1. In the summit talks between Keizo Obuchi, Japan's prime minister, and Boris Yeltsin, Russia's president, on November 12 in Moscow, it was made public that both sides had agreed on a "Moscow declaration" and on problems concerning future Japan-Russia relations.
It is quite natural to develop relations of friendship and exchange between Japan and Russia as part of Japan developing its peaceful foreign relations. But, in the summit talks, there were serious points which from the view of the Japanese people can not be overlooked, such as the substance and process of the negotiations on the territorial problem, which is the biggest question between the two countries.
One concern is that the negotiations are taking place in such secrecy: in last April's Hashimoto-Yeltsin summit talks at Kawana, Shizuoka Prefecture, the Japanese side made a proposal behind closed doors; and this time likewise the Russian side made a counter proposal; both previous and present talks were and are actually being conducted as international "behind closed doors" talks from which the people are excluded. The press reports that the proposal behind the closed doors by Japan, which is the major item on the negotiations agenda, includes serious points indicating a unilateral concession by Japan to Russia concerning the territorial question. That the matter is being processed without any report to the Diet and the people, the possibility is that the territorial negotiations could now result in Japan's interests being seriously undermined.
The JCP demands that the Japanese government make its proposal and Russia's counter proposal public for the people.
2. According to press reports, the secret proposal made by former Prime Minister Hashimoto last April is as follows: (1) the Japanese side confirms that it has finally concluded that only the islands of Habomai, Shikotan, Kunashiri and Etorofu will be the subject of the territorial negotiations, (2) On the problem of return of the four islands, both governments should conclude a peace treaty based only on a demarcation agreement and Russia would retain the administrative right over these islands, which means that any restoration of actual territory to Japan will be postponed.
As we pointed out in relation to the JCP-Hashimoto talks after the Kawana summit talks last April, Japan's proposal contained two serious concessions.
First, the proposal means Japan will once and for all publicly renounce its right to the northern Chishima (Kurile) Islands, the historical territory of Japan.
Second, in relation to the southern Chishima Islands (Etorofu and Kunashiri), and the Habomai and Shikotan Islands, the unilateral proposal made by Japan that it would not claim that the administrative rights over these islands be returned to Japan and that it would remain in a position of only having "residual sovereignty" over these islands.
These are serious problems which conflict with Japan's sovereignty and international reasons. It is difficult to understand, as territorial negotiations, why Japan is making unilateral concessions when Russia is making no positive proposals on the territorial question. Such an approach just pushes a solution of the territorial quetion further away, even on the four islands of Habomai, Shikotan, Etorofu and Kunashiri that the Japanese government claims are Japanese territory.
An important question in the latest summit talks is that Japan's secret proposal is being dealt with as an accomplished fact.
Whilst the Russian side isn't taking a responsible attitude, only Japan's concessions will be regarded as established fact without informing the people. With such a serious matter involved, we must say we can't allow this to continue any longer.
JCP Proposal on Future Japan-Russia Territorial Negotiations
3. To get a positive settlement of the territorial question, the very servile and extraordinary approach adopted since the Hashimoto cabinet of linking the territorial question to "economic aid" and "economic cooperation" must be drastically changed. Japan has tried to ingratiate itself with Russia by making concessions in meetings behind closed doors without informing the Japanese people. Japan must adopt a clear diplomatic policy which makes the grounds for Japan's territorial claims clear to public opinion in Russia and the rest of the world, and undertake the territorial negotiations based on international reason.
Based on this view I now make the folloiwng proposals on how future negotiations should be conducted.
(a) The territorial question with Russia arose from Stalin's claim for the Chishima (Kurile) Islands, Japan's historical territory, to be handed over to the Soviet Union and their subsequent forced annexation, just before the end of the Second World War. This was an absolute violation of the principle of "no territorial expansion" which the allied powers declared as a principle for the postwar disposal.
The basis for the Japanese people's territorial claim to Russia is the necessity for this historical injustice perpetrated by Stalin's great power chauvinism to be corrected. Therefore it is necessary for all future territorial negotiations to be firmly based on this basic character and aim of Japan's territorial claim.
(b) The Japanese government regards the San Francisco Peace Treaty, in which Japan renounced claim to the Chishims Islands, as absolute. With this as a ground for its territorial claim, it argues that "Etorofu and Kunashiri are not part of the Chishima Islands." But this argument is untenable on the basis of history and international law. There is no need to regard the clause in the San Francisco Peace Treaty, in which Japan renounced its right to the Chishima Islands, as immutable. This is clear from the fact that Okinawa, which under the treaty was not possible to be returned to Japan, was actually returned to Japan 20 years after the treaty, as a result of the strong demands and movement of the Okinawa prefectural people.
We think the important thing is for all future territorial negotiations to be conducted based on the fundamental principle of international law that no country is allowed to annex any historical territory of another country.
(c) On this basis, it is unreasonable to limit the territorial negotiations just to deal with the southern Chishimas, Habomai and Shikotan islands. There must be reasonable negotiations on the return of alll historical territory -- Habomai and Shikotan, and the whole of the Chishima Islands -- which Stalin unjustly annexed.
Because territorial negotiations take place between countries, it is unlikely for all territorial claims to be met at a stroke. even in such a case, the government must conduct the negotiations based on claiming a phased return of the territory, and must not speak easily about its intention to renounce its rights to the parts on which it was not possible to get agreement. Also it is absolutely unacceptable in the recent negotiations for the Japanese government to easily propose such unilateral concessions as abandoning the claim to northern Chishima and accepting the shelving of the return of administrative rights, even before substantial negotiations started. (end item)
|
HOME:www.jcp.or.jp/english |
