In late May 2015, President Vladimir Putin of Russia was reported to have received an invitation to visit Japan in June 2015 to discuss the ongoing Kuril Islands dispute. The historical dispute over the South Kuril Islands has been simmering for more than 50 years, since the end of WWII. Will 2015 see a breakthrough in the Russia–Japan relationship from the perspective of territorial ownership of the South Kuril Islands? Or will the focus be shifted to other aspects of the bilateral relations during the President’s visit? Prof. Dmitry Streltsov, DSc (Hist.), Head of the Department for Oriental Studies at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO) under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia, and Expert on the Russian International Affairs Council (RIAC), shares his insights on the upcoming visit.
In late May 2015, President Vladimir Putin of Russia was reported to have received an invitation to visit Japan in June 2015 to discuss the ongoing Kuril Islands dispute. The historical dispute over the South Kuril Islands has been simmering for more than 50 years, since the end of WWII. Will 2015 see a breakthrough in the Russia–Japan relationship from the perspective of territorial ownership of the South Kuril Islands? Or will the focus be shifted to other aspects of the bilateral relations during the President’s visit? Prof. Dmitry Streltsov, DSc (Hist.), Head of the Department for Oriental Studies at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO) under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia, and Expert on the Russian International Affairs Council (RIAC), shares his insights on the upcoming visit.
The relationship with Russia is of paramount importance for Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in the context of his endeavor to improve Japan’s contacts with all its neighbors, which he voiced when he assumed office. Japan’s relations with nearly all its neighbouring countries soured when the Democratic Party of Japan was in power. Among them, Russia is an important, if not a priority partner for Japan.
Abe’s recent statement on the South Kuril Islands should not be overrated. There are no indications that Japan is ready to meet Russia halfway and mitigate its harsh and unconstructive (as Russia sees it) position on the Kuril issue. Talks to find a way out of the historic dispute are in deadlock but at least they have been under way. Continuation of the negotiating process is important to Russia, but it is premature to say that the talks will have any tangible results, let alone lead to a peace treaty.
President Putin’s visit is currently on the bilateral agenda and both countries are making serious preparations. Prior to Putin’s visit, Japan’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Fumio Kishida is expected to come to Moscow. Russia and Japan are currently working on the agenda for both visits. Even so, in the context of the upcoming negotiations, economic decision-making should be emphasised, rather than political resolutions. Discussions on border demarcation are an established ritual for Russia and Japan that will give a signal to Japan’s public opinion from Prime Minister Abe. For Japanese voters, relations with Russia have always been closely associated with the territorial dispute, so it is important for Abe to voice his wish to facilitate successful promotion of the talks and emphasise the ultimate cause.
From a realistic point of view, one can hardly hope that the two countries will work out a compromise, because the fundamental positions of both Russia and Japan were identified long ago and changing them would mean a political suicide for either party. In my opinion, Russia and Japan should put the dispute on the back burner. For about a quarter of a century now, whenever contacts between Russia and Japan intensify, the territorial dispute one way or another appears among the issues topping the agenda, but with no breakthroughs. Disillusionment always follows and public expectations remain unsatisfied. Consequently, these statements by the Japanese Premier should be regarded as efforts to improve his political image inside the country as an unconditional champion of national interests, rather than an attempt to offer a constructive solution to the old problem.