MOSCOW. (Anatoly Koshkin for RIA Novosti) - The Japanese Yomiuri Shimbun carried an article entitled "Counterproductive Proposals on Concessions to Russia" by Prof. Shigeki Hakamada from the Aoyama Gakuin University.
This influential expert on Russian-Japanese relations writes, among other things, that in defiance of the 1993 Tokyo declaration, Russia does not want to discuss the status of the South Kurile Islands.
Hakamada believes that Japan's new proposals, like Foreign Minister Taro Aso's recent idea to divide the islands in two, return three islands to Japan or develop them together are only toughening Russia's position because Moscow is simply waiting for more concessions to come. He thinks it is pointless to make public any ideas before they become a subject of talks and suggests that Japan should abstain from making new initiatives. He believes that the negotiations should be conducted without much publicity and should primarily be aimed at building up trust between the two parties. Prof. Hakamada suggests delaying talks on this issue of national importance for a hundred years if such talks are too difficult today.
I read his article with interest and would like to express my opinion on some points. Quoting public opinion polls, Prof. Hakamada writes that about 85% of the Japanese consider the problem of northern territories to be an obstacle to the development of bilateral relations. I think that the majority of my compatriots share this opinion. We do not see what else can obstruct our good neighborly relations except for the border issue. However, it will be difficult to resolve this issue in the near future even if there is mutual will to do so. Prof. Hakamada explains this by Russia's mounting nationalist and great power ambitions; I believe the reason lies in the absence of political, and especially psychological, conditions for compromise.
Today, 73% of Russians are against territorial concessions to Japan and only 2% find them possible. About 75% of those polled in Siberia and Russia's Far East will change their attitude to President Vladimir Putin for the worse if he lets the Kuril Islands go. Russia had to toughen its position on Japan's territorial claims with due account of these polls. Also, this territorial dispute has gone far beyond the diplomatic framework a long time ago and has become a subject of heated domestic political debates in Russia. It features prominently in the elections to both local and central bodies of government.
Prof. Hakamada complains about Russia's disregard for the 1993 Tokyo declaration. Indeed, Russian experts are not unanimous on its interpretation. The declaration-sealed consent of former President Boris Yeltsin to negotiate the status of Russian territories runs counter to the Russian Constitution. Moreover, Yeltsin's visit and the signing of this document took place at a time when Russia did not have representative authorities as a result of the Supreme Council's dissolution. The State Duma, established in December 1993, did not even discuss this declaration, let alone approve it. I think that for this reason we do not have enough grounds to view it as a binding and valid international agreement.
It is the joint 1956 Soviet-Japanese declaration, ratified by both the Duma and the Diet, that is a fundamental bilateral document, as Tokyo has been reminded more than once.
During the past few years I have repeatedly emphasized that it is inadmissible to use the obsolete methods of secret diplomacy at the Russian-Japanese negotiating table. I am against decision-making in the hush of foreign ministry offices or, as was recently the case, in high-class restaurants with geishas from Tokyo's district of Akasaka, when the public was kept in ignorance of what was going on. A scandal with Japanese MP Muneo Suzuki shows what deplorable consequences such diplomacy may have. Muneo was involved in behind-the-scenes activities in bilateral relations and accused of corruption later on. This scandal has illustrated the axiom that in the age of the information revolution it is increasingly difficult, if at all possible, to conceal anything from the public.
I cannot accept the ideas of Foreign Minister Taro Aso and Democratic Party leader Ichiro Hatoyama. Expressed as personal views, their proposals are likely to invite criticism both in Japan and Russia. What really matters is an attempt to lead the talks out of deadlock, to seek compromise. Undoing intricate knots of contradictions is a mission of real politicians.
As the art of the possible, diplomacy rejects the all-or-nothing approach. Prof. Hakamada's appeal to his compatriots to stand ground for another hundred years sounds depressing. Our nations are not likely to benefit from another century of confrontation. Russia is not dodging the discussion of a peace treaty.
On January 23-23, Russia and Japan are going to hold bilateral talks in Moscow in the new format of strategic dialogue, although the territorial issue is not on the agenda. I'd like to hope that these negotiations will not sound like a broken record and will let the two countries start, at long last, moving their positions closer together.
Anatoly Koshkin is professor at the Oriental University.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and may not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
