, takes everything.
And the winner, of course, in any exchange of the islands for any financial "buns" will be - and will be announced - the Japanese. For money is nothing more than money, and territory is never less than territory. Let us recall what place Alaska occupies in the Russian national consciousness with the history of its sale. And it’s clear, it’s clear that in the middle of the 19th century it was unprofitable, inconvenient, practically uninhabited by Russian land, which the British or Americans would have taken away one way or another simply by the fact of its gradual settlement. And what kind of borders could have stopped them if gold had been discovered there earlier, when Alaska was still under Russian jurisdiction!

So it seems to be correct and inevitable - at least they received the money, and not just lost the land - Alaska should have been sold. But does anyone thank Tsar Alexander II for this today?

Kurile Islands. On the island of Kunashir. Fishing. Photo: Vyacheslav Kiselev/TASS

What can the Japanese give?

The only thing that can justify the transfer of the territory of the country to another state in the minds of the people is, perhaps, only an exchange for other territories. As, for example, they did this with the Chinese, correcting the status of individual islands on the Amur. Yes, they gave away some land, but they also received it, and even a little more. But what lands can the Japanese give us in exchange? Is it the island of Okinawa with American military bases? It is unlikely - it is unlikely that among Japanese politicians there will be at least one capable of arranging such a "movement" ...
So, Japan has no land for us. Is there money?

And it depends what. Just recently, 10 billion dollars were received for a 19.5% stake in Rosneft. In total, the corporation promised "an overall effect, taking into account the capitalized synergies between PJSC NK Rosneft and PJSC ANK Bashneft, in the amount of more than 1.1 trillion rubles ($ 17.5 billion), cash receipts to the budget in the fourth quarter 2016 will amount to 1,040 billion rubles ($16.3 billion)."

Igor Sechin called this deal the largest in the history of the country. But these are just shares of just one state corporation, of which there are far more than one in Russia. Yes, as noted by a number of observers, sold at a fierce discount relative to the true value of the company.

Attention, the question is: how much money would Japan be willing to pay for our islands? Even if it's a tenfold higher amount - with $1.248 trillion in international reserves it can find it relatively painlessly - is it worth the candle? What economic effect will Japan get from the southern Kuril chain? It is clear that there will certainly be some effect - at least from the exploitation of marine resources in the adjacent water area. But the problem is that money is given - if given - by completely different people, far from the fishing industry.

Photo: Sergey Krasnoukhov / TASS

Until the first shout of the owner ...

However, it's not about money - even if they really were given to us. What can be purchased with them? The most valuable thing in today's world for Russia is technology and machine tools. Will the Japanese give them to us? You can be sure - no. Serious technologies are a closed subject for us for reasons of secrecy. A similar problem is with machine tools: yes, we need them after the total destruction of industry in the 90s, much more important is the technology for their production. At one time, the USSR had already made a mistake when, after the war, it brought German machine tools to its territory as requisition. Rather, it was a forced measure - there were actually no good machine tools in the USSR before the war, and even more so after. But only in this way the industry turned out to be tied to obsolete models, but Germany, forcedly "undressed" in this respect, forcedly, but extremely effectively, modernized its machine park.

But even if we assume that the Japanese somehow get around other people's restrictions in this matter - and these are primarily American restrictions dictated, by the way, by interests and national security - how long will they be able to portray "nobility"? Until the very first independent movement of Russia, which Washington would not like. For example, the final capture of Aleppo. The coalition of Western countries has already threatened us with new sanctions for this and kept the old ones. Will the Japanese be able to disobey their main allies? Never!

Thus, everything turns out to be simple: even if Russia gives up the islands in exchange for money or technology, very soon it will not have either one or the other. And islands, of course.

What is Russia losing?

From a purely material point of view, the Kudryavy rhenium volcano alone on Iturup Island, which annually ejects $70 million worth of this valuable metal for defense needs, makes the loss of the islands a very mismanagement act. In Alaska, at least there was an excuse - the then Russian authorities did not know about either gold or oil in this distant land. According to the Kuriles, there is no such justification.
What happens if you give up the islands?

“Nothing good will happen,” the historian Gigolaev answers. “The zone of international waters in the Sea of ​​Okhotsk, which are not subject to our national jurisdiction, will immediately increase. Plus, several straits are blocked for our warships to exit through them from the Sea of ​​​​Okhotsk to the open ocean.”

Of course, the extraction of fish and seafood in the surrounding water area gives rather big incomes. At the same time, there is also the right to limit this production in the Sea of ​​Okhotsk for the same Japanese, Koreans, Chinese, because the possession of four islands makes this sea inland for Russia.
But these are still pleasant, but trifles against the background of what the loss of the islands in the geostrategic sense can turn into. As pointed out by German Gigolaev.

The thing is that since the Second World War, Japan has not been a sovereign power in the full sense of the word. It is under US military and political control. And if tomorrow the Japanese get at least one of the disputed islands, the day after tomorrow an American military base may appear on it. For example, with the missile defense system, which, as Tsargrad has already written more than once from the words of informed military experts, can be quickly and painlessly converted into an attack complex - just a canopy of Tomahawk cruise missiles. And no one can stop the Americans, and Tokyo in particular cannot.

By the way, they are not particularly eager to ban. Moreover, at the level of the prime minister, the government, and the Foreign Ministry, they have already officially denied any even attempts to make an exception from the security treaty with the United States regarding the South Kuril Islands, if Russia agrees to give them up. According to Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida, the security treaty with the United States "applies and will continue to apply to all territories and water areas that are under the administrative control of Japan."

Accordingly, if desired, access to the Pacific Ocean is blocked for the Russian military fleet, because there are straits that do not freeze in winter, which today are controlled by the Russian military, but will become American. So, as soon as the threatened period comes - and who guarantees that this will never happen? - Immediately the Pacific Fleet can be written off the balance sheet. After all, with the same success, a solid naval group led by an aircraft carrier could be based somewhere on Iturup.
Let's agree: the Japanese (or, more likely, their owners, the Americans) came up with a beautiful option. Insignificant for the area of ​​Russia, patches of land immediately deprive Russia of rhenium necessary in military production (in engine building, for example), and valuable resources of sea areas, and access to the ocean in a threatened period.

And this - in the complete absence of reasonable arguments for their rights to these islands! And if, under these conditions, Moscow decides to transfer the islands, then something more terrible will happen than the loss of fish, rhenium, and even access to the ocean. Because it will become clear to everyone: pieces can be pulled out of Russia even without any reasonable justification. That is, pieces can be pulled out of Russia! From Russia! Can!

She allowed...