Jump to content
tanknet.org

Security Of Taiwan And Senkaku Islands


Recommended Posts

 

 

But one thing is that to say that "now" that discussion of the the northern territories is "spilling into Russian domestic discussion" would imply that it hasn't been discussed much before. If to take that as the premise, then it should mean that the Japanese PM saying that the Russian people can continue to live on the islands after the transfer is done and work together with Japanese is something entirely new. To talk more specifically about that is new I think but Japan has had the position of having to return all 4 islands in the past number of years. So I think it would be a natural extension to address what happens to the Russian people in the case that all four islands are returned. But it seems that was not explored at all, either willingly or unwillingly. It certainly could have been something explored by people before just now. But it was also Putin that said that he wanted to get the Peace Treaty signed quickly. So consequently more concrete details are going to rush up front for discussion if running on Putin's suggestion of a quick schedule. Right now Abe wants to find a resolution quickly as well.

 

Actually it got very little to do with what Japanese PM said (or not said) but with affairs inside Russia plus foreign attempts to influence it. As for me, it is result of Western political and special services circles finally came to understanding that their plans to use first so called "liberal opposition" (above mentioned Leonid Gozman is example of) and oligarchs to change political course of Russia failed; so now they are trying to use "patriots" against "Putin" - and since we see hype waves of "Putin failed to respond to US bombing in Syria", "Putin giving out Donbass", "Putin ready to return Kuril islands to Japan" etc. on regular basis. Often they are driven by liberal press suddenly pretending to be "protecting Russian interests".

As for me, all this talks about "autonomy of the Japanese foreign policies" as polite way of our diplomacy to postpone saying firm "No" (as situation in Japan not going to change in any visible future).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

 

 

Japanese foreign diplomacy kabuki is wonderful and entirely for domestic consumption.

Now it is spilling into Russian domestic discussion

 

Well if I may give an opinion but the presentation style of the hosts leave no room for careful consideration. Anyone that would care to take careful consideration gets mobbed. And there were many points of exaggerations or disinformation that I could spend time addressing.

 

Unfortunately very few Russian FTA TV programs (not mentioning non-broadcast TV) are translated to English, so i am limited in scope of what i could bring here. Surely this talk show is way more show than talk (as it is prime-time FTA and have to compete for audience against entertainment programs) - but this topic making the way to it is indicative by itself. And i have to note provide space for prominent anti-Russian opposition figures (like in this case Leonid Gozman who was mentioned in my earlier posts http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=38893&p=1279244- by the way also to some extent linked to China, also speaking here by himself https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4eV9unFJv4 )

Calm discussions are usually not translated - like this one, Kyodo News correspondent Hirohumi Syadzaki (not sure about transcript from Russian, the same remarkably free Russian-speaking Japanese who was asking Putin "How many islands will we get?" , see 1:05:10 here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTAtam1lbuQ ) discussing Kuril islands issue to Igor Strelkov, famous leader of Slavyansk defense in 2014. It really worth listening to as he is representing views of many Russians (and by the way quite skeptical of current political system in Russia). May be this discussion was somehow reflected in Japanese press?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFTYvJJSW7k

 

 

Yeah, the Putin answer to which as you know I replied to before.

 

About the interview with Strelkov, looks interesting, but can't find something immediately to something specific to Strelkov's opinions about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will say that Abe was hopeful of using a person-to-person approach with Putin to derail progress toward policy convergence between Moscow and Beijing, and to essentially use Russia as leverage against China for the benefit of Japan's national interest.

 

The reaching of an understanding between Abe and Putin on Japanese sovereignty over the Northern Territories would have helped this effort considerably.

 

The best time for the achievement of both of these goals was when Russia was at its most isolated after its Crimea operation, and when Abe broke with Washington to hold the door open for Russia in the face of repercussions.

 

Washington's anger at this independent policy decision made by the MFA for the benefit of the Japanese national interest was palpable in various ways.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How about making a new thread for the northern territories Roman?

Up to me it is logical to keep all territorial disputes in one thread, as it is impossible to understand logic of them separately. Unfortunately Strelkov's explanation of his view above was not translated, while he is clearly expressing this link: Any discussions with Japan are useless as long as Japan is close US ally (if not subordinating to US) - and Japan will stay in allied\subordinated relations with US as long as Japan is in bad relations with China (since only US is able and willing to oppose China on Japan side). Equally, in my opinion, any "northern territories" issue solution would potentially harm China, as China need Russia on their side or neutral.

Anyway, hype around Kuril Islands resulted in public outcry inside Russia (with all signs of it being pumped up by usual suspects who sponsor our liberals) and resulted in unusually tough statement by Russian foreign affairs ministry (who clearly indicated this hype was, as they believe, not of Japan origin)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will say that Abe was hopeful of using a person-to-person approach with Putin to derail progress toward policy convergence between Moscow and Beijing, and to essentially use Russia as leverage against China for the benefit of Japan's national interest.

 

The reaching of an understanding between Abe and Putin on Japanese sovereignty over the Northern Territories would have helped this effort considerably.

 

The best time for the achievement of both of these goals was when Russia was at its most isolated after its Crimea operation, and when Abe broke with Washington to hold the door open for Russia in the face of repercussions.

 

Washington's anger at this independent policy decision made by the MFA for the benefit of the Japanese national interest was palpable in various ways.

You're delusional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I will say that Abe was hopeful of using a person-to-person approach with Putin to derail progress toward policy convergence between Moscow and Beijing, and to essentially use Russia as leverage against China for the benefit of Japan's national interest.

 

The reaching of an understanding between Abe and Putin on Japanese sovereignty over the Northern Territories would have helped this effort considerably.

 

The best time for the achievement of both of these goals was when Russia was at its most isolated after its Crimea operation, and when Abe broke with Washington to hold the door open for Russia in the face of repercussions.

 

Washington's anger at this independent policy decision made by the MFA for the benefit of the Japanese national interest was palpable in various ways.

You're delusional.

 

 

He's not alone. The idea has been pushed around here. Well I think it is a general shortcoming of some Japanese to underestimate the security risks of Russia. But I think it goes very much the same way how many in Europe underestimate the security risks with China. So both sides just being more fixated with whats in their own neighborhood.

Edited by JasonJ
Link to post
Share on other sites

Equally, in my opinion, any "northern territories" issue solution would potentially harm China

 

All the more reason for the reaching of one, and the probable cause of Abe's efforts to do so for the past half decade and counting. Such a solution will need to involve the handover of territory from Russia to Japan in some degree, however, for domestic political reasons.

 

The MFA's decision to hold open the door to a negotiated settlement regarding the Crimea for Russia while the rest of the G7 wanted to close it on the Russian fingers grasping it was a nuanced break from the hardline set by Washington. What is interesting is that this break appears to have been too nuanced for Russia and Russians to recognize, along with the associated opportunity.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The MFA's decision to hold open the door to a negotiated settlement regarding the Crimea for Russia while the rest of the G7 wanted to close it on the Russian fingers grasping it was a nuanced break from the hardline set by Washington. What is interesting is that this break appears to have been too nuanced for Russia and Russians to recognize, along with the associated opportunity.

Actually this question was to some degree addressed in Hirohumi-Strelkov discussion above: From Strelkov's point of view (and this type of opinion is quite wide-spread in Russia), Japan got nothing to propose to Russia as nation. According to him, "investments" would only bring extra money to corrupt Russian elite bank accounts in Western banks. In his opinion, current activity in talks with Japan is supported by part of Russian elite interested in finding "window" to channel money they loot in Russia to outside world (and joint economic projects on islands is the way for money laundering) . So when you are talking about " Russian fingers grasping" note that it is not "Russian", but fingers of pro-Western Russian elite totally dependent on West, with assets and families abroad. Cutting this fingers would be applauded by many in Russia.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see zero benefit in handing over territory to Japan who can offer nothing to the Russian Federation since it ultimately depends on the United States for its security. It's like trying to buy a house from the tenant. Japanese insistence on territory being handed over and premature fantasies of Russians having to be PR since they are not ethnic Japanese is just grist for the imperialist fanbois. Putin plays along because it is cheap and there's little downside in doing so. Ultimately this is true for almost all the Japanese claims etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see zero benefit in handing over territory to Japan who can offer nothing to the Russian Federation since it ultimately depends on the United States for its security. It's like trying to buy a house from the tenant. Japanese insistence on territory being handed over and premature fantasies of Russians having to be PR since they are not ethnic Japanese is just grist for the imperialist fanbois. Putin plays along because it is cheap and there's little downside in doing so. Ultimately this is true for almost all the Japanese claims etc.

 

If saying that then surely the same principle about past empire desires by fanbois applies to the taking of Ukraine territory by Russia. At least Japan uses diplomatic and peace approach unlike Russia.

 

Of course your assassment about the basis of each territorial claim is also wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see zero benefit in handing over territory to Japan who can offer nothing to the Russian Federation since it ultimately depends on the United States for its security.

It is almost exactly Strelkov's words: "What use in talking to Japan when we can talk directly to US?"

 

 

Japanese insistence on territory being handed over and premature fantasies of Russians having to be PR since they are not ethnic Japanese is just grist for the imperialist fanbois.

I am asking myself why this was said publically? Without Japanese officials activity, this story of internal Russian hype seems to be so obviously artificial and so playing against any deal between Russia and Japan that China sponsoring it can't be ruled out. But taking into account Japan officials awkward verbal interventions, it seems result of simple incompetence. Generation of politicians and diplomats who matured believing they are winners of Cold War and can behave as such now reached decision-making positions.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Japan could go anti-US if they find the DPRK a role model for a

society.

 

Japan has been an extrordinarily kind country, being slandered by sissy media things like comfort women and such.

 

Imagine if they picked up the same attitude as Russia.. the kind of hell they could come off with. Russia is a loser role model country. If Japan as it is now had the same territory and resources as Russia, GDP would exceed 10 trillion USD. GJ Putin in ruining that country [/sarc]

Link to post
Share on other sites

One has to note the obvious point, that if Crimea is, despite all agreements in the past, a part of Russia, then Russia has, by the same token, to accept the Kurlies are also part of Japan.

 

Russia cant have it both ways here. Its either the demolisher of past agreement's, or it isn't. They aren't the sole participant that can pick and choose here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Japan has been an extrordinarily kind country, being slandered by sissy media things like comfort women and such.

 

Imagine if they picked up the same attitude as Russia.. the kind of hell they could come off with. Russia is a loser role model country. If Japan as it is now had the same territory and resources as Russia, GDP would exceed 10 trillion USD. GJ Putin in ruining that country [/sarc]

With all my respect, let me remind you that "Japan as it is now" is result of Japan Empire starting and loosing war against next to all neighbors, close and distant (like US). It is not in Japan interests to complain about not having "same territory and resources as Russia" as once it had already, and we know how it ended.

cebb2a84fe94b55064ddcccdb72059f7--maps-h

 

And about " extraordinarily kind" - i think one day Chinese and Korean users may find it worth commenting on. Luckily for Japan, Soviet (and now Russian) officials were not promoting information about "extraordinary kindness" of Japanese troops in Sakhalin and other places where Russian population was unlucky to contact them - preferring to focus on cruelty of US bombings of Japan instead.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah the history 80 years ago is the only argument the chicoms can scrape out of the bottom of the barrel too. 80 years ago. Japan has accepted defeat and since then has been an extrordinarily kind country. Undo that and the Russian fleet will sink again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One has to note the obvious point, that if Crimea is, despite all agreements in the past, a part of Russia, then Russia has, by the same token, to accept the Kurlies are also part of Japan.

 

Russia cant have it both ways here. Its either the demolisher of past agreement's, or it isn't. They aren't the sole participant that can pick and choose here.

They think they can choose since they are selective with logic on any given second. Thus illogical. Too much macho-man Putin twisted their rational. Russia Stronk! When China allows it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You're delusional.

 

 

I'd have thought the opposite was true. But you do disapprove.

 

 

By believing in playing Russia against China you're just as delusional as many Western 'experts' who believe the same. Those may be the rogue states, but their leaders aren't dumb. They have no other way than to hang together, or else they will hang separately.

 

 

 

 

I will say that Abe was hopeful of using a person-to-person approach with Putin to derail progress toward policy convergence between Moscow and Beijing, and to essentially use Russia as leverage against China for the benefit of Japan's national interest.

 

The reaching of an understanding between Abe and Putin on Japanese sovereignty over the Northern Territories would have helped this effort considerably.

 

The best time for the achievement of both of these goals was when Russia was at its most isolated after its Crimea operation, and when Abe broke with Washington to hold the door open for Russia in the face of repercussions.

 

Washington's anger at this independent policy decision made by the MFA for the benefit of the Japanese national interest was palpable in various ways.

You're delusional.

 

 

He's not alone. The idea has been pushed around here. Well I think it is a general shortcoming of some Japanese to underestimate the security risks of Russia. But I think it goes very much the same way how many in Europe underestimate the security risks with China. So both sides just being more fixated with whats in their own neighborhood.

 

 

Well, in Europe we have quite a lot of those who underestimate the security risks of Russia, which is at our doorstep, so expecting them to understand the Chinese problem...

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

You're delusional.

I'd have thought the opposite was true. But you do disapprove.

By believing in playing Russia against China you're just as delusional as many Western 'experts' who believe the same. Those may be the rogue states, but their leaders aren't dumb. They have no other way than to hang together, or else they will hang separately.

 

 

 

 

I will say that Abe was hopeful of using a person-to-person approach with Putin to derail progress toward policy convergence between Moscow and Beijing, and to essentially use Russia as leverage against China for the benefit of Japan's national interest.

 

The reaching of an understanding between Abe and Putin on Japanese sovereignty over the Northern Territories would have helped this effort considerably.

 

The best time for the achievement of both of these goals was when Russia was at its most isolated after its Crimea operation, and when Abe broke with Washington to hold the door open for Russia in the face of repercussions.

 

Washington's anger at this independent policy decision made by the MFA for the benefit of the Japanese national interest was palpable in various ways.

 

You're delusional.

He's not alone. The idea has been pushed around here. Well I think it is a general shortcoming of some Japanese to underestimate the security risks of Russia. But I think it goes very much the same way how many in Europe underestimate the security risks with China. So both sides just being more fixated with whats in their own neighborhood.

Well, in Europe we have quite a lot of those who underestimate the security risks of Russia, which is at our doorstep, so expecting them to understand the Chinese problem...

Quite true good point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah the history 80 years ago is the only argument the chicoms can scrape out of the bottom of the barrel too. 80 years ago. Japan has accepted defeat and since then has been an extrordinarily kind country. Undo that and the Russian fleet will sink again.

What about US fleet sink again, UK fleet sink again and recreating other glorious victories that happened in years between Russian fleet sink and nuclear mushrooms over Japan 40 years later? It is hardly reasonable position for Japan to remind others about this part of history (especially when nation most affected by this great victories is now 1.3 bln country with world's second, if not first, economy )

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yeah the history 80 years ago is the only argument the chicoms can scrape out of the bottom of the barrel too. 80 years ago. Japan has accepted defeat and since then has been an extrordinarily kind country. Undo that and the Russian fleet will sink again.

What about US fleet sink again, UK fleet sink again and recreating other glorious victories that happened in years between Russian fleet sink and nuclear mushrooms over Japan 40 years later? It is hardly reasonable position for Japan to remind others about this part of history (especially when nation most affected by this great victories is now 1.3 bln country with world's second, if not first, economy )

 

 

How about... what about not goal post shifting? Are you already that desparate to find an escape and come out ahead by coming out in impression points?

 

The post you made here in order to prop up another post made an argument that is for the most part already debunked by an earlier post that I made here. Additionally, that post you made is also by questioning why it was said in public as if it was some huge big ordeal. How about sending poison to someone in a perfume bottle in a different country as opposed to typical Kabuki? So much for Russia Stronk! if to be so vulnerable to the Japanese PM suggesting that the Russian people can continue to live on the islands and work side by side with Japanese people. As part of resolving the territorial issue, I find that proposition rather positive. It doesn't mean it has to be liked, Russia can of course decline and remain firm on giving back only the two smaller islands. It is so obviously Russia turning this into a big deal in Russia, if it is indeed the big deal that you claim it to be.

Edited by JasonJ
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

How about... what about not goal post shifting? Are you already that desparate to find an escape and come out ahead by coming out in impression points?

 

I'm just reminding you about consequences of playing this games in past. I do not think it is any need to replay history.

I'm afraid you are overestimating the importance of our chats here :)

 

 

 

if to be so vulnerable to the Japanese PM suggesting that the Russian people can continue to live on the islands and work side by side with Japanese people. As part of resolving the territorial issue, I find that proposition rather positive. It doesn't mean it has to be liked, Russia can of course decline and remain firm on giving back only the two smaller islands. It is so obviously Russia turning this into a big deal in Russia, if it is indeed the big deal that you claim it to be.

 

If your political decision makers are thinking this way -it is indication of their experts on Russian affairs incompetent (or political leaders not consulting with experts). Of course, we can't rule out their aim was not agreement but derailing talks....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...