15 ms·
Japan has declared today that the southern Kurils is their sovereign territory
- azangru 5y agoDidn't they always (well, since WW2) consider southern Kurils their territory occupied by Russia? Has anything changed in their messaging?
- baybal2 5y ago
- _0w8t 5y agoYes, it looks like Japanese government just reminded about the position they always had that southern Kurils were occupied by Russia illegally. But the timing of the reminder is interesting.
- rwmj 5y agoI didn't realise it was such a big thing until I visited a festival in Hokkaido a few years back and there was a very large and busy stall soliciting signatures for a petition over the Kurils and with lots of photographs and maps. It seemed slightly delusional (but mostly harmless) to me at the time, but now - who knows?
- thematrixturtle 5y agoIt's pretty delusional even in Japan, nobody seriously expects Russia to return them. Early in the post-Soviet era there were some serious-ish proposals about Russia handing them back in exchange for massive financial aid, but ever since Putin took the reins it's been obvious that this is just not going to happen. I don't think even the Japanese government wants them back at this point, Hokkaido (the nearest big island) is already rapidly depopulating and having to administer a bunch of semi-frozen islands with random Russian pensioners and no resources aside from fish would be a logistical nightmare and permanent drain on the treasury.
- _0w8t 5y agoPutin did return quite significant territories to China in 2008 to settle a dispute that resulted in a small-scale war in 1969, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_border_conflict https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_border_conflict .
- thematrixturtle 5y agoFair enough, but the geopolitics are quite different: China and Russia are (wary) allies and the agreement was more about agreeing where to draw the line than handing over war spoils.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- Timpy 5y agoI'm not a fishing expert but I think officially owning those islands would affect their Exclusive Economic Zone. If the fishing there is good they could turn a profit even if administering the islands costs some yen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusive_economic_zone#Japan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusive_economic_zone#Japan
- carlivar 5y agoAnd would that include whaling? If so, I'm opposed to this and hope the islands stay with Russia.
- culopatin 5y agoIt’s like Argentina and the Falklands. To this day you’ll find people trying to say they are Argentinian when they would only be by proximity. I’m Argentinian and I’d love for them to be, but they are not. Uruguay is just as close and it’s a different country, why not take that too?
- mytailorisrich 5y agoWell, Japan lost WWII and treaties among the victors gave the Kurils to Russia.
- skhr0680 5y agoThe Japanese government's position via Wikipedia > Although by the terms of Article (2c) of the 1951 San Francisco treaty, Japan renounced all rights to the Kuril Islands, the treaty did not apply to the islands of Kunashiri, Etorofu, Shikotan and Habomai since they are not included in the Kuril Islands. Also, the Soviet Union did not sign the San Francisco treaty.
- barry-cotter 5y agoRight of conquest. Remember, in International Relations, might is all.
- tgz 5y ago
- yardie 5y agoWith so much of their military tied up in the boondoggle on their western front I guess now would be the perfect time to pounce on disputed territory. Knowing your enemy distracted.
- ilammy 5y agoThankfully, Article 9 is still in Japan's constitution, so it's very unlikely that any action would happen. Just rolling back to pre-2018 status quo, before Japan was seemingly willing to resolve the dispute at last.
- Armisael16 5y agoArticle 9 doesn’t really mean what it says, at least in practice. If Japan is attacked the state won’t just roll over and die - it’ll try to defend itself (hence the JSDF). You can read it as forbidding offensive war, but if Japan has claimed that those islands are part of Japan for a while then there’s enough of an argument for it being defensive war that no one will much care.
- FpUser 5y agoSo repeating something long enough suddenly changes a reality?
- fomine3 5y agoYes, current the constitution of Japan is very hard to change so it had never changed. Still govt need to do some military-ish operation so they changed how to interpret multiple times.
- lifeplusplus 5y agoTactical nukes bend that roi calculation in favor of russia
- FpUser 5y ago>" I guess now would be the perfect time to pounce on disputed territory" And get a nuke in response?
- bertil 5y agoMany people are tempted to compare the claim to the Russian argument in Dombass: it’s a much smaller claim (20k inhabitants), a consistent one since 1945. The population is notoriously isolated, too.
- ksec 5y agotl:dr - Nothing New. The message has been the same since WWII. Just an opportunity to remind the world about it while Russia is getting all the negative press. It wouldn't even beep in the world of PR if they had said it any other time.
- belter 5y agoRussian Migs to "accidentally" cross into Japanese airspace in 3 days... Edit: Of course as follow-up to this accidental event of 6 days ago... "Japan says Russian helicopter violated airspace, scrambles fighter jet" https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2022/03/02/japan-russia-helicopter-violate-airspace-fighter-jet/3251646213829/ https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2022/03/02/japan-rus...
- chockchocschoir 5y agoTo be fair, this is not something that just happened recently, nor just in Japan (nor just by Russia). Airspace of multiple nations gets violated multiple times per year by multiple nations, all the time. Although the timing makes it a bit suspected, I'm sure it's just a general test of "readiness", which happens often.
- neetfreek 5y agoAlso recently four Russian jets violated Swedish airspace during joint Finnish-Swedish exercises. From the linked article, described by the Swedish airforce as '"particularly serious" given the current situation, [who] called the Russian actions unprofessional and irresponsible.' https://yle.fi/news/3-12341483 https://yle.fi/news/3-12341483
- chockchocschoir 5y agoAs the sibling comment mentions, this happens constantly so I don't think it's as big news as some make it out to be. It's almost a weekly occurrence at this point.
- belter 5y agoIt would seem Russia has more than 300 of these incidents just in 2019. "NATO says Russian aircraft violated European airspace nearly 300 times in 2019" https://taskandpurpose.com/news/russian-aircraft-violate-european-airspace/ https://taskandpurpose.com/news/russian-aircraft-violate-eur... However I cannot recall any incidents of the type: "French Mirages violate Russian Airspace" "Swedish Grippens's buzz Russian Cruiser..." or "UK Jets cross into Russian airspace" Not saying they do not happen, just that I can't recall any. Do you have some examples?
- sharikous 5y agoWhat would be the value (economical, strategical) of those islands for Japan? Apart from the sentimental one?
- periheli0n 5y agoRussian bombers, fighter jets, missiles launched from those Iislands can reach Hokkaido and/or Tokio much quicker than when launched from more northern islands, leaving less time for countermeasures. Same for ground troops.
- lovemenot 5y agoIt's a few tens of kilometers. Not significant.
- lovemenot 5y agoNone whatsoever. But that is exactly the point of reaffirming their claim now. Russia can choose to climb down over something insignificant in order to gain a potential ally. Japan would thereby become a credible broker for peace.
- soraminazuki 5y agoI'm doubtful about Japan becoming allies with the Russians. Japan is an American ally, depends heavily on them for military defense, and the public sentiment is very much against Russia right now.
- samwillis 5y agoI imagin if it’s anything like the UK and all it’s various islands it’s about fishing and drilling rights. So much comes down to natural resources.
- petercooper 5y agoFor anyone unaware of the place, consider where Scotland's westernmost point is! :-) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockall https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockall
- rambojazz 5y agoRussia can't afford to open another front
- vasac 5y agoJapan can't afford to be nuked again too.
- TMWNN 5y agoEven in the worst days for Russia during the German invasion, when it seemed like Moscow would be overrun, the Soviet Union kept substantial forces on the border with Japanese-occupied China. Although the two countries having a nonaggression pact, the Soviets remained fearful of the Japanese invading from the east. By 1945 the situation had changed, of course, with the Soviets being the ones to abrogate the pact and then formally entering the war against Japan in August 1945.
- zelphirkalt 5y agoJust yesterday I was thinking: What if others started to grab territory, which Russia claims to be its territory around the world now? Wouldn't that be fortunate timing and overload Russian army? Today I read this.
- rjzzleep 5y agoJust yesterday I was thinking: What if we piss off a nuclear power all around the world now? Wouldn't that be fortunate timing to solve global warming? FTFY. I mean sure we only have another 50 years before the planet is unlivable for us, but why desperately try to accelerate it? EDIT: here is Russias military doctrine from 2000 https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2000-05/russias-military-doctrine https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2000-05/russias-military-doc...
- jakeinspace 5y agoThe planet will not be unlivable in 50 years. Larger areas of it will be, but most of the landmass will still be hospitable. There may be significant collapse of agricultural production, but again, that will affect the poorer countries mainly. I suppose some massive and unpredictable ecological collapse could conceivably happen by then, which would I guess have the potential of severely damaging food production, but I’m not sure if that’s considered especially likely.
- jorvi 5y agoI can’t find the source right now, but nuclear winter is projected to drop temperatures by 20 to 40°C . Not a single country in the world has the infrastructure or reserves to deal with that.
- marcinzm 5y agoThe OP was talking about climate change making the planet inhabitable and nuclear winter fixing that.
- mellavora 5y ago
- decremental 5y agoThis is different because we like Japan but we don't like Russia. If Russia didn't want the entire world to turn on them, they shouldn't have illegally invaded Afghanistan.
- Aethylia 5y agoDo we like Japan? They have a shameful history that they have refused to acknowledge. I view them very negatively.
- ineedasername 5y agoI view them through the lens of how they exist today, not decades before nearly everyone in the world was alive. I acknowledge their history but do not judge the current leaders or population by it.
- pelorat 5y agoJapan is still ruled by conservative traditionalists with questionable views.
- ineedasername 5y agoDo you think that, given the opportunity, they would commit the same atrocities as their ancestors? Can those traditionalist views be separated from those atrocities or do those views, given no restraint, inevitably lead to the atrocities? If they would, would that Japanese people allow them to stay in power if they undertook steps in that direction? Important questions that would need answers before I would revert my opinion to one I might have held if alive 80 years ago.
- Aethylia 5y agoAbsolutely I think that they would commit the same atrocities if given the chance. Fortunately as you say their people hopefully don't agree. That is what I was alluding to when I mentioned that they do not admit their wrongdoings even today. Disputes with e.g. South Korea prove that they still believe they own places they invaded during the war. Educating their citizens on the past and rebuilding trust with the countries who suffered under them would be signs they have changed as a government. Neither of those things take place.
- redwood 5y agoKönigsberg anyone?
- belter 5y agoTechnically, Japan and Russia are still at war. "Why Are Japan And Russia Still At War?" https://theowp.org/why-are-japan-and-russia-still-at-war/ https://theowp.org/why-are-japan-and-russia-still-at-war/
- smitty1e 5y agoThe interaction at Tsushima Strait didn't go so well for the Russians https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tsushima https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tsushima
- ceejayoz 5y agoNo, they aren’t. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet–Japanese_Joint_Declaration_of_1956 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet–Japanese_Joint_Declarat... From its text: > The state of war between the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and Japan shall cease on the date on which this Declaration enters into force and peace, friendship and good-neighbourly relations between them shall be restored. The article claims it was never signed. This appears to be entirely made up. There are photos of the signing. https://twitter.com/urdailyhistory/status/1318100824288075776 https://twitter.com/urdailyhistory/status/131810082428807577...
- robbedpeter 5y ago>>President Vladimir Putin on the next day.[11] However, the dispute persists,[12][13][14][15] no peace treaty has yet been signed, and the islands remain under Russian administration Yes they are. Japan never signed.
- robbedpeter 5y agoAhh. This was a declaration, mutually signed, that agreed to negotiations for a treaty. No treaty was ever signed, this declaration was.
- ceejayoz 5y agoThe declaration states, once signed, that it ends the war. That there were to be further negotiations after that didn't conclude doesn't invalidate that agreement. Text is quite short, and clear: https://worldjpn.grips.ac.jp/documents/texts/docs/19561019.D1E.html https://worldjpn.grips.ac.jp/documents/texts/docs/19561019.D...
- coobird 5y agoThis isn't anything new. That's always been Japan's position on the "Northern Territories" as it's commonly called here. From the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan: https://www.mofa.go.jp/region/europe/russia/territory/overview.html https://www.mofa.go.jp/region/europe/russia/territory/overvi...
- EGreg 5y agoChina and Taiwan would be a lot more interesting Out of the three major nuclear powers, I’d say only Russia would ever get sanctions for invading and occupying land. When was the last time US got sanctions?
- mrunkel 5y agoWhen was the last time the US invaded and occupied land on its own?
- Fiahil 5y ago2003, if I recall correctly ?
- q1w2 5y agoNope: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq#Coalition_and_Allied_contingent_involvement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq#Coalitio...
- lumost 5y agoThe same claim could be made of Russia/Belarus or the Warsaw Pact invasions. Ultimately the US contributed well over 90% of the combat force in 2003.
- fsflover 5y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Invasions_by_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Invasions_by_the_Unit...
- bobuk 5y agoI heard that in Russia they consider it's natural to separate parts of the country by people's referendum...
- Hamuko 5y agoAren't the islands full of Russian people? I imagine a referendum wouldn't yield a result that was unfavourable to Russia.
- bobuk 5y agoit depends on the Japan's proposition. If they will propose to guarantee jobs for every new citizen with typical for Japan salary - it will be enough because the exchange rate of Russian ruble is dropped by more than 100% in the last 5 days.
- throwaway0a5e 5y agoPeople will readily pay or forgo money in order to live how they want where they want with people they get along with.
- thriftwy 5y agoConsidering how much discrimination japanese Koreans and especially Ainu has faced, it's hard to take this proposition at a face value. "Would you like to have an average wage of our country as a second-class citizen".
- hirako2000 5y ago0.0091, down to 0.0075 is far from 100% by the way, a drop of 100% or more would imply the currency is below zero no matter its previous value. so what we see here is a 20%, max 25% drop of the rubble to the dollar. bringing people's view towards reality is a difficult but much needed change to wish for.
- heavenlyblue 5y ago> he exchange rate of Russian ruble is dropped by more than 100% in the last 5 days. So is it negative now?
- throwaway_4ever 5y agoHere’s a good heuristic: if the only people alive for the past change of hands are old enough to physically be incapable of being the ones sent to fight for it, the dispute is over as-is. (Why send the young to fight over something that’s never been an issue for them?) Would save us a whole lot of historical grievances, revanchism and war by retconning the past centuries into a new issue.
- tokai 5y agoHows that a good heuristic? It means never giving anything up and talking about the issue. Just keep sending troops before they get any older.
- bluecalm 5y agoAs someone who was born under de-facto Soviet occupation, almost 40 years after the end of WWII may I suggest you go stuff yourself with your suggestions? Suggesting that "it's never an issue for them" is just ignorance of the highest order.
- cool_dude85 5y agoLet's bring war for territory back, baby! Just gotta hold it for 20-30 years.
- throwaway_4ever 5y agoBack? You must've missed Ukraine, Nagorno-Karabakh, Georgia, Israel-Palestine, the Cyprus issue, Taiwan, Western Sahara, need I go on? You can settle old tinderboxes while ensuring fidelity current boundaries for the indefinite future.
- inglor_cz 5y agoIn the case that Russia actually collapses as a state ... which is not likely, but cannot be ruled out if they lose this war badly (lost wars are an enormous stress test for authoritarian regimes where the ruler gets all the blame, just look at the collapse of Tsarist Russia in 1917) ... a lot of territory would be up to grabs. Kaliningrad could transform to a puppet state of the EU, removing a serious gap in its territorial contiguity. Various Kavkaz ethnicities could vouch for independence. Tuva (ironically, where Shoigu comes from) is a Buddhist nation that fits into the Mongol-Chinese cultural sphere better than into Russian one. Vladivostok used to be a Chinese fishing village once, and the Chinese hate the old Unequal Treaties. Sakhalin is a part of the Japanese archipelago. Vyborg (Viipuri) and Pechenga (Petsamo) are formerly Finnish territories and even though the irredentism has subsided, they could still be valuable economically. Vyborg is a major port and Pechenga gives access to the Arctic Ocean. Their reconstruction would be a huge money sink, though. Much like reconstruction of the DDR after reunification of Germany.
- jcfrei 5y agoLots of countries are obviously positioning themselves to (re-)integrate some territory just in case. Some missing pieces: South Ossetia and Abkhazia which would probably be reintegrated into Georgia and pave the way for potential NATO or EU membership. Transnistria integration into Moldova. LDR / DPR maybe even Crimea back to Ukraine.
- mytailorisrich 5y agoThis would require military action by Moldova/Georgia/Ukraine because the territories you mention are ethnically different and do not want to be part of those countries to start with. Abkhazia fought a war in the early 90s to split from Georgia. South Ossetia also fought several wars to become independent. So both those territories might strive to become fully independent but will absolutely refuse to be re-absorbed by Georgia. Moldovans are actually a minority in Transnistria, which has also seen open tensions since the fall of the USSR. Lastly, Crimea, which was Russian until 1954, will definitely require a war and ethnic cleansing if Ukraine want to take it again and to keep it.
- waffleiron 5y agoFor people who want to read up, this is quite a complex situation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuril_Islands_dispute#World_War_II_agreements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuril_Islands_dispute#World_Wa...
- q1w2 5y agoThe history is complex. The current politics are not. It's just a way of Japan reminding Russia how unhappy it is with the war in Ukraine. The islands are barely inhabited.
- ceejayoz 5y ago> The islands are barely inhabited. It's not about the inhabitants, it's about the 200 nautical mile radius around the islands that becomes yours for economic purposes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusive_economic_zone https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusive_economic_zone
- _ph_ 5y agoOn the one side, it is easy now to bring up those old conflicts in a moment when Russia is weak and distracted. On the other side, it could be an attempt at supporting Ukraine, as to draw out the efforts of Russia even further and give a clear signal to anyone, especially the high ranking military, that Russia might be stretched between a lot of competing crises, if they can't make peace in Ukraine.
- env123 5y agoIt's just a declaration of core claim, it's not like Japan will actually do something about it at this point. When Japan is finally free from the shackles of western hegemony and able to build up militarily like it used to, then it might do something about it. Remember, geopolitics is about perception of power and "alliances", nothing to do with morality or freedom
- oblio 5y agoJapan is one blink of an eye of passing from the "shackles of Westerner hegemony" (that among other things at one point made it the 2nd largest economy on the planet for a country only 50% bigger than Romania...) into the loving arms of the Chinese juggernaut. Be careful what you wish, because it might come true :-)
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- jcmontx 5y agoWhat are all these comments about not _necessarily_ returning Crimea to Ukraine? Is HN being spammed by Russians?
- ceejayoz 5y agoUkraine's been unable to take it back in eight years of conflict. Formally ceding it might be the sort of concession that lets Putin claim enough of a win to end the conflict. Right now, he's got no ability to save face, and that risks continued escalation.
- TMWNN 5y agoIt's a fact that Russia's military is still superior to Ukraine's. A plausible outcome of the current war is * Ukraine formally acknowledging its loss of Crimea and the Russian-heavy east, all under Russian occupation since 2014 * Ukraine formally declaring neutrality (i.e., no joining NATO) * Rump Ukraine's borders formally guaranteed by Russia/US/NATO This gives Putin something that he can plausibly sell to Russians as a win, and codifies US/Western military intervention on Ukraine's behalf (not just the current flow of supplies) from further Russian revanchism, while not losing any/much territory that wasn't already out of Ukrainian hands before the invasion began. Now, if the indications that Russian logistics have broken down and Russia's losses are unsustainable are true, that's a different story. But I am not ready to conclude that yet.
- MaxBarraclough 5y agoFrom https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, bots, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data.
- random_upvoter 5y agoThe current situation is already a catastrophe as it is. The best possible outcome at this time is that this war is ended as soon as possible even when this means handing a few victory points to Russia. It is the only way at lot less Ukrainians will die and then I'm just ignoring the potential outcome of further escalation. Nothing the West is doing right now is working towards this outcome. We still seem to believe that at the end of the road there is some 'win' against Russia with tolerable costs for ourselves. The economic sanctions just boomerang with a comparable net loss to the West. Then there's millions of Ukrainian refugees who will need to be offered a somewhat humane existence in Europe at huge initial costs. The War in Syria already stretched Europe's capability to absorb refugees to the limit. Ukraine has more than twice the number of citizens. The Western leaders has got to stop this pretense of "we got this" and "we can hurt Russia more than it can hurt us". We don't have this.
- DyslexicAtheist 5y ago> best possible outcome at this time is that this war is ended as soon as possible even when this means handing a few victory points to Russia why for the love of god would the West support Russia and not the wishes of the Ukrainian people? I don't understand this reasoning and have even heard it among some of my ultra-religious friends or extended family members. None of them has any skin in the game other than steep gas prices and lot of fear, so they just parrot "war is bad please stap!". But none of them contributes how that would impact the people. If you force them to comment it always turns out to be a trolley-problem that they have pulled the lever on for others: with silly arguments like we must do it because "claiming 100K dead people is still better than 10MM". And this is where this hypothesis gets hairy because that decision is easier to make for others but a lot harder to say: "I and my partner with 2 toddlers will volunteer to be in the pool of those who die." I'm only speaking for myself but there isn't a thing in the world I wouldn't do if I'd have to defend my own family even that means wiping out half of humanity. If I'd think very hard about I'd even wipe out part of my own blood to ensure survival of my own offspring. Luckily this is only a hypothetical scenario. Sure I'd never recover from it emotionally or psychologically but it is what I would do. This is obviously flippant and hypothetical but no better way to illustrate the hypocrisy at play here. Edit: The only part I agree is the rest of the world will be massively hurt by it too. Egypt, Tunesia, Yemen, etc are totally screwed as it's the biggest consumer of UA/RU grain https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2022/mar/07/we-need-bread-fears-in-middle-east-as-ukraine-russia-war-hits-wheat-imports https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2022/mar/07/w...
- antiterra 5y agoThere’s no question in my mind that this is Putin continuing to follow the Foundations of Geopolitics playbook: > Russia should manipulate Japanese politics by offering the Kuril Islands to Japan and provoking anti-Americanism From https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics
- nullifidian 5y agoDugin has no power or influence on the Russian elite. Only clueless westerners post links to this book. Putin's imperialism is of his own biographical origins, and there is no shortage of other nationalist/pro-imperialist authors. Dugin is just one of the more intellectual ones, which isn't actually helpful in getting him popular among the Putin's "elite".
- antiterra 5y agoWhether it was influential or merely representative of a Eurasianist Russian Idea, the book has been prescient as a guideline for over 23 years. I wouldn’t expect it to be directly held contemporary doctrine. After all, the world is a bit different than it was back then. This does not rely on any current influence by Dugin, who did not write the book entirely on his own.
- kornhole 5y agoLink is broken for me but probably caused my hardened browser settings. We can expect more countries to test territory with Russia while it is embroiled, distracted, and weakened by current endeavor.
- powerapple 5y agoso NATO will join the war if Japan decides to take the islands back?