top | item 30598636

Japan has declared today that the southern Kurils is their sovereign territory

176 points| baxtr | 4 years ago |twitter.com | reply

297 comments

order
[+] zelphirkalt|4 years ago|reply
Just 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.
[+] ineedasername|4 years ago|reply
I too have taken Russia's actions as both precedent and the distraction needed to make my own move. I declared the basement of my house (finished, furnished) complete with bathroom, sink and microwave, to be my own sovereign domain. The consequences for violating that territory will be such as none in my household have ever in their history experienced.
[+] rjzzleep|4 years ago|reply
Just 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-doc...

[+] JoachimS|4 years ago|reply
Yes. I'm sure some consider Königsberg to have been an exclave for far too long. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%B6nigsberg

And since Putin is talking about restoring old borders, could the Ru visitors in Livland go home now? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_Empire

Putin is not the only one who could play this game, and make demands on historical grounds. More modern problems, like Chagos Island should really be solved though. The way UK is acting, and treating the Chagos exiles is quite ugly. IMHO.

[+] pjc50|4 years ago|reply
There is very little Russian overseas territory, most of Russia's territorial claims are to, er, neighboring states.
[+] belter|4 years ago|reply
Russian 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-rus...

[+] chockchocschoir|4 years ago|reply
To 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.
[+] azangru|4 years ago|reply
Didn't they always (well, since WW2) consider southern Kurils their territory occupied by Russia? Has anything changed in their messaging?
[+] _0w8t|4 years ago|reply
Yes, 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.
[+] mytailorisrich|4 years ago|reply
Well, Japan lost WWII and treaties among the victors gave the Kurils to Russia.
[+] _ph_|4 years ago|reply
On 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.
[+] yardie|4 years ago|reply
With 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|4 years ago|reply
Thankfully, 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.

[+] random_upvoter|4 years ago|reply
I think that piling on top of an already volatile situation is a distinctly unwise move.
[+] FpUser|4 years ago|reply
>" I guess now would be the perfect time to pounce on disputed territory"

And get a nuke in response?

[+] random_upvoter|4 years ago|reply
The 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|4 years ago|reply
> 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/w...

[+] kbart|4 years ago|reply
It was proven over and over again, that the more you give to Russia, the more they will take next time. We have to stop them now or never. War is already on going between Russia and the west (Putin himself and his chief of spies already said, that they deem sanctions akin declaration of war), hiding from this fact won't help.
[+] ProjectArcturis|4 years ago|reply
The realpolitik of it is, Russia has blundered into a catastrophe (or, if you prefer, the West provoked it by expanding NATO). Like the Soviets in Afghanistan, it will turn into a grinding, unwinnable quagmire. The thought is that the war will help pull down the Putin regime, like Afghanistan hollowed out the Soviet Union. It also invites anyone with a territorial dispute with Russia to push hard on it now, like the Japanese are doing.

It will be awful for Ukraine, and for the Russian soldiers sent to fight it. But the West's only alternative would be to encourage Ukraine to surrender, which would only tee up Putin's next invasion (Moldova, then the Baltics, then Poland).

[+] env123|4 years ago|reply
It'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|4 years ago|reply
Japan 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 :-)

[+] bertil|4 years ago|reply
Many 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.
[+] bobuk|4 years ago|reply
I heard that in Russia they consider it's natural to separate parts of the country by people's referendum...
[+] Hamuko|4 years ago|reply
Aren't the islands full of Russian people? I imagine a referendum wouldn't yield a result that was unfavourable to Russia.
[+] mardifoufs|4 years ago|reply
Referring to what the russians did is whataboutism, focus on the current Japanese threat ;)
[+] throwaway_4ever|4 years ago|reply
Here’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|4 years ago|reply
Hows 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|4 years ago|reply
As 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|4 years ago|reply
Let's bring war for territory back, baby! Just gotta hold it for 20-30 years.
[+] sharikous|4 years ago|reply
What would be the value (economical, strategical) of those islands for Japan? Apart from the sentimental one?
[+] Freak_NL|4 years ago|reply
When asking the question “what is the value of those islands/rocks-in-the-sea?” the answer is always 'EEZ boundaries'. I.e., having extra bits of land in the middle of the sea enlarges your exclusive economic zone where you can exploit resources in the ocean and below the ocean bed (oil) significantly. Which is why so many disputes exist over really boring bits of rock jutting out of the water.
[+] samwillis|4 years ago|reply
I 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.

[+] lovemenot|4 years ago|reply
None 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.
[+] periheli0n|4 years ago|reply
Russian 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.
[+] redwood|4 years ago|reply
Königsberg anyone?
[+] dvh|4 years ago|reply
It's yours if you can cross 7 bridges in one go
[+] rambojazz|4 years ago|reply
Russia can't afford to open another front
[+] kornhole|4 years ago|reply
Link 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.

[+] ksec|4 years ago|reply
tl: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.

[+] decremental|4 years ago|reply
This 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.
[+] _ph_|4 years ago|reply
Afghanistan was bad, but they were almost forgiven internationally, especially as one could pretend "that was the Sovjet Union". But with the invasion of the Ukraine, that is all washed away, Russia is as ugly as the old SU.
[+] Aethylia|4 years ago|reply
Do we like Japan? They have a shameful history that they have refused to acknowledge. I view them very negatively.