Maritime Russian-Japanese border Sakhalin. What countries borders Japan? Who needs negotiations on a peace treaty between Russia and Japan

The current political and legal problem of territorial demarcation between Russia and Japan. In the Joint Collection of Documents on the History of the Territorial Delimitation between Russia and Japan, prepared in 1992 ... ... All Japan

To the Far East. economy district, pl. 87.1 thousand km²; adm. center - Yuzhno Sakhalinsk. Covers about. Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands, which are located in a tectonically active zone on the border of Eurasia and the Pacific Ocean. High seismicity is noted everywhere; … Geographic Encyclopedia

In Russian federation. 87.1 thousand km2. Population 647.8 thousand people (1998), urban 82%. 18 cities, 31 urban-type settlements. Center Yuzhno Sakhalinsk. It is washed by the waters of the Okhotsk and Seas of Japan and the Pacific Ocean. Includes Sakhalin Island and ... ... encyclopedic Dictionary

Coordinates: 50°51′06″ s. sh. 156°34′08″ E  / 50.851667° N sh. 156.568889° E etc. ... Wikipedia

Asia- (Asia) Description of Asia, countries, states of Asia, history and peoples of Asia Information about Asian states, history and peoples of Asia, cities and geography of Asia Contents Asia is the largest part of the world, forms Eurasia together with the mainland ... Encyclopedia of the investor

Disputed islands with Russian and Japanese names The problem of ownership of the southern Kuril Islands (Jap. 北方領土問題 Hoppo: ryo:do ... Wikipedia

Eurasia- (Eurasia) Contents Contents Name origin Geographic characteristics extreme points Eurasia The largest peninsulas of Eurasia General overview of nature Borders Geography History Countries of Europe Western Europe Eastern Europe Northern Europe … Encyclopedia of the investor

Chinese civilization is one of the oldest in the world. According to Chinese scientists, its age may be five thousand years, while the available written sources cover a period of at least 3500 years. The presence of administrative systems ... ... Wikipedia

I will not be mistaken if I state with confidence that, probably, everyone, at least out of the corner of their ear, has heard about this problem. "Northern territories" (for Russia - southern) have long been a stumbling block in relations between the two neighboring countries Russia and Japan. Much is mixed in this long-standing dispute: history, international law, foreign and domestic policy, military strategy, national feelings, etc. Basically, it is considered from two sides: from the point of view of international law and from the point of view of history, that is, priority in discovery and research.

In this article, I would like to highlight the relationship between the two countries regarding territorial affiliation South Kuril Islands and Sakhalin and to interest the reader in this problem, in the formation of his own view.

So, the problem of the "northern territories". These territories include three relatively large ones (Shikotan, Iturup, Kunashir) and a number of small islands Kuril ridge, the so-called Habomai ridge (Polonsky, Zeleny, Tanfilyev, Yuri, Anuchin, Demin, Signalny, Fox, Cones). The dispute about who still owns this territory permeates the entire history of relations between the two neighboring states, then fading, then escalating again. For example, in Soviet times, this problem simply "did not exist." The Soviet government did not recognize its existence. However, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia became its successor. Russia, which calls itself a democratic state. Russia, which strives to transfer its economy with the least losses to the "market rails". Russia, which wants to work closely with other states and intends to become a full-fledged and full-fledged member of the modern international community, new to us both in economic and in many other aspects. At such a moment, it is natural to recall the existence of this problem, since Japan is one of the attractive economic partners in the rather promising Asia-Pacific region. The situation is complicated by the fact that for many years of the Cold War, Japan was, figuratively speaking, “on the other side of the barricades” and at a time when many of us did not even suspect the existence of a problem, active anti-Soviet propaganda was carried out there. As a result, today we have a rather reactionary Japanese public opinion.

The development of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands and the formation of the Russian - Japanese border

The beginning of the formation of the Russian-Japanese maritime border in the region of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands, as well as in general, the beginning of the study of these territories dates back to the 17th century. It is assumed that the Nivkhs, who visited the island in winter, when the narrow part of the strait froze, were the first to know about Sakhalin. Sometimes in the summer they crossed the Tatar Strait in their boats. The first relatively accurate information about Sakhalin in Russia came from the members of the expedition led by the written head V.D. Poyarkov in 1643 - 1646 However, the existence of islands in the Sea of ​​Okhotsk could be suspected even before that. In the description of the expedition of Maxim Perfiliev in 1693 - 1641. along the Vitim and Amur rivers it is said that the mouth of the Amur is free, there is no peninsula here, and that Chinese merchant ships sail along the Tatar Strait (in order to pass from the coast of China, that is, from the south, to the mouth of the Amur, you need to go through most of the Tatar Strait , including its narrowest section - the Nevelskoy Strait). It is quite probable that Perfiliev could have known from the local peoples about the island lying opposite the mouth of the Amur.

Around the same period, the Russians also learned about the Kuriles. According to some Russian sources, Fedot Alekseevich Popov, a member of the Dezhnev expedition in 1648-1649, was the first to visit them. The Japanese historian T. Matsunaga wrote: “In 1643 (the 20th year of Kei-an), the Russians came to Kamchatka and discovered the Tisimsky Islands, the name of which they changed to the Kuril Islands,” and after Bering’s voyage, “the Russians occupied the nearest 21 islands,” i.e. all the Kuriles, for the 22nd island was called Hokkaido. He also writes about Sakhalin: “They say that the Russians arrived on the island of Karafuto for the first time in 1650 (the 3rd year of the reign of Kei-an), and from that time the northern part of the island became the possession of Russia. Our country, although it claims that Karafuto has long been our possession, but there is no real occupation of its territories by us. There are also sources that speak in favor of the discovery of the Kuriles and Sakhalin by the Japanese. For example, the German japanologist F. Siebold reported in the middle of the 19th century that in 1613 the Japanese traveled to Sakhalin to describe and map it.

D. Garrison wrote that back in 1604, the military ruler of Japan, the shogun, granted Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands to Prince Matsumae, and Ray Shiratori argued that the indigenous population of the Kuril Islands had been in vassal relations with the central authorities of Japan since 1615. About who is still the first to know about the existence of the islands can be argued for a long time, but probably it is worth paying great attention not only to the dates, but also to the very methods of penetrating the islands and the goals they pursued. The Japanese mainly established trade contacts, and the trade was quite active and had an equal character. Some Ainu left with the Japanese for Hokkaido, having been hired by the latter. For the Russian pioneers, the main task was not so much trade as the annexation of these lands to the Russian state and, in accordance with this, taxing the local population with yasak, that is, collecting in favor of the treasury. Moreover, the Russians often met resistance from the local population and used force. An important role was played by the fact that in 1638 - 1639. Shogun Iemitsu Tokugawa, outraged by the activities of the Jesuits in Japan, prohibits Christianity and "closes" the country from the outside world. From now on, for many years, any trip abroad is punishable by death. And although northern borders were not clearly defined, research even on the island of Hokkaido at that time was carried out secretly, haphazardly, and almost no official data about them was preserved. One way or another, we can talk about the discovery and exploration of the islands at about the same time by the Russians from the north, and the Japanese from the south. And despite the fact that Russian researchers had official support from the state in their research, one cannot still talk about the peremptory right to own all the islands of Russia, considering this issue from the point of view of priority in the discovery and development. Nevertheless, until the 19th century, that is, until the first treaty between Russia and Japan, Sakhalin and the Kuril ridge were considered the territory of the Russian Empire.

Russo-Japanese negotiations in the 19th and early 20th centuries

The beginning of Russian-Japanese diplomatic and trade relations was laid by the Shimoda Treaty on Trade and Borders, concluded on February 7, 1855. It was signed as a result of negotiations led by E. Putyatin. According to this treatise, diplomatic relations were established between Russia and Japan; the subjects of the two countries were to enjoy mutual patronage and protection; the ports of Nagasaki, Shimoda, Hakodate were opened for Russian ships; the Russian consul was allowed to stay in one of the Japanese cities from 1856, etc.

The border was established between the islands of Urup and Iturup - i.e. the islands of Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and Habomai retreated to Japan. Sakhalin remained undivided. In the instructions for the negotiations, Nicholas I wrote that it should be done so that "from our side, the southern tip of this island [Urup] was (as it actually is now) the border with Japan."

The next milestone in Russian-Japanese relations was the signing of the Petersburg Treaty in 1875, according to which, in exchange for renouncing its claims to the southern part of Sakhalin Island, Japan received the entire Kuril ridge. This was explained in Russian history again as forced actions, a consequence of the difficult situation of Russia in that period, which was caused by the following factors:

• The focus of Russian diplomacy in the Middle East, where a crisis and war with Turkey were brewing at that time;
• Insufficiently strong positions of Russia of that time in the Pacific region;

In refutation of the thesis that Russia was forced to sign the 1875 treaty, one can cite the idea, carried out in a number of studies, that the Russian authorities themselves intended to exchange the Kuril Islands that they had left after 1855 for more valuable Sakhalin, as well as evidence of dissatisfaction with the 1875 treaty that broke out in Japan as infringing on the interests of the Japanese state.

USSR - Japan

Young Soviet Russia recognized the Portsmouth Treaty of 1905 as valid. It was concluded after the Russo-Japanese War. Under this treaty, Japan not only retained all Kurile Islands, but also received South Sakhalin.

This was the case with the disputed islands before the Second World War - even before 1945. I want to once again draw general attention to the fact that until the 45th year, Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and Khabomai never belonged to Russia, and to assert the opposite is to go against facts. Everything that happened after 1945 is no longer so clear cut.

During almost the entire period of World War II (September 1939 - August 1945) Japan and the Soviet Union were not at war. For in April 1941, a Neutrality Pact was concluded between both countries with a validity period of 5 years. However, on August 9, 1945, three days after the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and on the same day of the atomic bombing of Nagasaki, the Soviet Union, in violation of the Neutrality Pact, entered the war against Japan, whose defeat was no longer in doubt. A week later, on August 14, Japan accepted the terms of the Potsdam Declaration and capitulated to the Allied Powers.

After the end of the war, the entire territory of Japan was occupied by the allied forces. As a result of negotiations between the allies, the territory of Japan proper was subject to occupation by US troops, Taiwan by Chinese troops, and Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands by Soviet troops. The occupation of the Northern Territories was a military occupation, completely bloodless after the hostilities, and therefore subject to termination as a result of the territorial settlement of the peace treaty.

In times of war, the territory of another country may be occupied, and the occupying country, under international law, has the right to exercise its administration on the basis of military necessity. However, on the other hand, the 1907 Hague Convention on the Laws and Customs of War on Land and other international legal acts impose certain obligations on this country, in particular, respect for the private rights of the population. Stalin ignored these international norms and by the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR of February 2, 1946, he included the areas under occupation into the territory of his country.

And here is the opinion of the Japanese side: “We welcome that in Lately The Russian government claims that it views the territorial issue between Japan and Russia on the basis of legality and justice. Precisely from the point of view of legality and fairness, we believe that the said Decree of the Presidium is illegal and clarifying this is of paramount importance and the appropriation of the territory of another state through such a unilateral act is legally not allowed.”

The peace treaty between Japan and the USA, England and other allied countries was concluded in 1951 in San Francisco. The Soviet Union also took part in the peace conference, but did not sign the San Francisco Treaty. The following two points are significant in the San Francisco Conference and the San Francisco Peace Treaty regarding the issue of the Northern Territories.

The first is Japan's renunciation of all rights to South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands under the treaty. However, Iturup, Shikotan, Kunashir and the Habomai ridge, which have always been Japanese territory, are not included in the Kuril Islands, which Japan abandoned. The US government, regarding the scope of the “Kuril Islands” concept in the San Francisco Peace Treaty, stated in an official document: “[They] are not included and there was no intention to include [in the Kuriles] the Khabomai and Shikotan ridges, as well as Kunashir and Iturup, which formerly have always been part of Japan proper and, therefore, must rightly be recognized as being under Japanese sovereignty." The second point is related to the fact that the act of annexation by the Soviet Union of South Sakhalin, the Kuriles and the Northern Territories did not receive international recognition. First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the USSR A. Gromyko tried to achieve recognition of Soviet sovereignty over these areas, in particular, by proposing amendments to the treaty, but they were rejected by the conference and not accepted into the content of the treaty. For this and a number of other reasons, the USSR did not sign the treaty. The San Francisco Treaty makes it clear that it does not grant any rights arising from the treaty to countries that have not signed it.

Due to the fact that the USSR did not sign the San Francisco Treaty, negotiations were held between June 1955 and October 1956 between Japan and the Soviet Union with the aim of concluding a separate peace treaty between both countries. These negotiations did not lead to an agreement: the Japanese side declared that Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and the Habomai ridge were the territory of Japan and demanded their return, while the Soviet side took such a position that, having agreed to return only Shikotan and Habomai, it could not return Iturup and Kunashir.

As a result, instead of a peace treaty, Japan and the USSR signed a Joint Declaration, that is, an agreement that provided for the termination of the state of war and the restoration of diplomatic relations. Article 9 of this treaty states that after the establishment of diplomatic relations, the parties will continue negotiations on the conclusion of a peace treaty; and also the USSR returns after the conclusion of the peace treaty the Habomai ridge and the island of Shikotan.

The Japanese-Soviet Joint Declaration has been ratified by the parliaments of both countries and is a treaty deposited with the UN.

In April 1991, the then President of the USSR M. Gorbachev visited Japan. The Japanese-Soviet Statement published at that time explicitly mentioned the Habomai ridge, the islands of Shikotan, Kunashir and Iturup. The parties agreed that "the peace treaty should become a document of the final post-war settlement, including the solution of the territorial issue", and an agreement was reached to speed up the preparation of the peace treaty.

After the August Democratic Revolution, President of Russia B. Yeltsin proposed a new approach to the territorial issue inherited by Russia from the USSR, which is naturally and positively assessed since the government of the Russian Federation, inheriting the international legal obligations of the USSR, declares compliance with the UN Declaration. This new approach, firstly, emphasizes the understanding of the fact that as a result of positive changes in the world today, a new international order is emerging, in which there is no longer a division into winners and losers in the Second World War. Secondly, it is emphasized that when resolving the territorial issue, legality and justice, including respect for international agreements concluded in the past, become important principles. And that's all. There was no further movement.

As for the policy of the current President Putin, Japanese politicians, led by former Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori, proposed to adhere to the updated Kavan plan for solving the problem, announced in April 1998 by Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto. Kavan's plan is to ensure that after the border is demarcated and the islands are legally assigned to Japan, the disputed territories will remain de facto Russian for some time. The Russian delegation, on the other hand, rejected this proposal, stating that it could not be regarded as a mutually acceptable compromise. Putin, in turn, proposed moving towards a peace treaty gradually, while building up the entire range of relations. To do this, Vladimir Putin invited the Prime Minister to pay an official visit to Russia, and the two leaders agreed to hold official meetings at least once a year - similar to what exists between Moscow and Beijing, our "strategic partner".

Now about the population of the ill-fated islands. According to Rudakova, head of the social department of the Kurilsk administration, the Japanese ask Kuril residents every year if they want the islands to go to Japan. On Shikotan, as a rule, 60 percent do not want this, and 40 percent do not mind. On the other islands, 70 percent are strongly opposed. “On Shikotan, after the 1994 earthquake, everything is Japanese, even fruit. The people are very accustomed to freebies, they do not want to work. They think that the Japanese will always feed them like this,” says Rudakova. Indeed, this option is not included in the plans of the Japanese. Back in March 1999, the Society for the Study of the Problem of Restoring Japan's Sovereignty over the Northern Territories developed rules according to which Russians would live on the islands after they were handed over to the Japanese. “Residents of Russian origin who have lived more than 5 years after being reinstated in Japan, if they wish, have the opportunity to obtain Japanese citizenship after conducting an appropriate individual verification,” the document says.

Nevertheless, Japan, a mono-ethnic country in which even the descendants of foreigners who settled several generations ago cannot obtain citizenship, pretends that all the rights of Russians remaining on the islands will be preserved. In order for the people of Kuril to see for themselves how wonderful their life will be under the new owners, the Japanese do not spare money for receptions. Yochi Nakano, head of the secretariat of the Hokkaido Commission for the Development of Relations with the Northern Islands, said that the island government spends $1,680 for just one Russian who came to Hokkaido, not counting contributions from various public organizations. The Japanese authorities seem to take things differently. They are confident that their tactics bring positive results. Yochi Nakano says: “Personally, I think that there are few Russians in the northern islands who would like to remain Russians. If there are any, it is all the more important to teach them that the northern territories belong to Japan. Kuril residents are very surprised by the ability of the Japanese to quickly believe in what they want and pass it off as real. Rimma Rudakova recalls how in September 2000, when Putin was in Okinawa, the Japanese hosting the group began to furiously argue that a decision had already been made to transfer Shikotan and Habomai, and even started talking about starting negotiations on the transfer of southern Sakhalin. “When we left ten days later, they expressed their regret that this did not happen,” she said.

Conclusion

So, what did the Russo-Japanese territorial dispute come to? Statements about belonging of the Kuriles to one of the disputing parties on the basis of priorities in the first discovery, first description, first settlement, first development and first accession in the legal sense do not outweigh each other. In international legal terms, the Kuriles were partially assigned to Japan under the Shimoda Treaty of 1855 and completely - under the St. Petersburg Treaty of 1875. As for the Shimoda, St. Petersburg and Portsmouth Treaties, it requires consideration of their status as international legal acts, signed by representatives of both states and subject to strict observance. References to the fact that Russia was forced to sign these treaties are untenable. An important point is the agreement of the USSR recorded in the Beijing Treaty of 1925 that the Portsmouth Treaty remains in force. It is difficult to agree with the interpretation of the Peking Treaty as temporary for the USSR. Did Japan give up the "Northern Territories" at the end of World War II? To answer this question, it is important to decide whether or not the "disputed islands" belong to the concept of the "Kuril Islands". An analysis of the Shimoda and St. Petersburg treaties does not confirm the correctness of either the Japanese side, which excludes the "northern territories" from the Kuriles, or the Soviet side, which takes the opposite position. As for the San Francisco Treaty, having secured Japan's renunciation of the Kuril Islands, it did not clarify the geographical limits of this concept. Under this treaty, Japan renounced the Kuriles, but neither the addressee of this refusal, nor the concept of the Kurils itself is defined in any international legal document (that is, it remains possible to assert that the "northern territories" do not belong to the Kuriles).

Below are two views of the problem.

Why are the islands ours? Russian point of view

Complete and unconditional surrender (announced by Japan after the defeat in the war) means not only the recognition of defeat in hostilities, but also the cessation of the existence of the state as a subject of international relations, the loss of its sovereignty and power, which pass to the winners. Thus, post-war Japan (as well as the post-war FRG and the GDR, and even the current united Germany) are not successors of the subjectivity of the pre-war states; these are new states created on the terms of allies within new borders, with new constitutions and authorities. Thus, as a new state, Japan cannot demand the "return" of the islands, which, moreover, were abandoned by the San Francisco Peace Treaty.

"Why are the islands ours?" Japanese point of view

Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and Habomai have always been Japanese territory and are not among the "areas captured by Japan on the basis of violence and greed" mentioned in the Cairo Declaration. The act of annexation of the Northern Territories contradicted the principle of non-expansion of territories, which was proclaimed by the same declaration.

With regard to the Yalta Agreement, Japan, which did not sign it and was not even aware of it at the time of signing, does not consider itself bound by it. In addition, the Yalta Agreement is only a document setting out general goals and does not constitute a legal basis for the transfer of territory.

Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and Habomai are not part of the Kuril Islands, which Japan abandoned under the San Francisco Peace Treaty, as they are native Japanese territory. Moreover, the treaty nowhere stipulates their transfer to the USSR.

Additional argument: the islands of Shikotan and Habomai do not belong to the Kuril Islands, but are part of the island system of the island of Hokkaido. In turn, the concept of "Kuril Islands" does not cover the "special geographical unit" - the "Southern Kuriles", i.e. Kunashir and Iturup.

NB: the last argument is highly controversial in that part of it, which refers to the islands of Kunashir and Iturup - the "Southern Kuriles" have never been singled out as an independent group on geographical maps. The assignment of Shikotan to the island system of Hokkaido is also controversial. On the other hand, Habomai most likely really relate to her. But this question must be left to the consideration of geologists.

And in conclusion of all this, let's remember what N. Lomanovich wrote before the visit of M.S. Gorbachev to Japan (1991): “...both sides bring numerous historical references, from which it is quite clear: the disputed islands have always been primordially Japanese (Russian) lands. These statements are perhaps both immoral. Let's remember that the Kuriles are, first of all, the original land of the Ainu.

Literature

1. Bondarenko O."Unknown Kuriles" M. 1992.
2. Eremin V.“Russia - Japan. Territorial problem: search for a solution. M. 1992.
3. Markov A.P.“Russia - Japan. Seeking consent." M. 1996.
4. Rep. ed. Krushanov A.I. "History of the Far East of the USSR from ancient times to the 17th century." M. 1989.
5. Rep. ed. Khazanov A.M. “Russia - CIS - Asia. Problems and prospects of cooperation.» M. 1993.
6. "Nezavisimaya Gazeta" from 1991
7. “Japan times” No. 2230
8. "Soviet Sakhalin" ¹ 142 dated 04.08.01
9. sites on the internet: http://www.lenta.ru; http://www.vld.ru/ppx/kurily; http://www.strana.ru; http://subscribe.ru/archive

Extensive cartographic material gives clear answers to the questions of who actually owned the Kuril Islands in the past and why Japan has no reason to lay claim to them in the present and future.

As a result of World War II, Japan, as an aggressor state, as well as fascist Germany and some of its satellites, was deprived of part of the territories that belonged to it. Its largest losses are the island of Formosa (Taiwan), Korea, the Caroline, Mariana and Marshall Islands. In addition, the Kuril Islands and southern Sakhalin were seized from her.

Tokyo claims

Japan, as you know, still refuses to recognize the legitimacy of the transfer of the USSR - and therefore modern Russia as its successor - the southern Kuriles (Iturup, Kunashir islands and the group of islands of the Lesser Kuril ridge, the largest of which is Shikotan), calling them their own " northern territories occupied by the Russian Federation” and putting forward claims to this part of the Kuril archipelago.

No. 1. Map of the Japanese archipelago, compiled in 1775-1780 according to Dutch sources (map by Savva Zubov). At that time, Japan did not even own most of Hokkaido (the narrow strip of land in the upper right corner of the map), not to mention the Kuril Islands - photo provided by the author

Tokyo cites two main "arguments" in support of its territorial claims.

The first is that the southern Kuriles never belonged to Russia and are "original Japanese territories" illegally occupied by the Soviet Union in 1945.

The second is that the post-war Soviet-Japanese, and now the Russian-Japanese border in the Kuril region has not received official international recognition.
Leaving aside all the artificiality, far-fetchedness and unfoundedness of such statements, as well as numerous legal and historical facts and documents confirming the legality of the ownership of the Russian Federation of the entire Kuril Archipelago, we will consider this issue from the point of view of cartography, which allows us to obtain the most impartial and objective picture.

No. 2. Map of the Irkutsk governorship from the Atlas of the Russian Empire, 1796. The Kuriles are shown as a Russian territory, administratively part of the Nizhnekamchatka district of the Okhotsk region of the Irkutsk governorship - photo provided by the author

The extensive cartographic material currently available debunks many historical myths and puts an end to the dispute about who actually owned the Kuril Islands in the past and what their current international legal status is (if, of course, we exclude the subjective approach characteristic of Japanese diplomacy of the post-war period , in which all "inconvenient" facts and documents are discarded or ignored).

Consequences of isolation

First of all, the cartographic material dispels the myth about Japan's "original affiliation" of the southern Kuriles.

This, in particular, is clearly demonstrated by the map (No. 1), the creation of which the researchers determine the years 1775-1780. It is easily dated, since it was signed by Savva Zubov, who at that time was the commandant of Okhotsk.

The importance of the map lies in the fact that it was compiled according to Dutch sources, as stated in the explanatory note under its title, and this testifies to its objectivity, since the Dutch are the only Europeans admitted to Japan during its isolation from the outside world (from 1639 until the middle of the 19th century), there was no point for political reasons either to underestimate or exaggerate the territory of the Land of the Rising Sun.

The territory of Japan on this map is limited by the island of Honshu (the main Japanese island) and a narrow strip of land in the extreme south of the island of Hokkaido (in the upper right corner of the map), which at that time was called Ezo (translated - "northern, unknown, foreign land", " the land of the barbarians).

No. 2a. A fragment of the map of the Irkutsk governorate from the Atlas of the Russian Empire in 1796 - photo provided by the author

This narrow strip is the entire territory of "Japanese Hokkaido" at that time, and it was there - along the southern tip of the island (Oshima Peninsula), adjacent to the Sangara Strait - that the northern Japanese border passed then.

In other words, this is all that belonged to Japan in Hokkaido at the end of the 18th century.

This state of affairs is also confirmed “documented”: not a single official Japanese act of that time is known that would indicate that Ezo is a Japanese possession.

At the same time, individual contacts of the inhabitants of the northernmost Japanese principality of Matsumae with the Ainu (the native inhabitants of Ezo) of both Hokkaido and the southern Kuriles were noted in the 18th century, but these were episodic trade contacts with the “Ezos” independent of Japan, which were not encouraged by the central Japanese government.

Japanese researchers themselves recognize the fact that even in the first half of the 19th century, the territory of Japan was not the large northern part of Ezo-Hokkaido.
Therefore, to argue that the southern Kuriles, or the so-called "northern territories", were the original Japanese lands, is simply meaningless. If at the end of the 18th century almost all of Hokkaido did not belong to Japan, how could the southern Kuriles, which lie to the north of this island, belong to it? The answer, I think, is obvious.

No. 3. Map from the Japanese "Latest Atlas administrative division Japan by Prefectures, 1954. The thin red dotted line covering only four islands represents the territory of Japan after the signing of the San Francisco Peace Treaty (1951). Bold red dotted line - the border of the country, established following the results of the First World War (1919) - photo provided by the author

The second fundamentally important card(also XVIII century) - from the official Russian atlas, the full name of which is "Atlas of the Russian Empire, consisting of 52 maps, published in the city of St. Peter in the summer of 1796, and the reign of Catherine II XXXV. This is the main Russian cartographic publication of that time.

In this case, we are talking about a color map (No. 2) of the Irkutsk governorship (we see its fragment in illustration No. 2a), on which the Kuril Islands are very clearly marked. All of them, including the islands of Chikota (Shikotan), Kunashir and Etorpa (Iturup), are painted in the same color as Kamchatka, that is, they are shown as a territory of the Russian Empire, administratively part of the Nizhnekamchatsky district of the Okhotsk region of the Irkutsk viceroy. Japan (Matmai Island) lies far to the south, and Ezzo Island (Ezo, remember, modern Hokkaido) is shown separately from Japan.

And this is as of 1796!

Thus, both considered maps - both "Dutch" and Russian - quite definitely testify to the historical priority in the development and possession of all the Kuril Islands (including the southern ones, now disputed by Tokyo) of Russia, and not Japan.

The reason for such an unpleasant fact for official Tokyo should be sought in the already mentioned policy of isolating the country from the outside world, which artificially “conserved” it within the framework of historical medieval borders and not only did not encourage, but directly prohibited the expansion of the state’s territory.

Following the results of Yalta

Let us now turn to the history of the twentieth century.

In Japan - contrary to facts, logic and just common sense - they claim that the southern Kuriles do not belong to the territories that were seized from it as a result of the Second World War.

They claim despite the fact that under the San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1951, Japan officially renounced "all rights, titles and claims" to southern Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands. Moreover, to all the Kuril Islands, without any artificial division into southern, middle or northern ones.

In this regard, of great interest is the map (No. 3) from the “Latest Atlas of the Administrative Division of Japan by Prefectures” published in Japan itself in 1954 in Japanese, where, in particular, a thin red dotted line covering only four main Japanese islands(Kyushu, Shikoku, Honshu and Hokkaido), the territory of Japan is designated after the signing of the San Francisco Peace Treaty.

At the same time, all the Kuril Islands, including the southern group, along with southern Sakhalin, are shown outside the post-war Japanese borders.

It is interesting that the inscription in hieroglyphs on both sides of this dotted line indicates the years 1854 and 1953: this confirms that the territory of Japan after the Second World War returned to the borders of the middle of the 19th century - until the conclusion of the first Russian-Japanese treaty (Shimodsky treaty) in 1855 .

I would like to emphasize that this territory of Japan, limited in the north by the island of Hokkaido, exactly corresponds to the agreements reached at the Yalta (Crimean) Conference of the Allied Powers, which was held in February 1945. This was the Japanese border in 1946. It exists even now: the border, we repeat, does not include the Kuriles and southern Sakhalin in Japan.

South Korean recognition

The last cartographic material presented here (No. 4) is important for getting an answer to the question about the status of the modern Russian-Japanese border. The map is very indicative because it was published not in Russia, but in South Korea.

Recall that the second "argument" of the Japanese side is the alleged lack of international legal recognition of the post-war Soviet-Japanese border.

Let's see how the border between Japan and Russian Federation on a map titled "Korea and adjacent territories" (published in 1998 by the Ministry of Transport of the Republic of Korea). In the Kuril region, the red dotted border line, passing through the Kunashir Strait, separates the island of Hokkaido from Kunashir and the islands of the Lesser Kuril Range, clearly marking the southern Kuriles as the territory of Russia. This is to the assertion that no one in the world recognized the post-war Soviet-Japanese border.

No. 4. Map "Korea and adjacent territories" in 1998, published by the Ministry of Transport of the Republic of Korea. Its compilers have no doubts about where modern border between Russia and Japan (in the Kuriles region it is indicated by a red dotted border line)

Thus, the presented cartographic material quite definitely testifies to Russian, and not Japanese, priority in the so-called "Kuril issue". The Kuriles were Russians in the 18th century, and from a historical and international legal point of view, today they legally belong to Russia, as they previously belonged to the Soviet Union.

Alexey Plotnikov, Doctor of Historical Sciences

To the 107th Anniversary of the Sakhalin Island Delimitation Act of 1908.

Preface.

July 28, 2015 I posted on my amateur blog« Pervomaiskiy» article by A. Akhmametiev "Demarcation of Sakhalin Island" for 1908 , where in the preface I mentioned"The act of delimitation of Sakhalin Island between Russia and Japan".

In this regard, without dwelling on just mentioning the act, I decided to publish it on the pages of my amateur blog, timed to coincide with the publication of a significant date - the 70th anniversary of the defeat and surrender on September 2, 1945 of Japan in World War II, which also abolished the state border of Japan on the island Sakhalin.

As you know, the former Russian-Japanese border on Sakhalin Island was established by the Portsmouth Treaty of 1905 in connection with the cession of the southern part of Sakhalin Island and all adjacent islands to Japan as a result of the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905. At the same time, the 50th parallel of northern latitude was taken beyond the territory ceded by Russia, along which, in accordance with the second additional article attached to the Portsmouth Treaty of 1905, the joint efforts of two demarcation commissions, Russian and Japanese, during 1906 - the line of the now former Russian-Japanese border on the island of Sakhalin.

On March 28/April 10, 1908, the final act was signed in Vladivostok, which completed the delimitation of Sakhalin Island between Russia and Japan along the 50th parallel of northern latitude.

From the Russian side, the act was signed by Colonel Lileev, and from the Japanese side by Major General Oshima.

In quantitative terms, the act was drawn up in two copies on each side, in Russian and Japanese, one copy of which, after signing, was subject to exchange between the contracting parties.

The act of delimitation consisted of a preamble, eleven paragraphs and three subparagraphs, an ending and a list of documents, which, in turn, consisted of nine paragraphs and three subparagraphs.

Thus, in the preamble of the Russian act, two demarcation commissions, Russian and Japanese, were first merged into one common commission called the "Russian-Japanese delimitation commission of Sakhalin Island."

However, the Japanese, without rejecting the Russian version of the delimitation commission, signed their own version under the act in hieroglyphs, which dealt with the Japanese delimitation commission of the island ... "Karafuto" (樺 太 ). Under this optionsigned the act by the head of the Japanese boundary commission, Major General Oshima.Obviously, the Japanese general did not care about the lack of a clause in the act regarding the interpretation geographical names, since for him, apparently, there was no other name for the island of Sakhalin, except for "Karafuto".

Let me remind you that in the practice of Russia and Japan, such an interpretation with geographical names existed at the conclusion of the Shimodsky treaty of 1855, when, next to the Japanese interpretation of the name of the island of Sakhalin - "Krafto", the generally accepted name of the island - Sakhalin was indicated in brackets. As for the Portsmouth Treaty of 1905, Article 9 of this treaty provided for only one name for the island - Sakhalin.

Russia did not react in any way to the interpretation of the Japanese general, since the goal of delimiting Sakhalin Island was achieved and Japan was securely locked in the southern half of the island, the keys to which Russia handed over to the Conduct. And as a guarantee along the 50th parallel of northern latitude, which has historically been inaccessible to Japan since the conclusion of the Shimoda Treaty of 1855, the exact line of Japanese possessions on Sakhalin Island, marked on the ground with “permanent signs”, passed.

Regarding the size of the mixed commission, it is known that by the time the final act was signed, each of the two demarcation commissions consisted of a chairman and sixteen members.

However, both commissions were not so numerous at the beginning of the delimitation of Sakhalin Island.

So in 1906, each commission consisted of five people - a chairman and four members. Moreover, the small compositioncommissions was probably due to the fact that the Russian commission arrived on Sakhalin Island much earlier than the Japanese commission and, thereby, won the right to parity. However, in the same year, the Japanese commission proposed to increase the number of members in each commission to sixteen people, and the Russian commission, observing the principle of parity for its part, agreed with this proposal.

On July 24/August 6, 1908, the act was approved by an exchange of notes, which from that moment acquired legal force and became binding on both states.

On the Russian side, ratification was formalized by the publication of a legislative act in the Collection of Laws and Orders of the Russian Government of August 28/September 10, 1908. At the same time, before the signature of the Japanese general, it was indicated that the act was signed by "the chairman of the commission from the Japanese side, Major General Oshima" with the note "in Japanese."

In 1911, legislative act No. 30859 “Approved by the Highest permission, by means of an exchange of notes, the Act of delimitation of Sakhalin Island between Russia and Japan” was published in the Complete Collection of Laws of the Russian Empire.

The validity of the former Russian-Japanese border on the island of Sakhalin was exactly thirty-seven years and twenty-seven days, starting from the moment the delimitation act was ratified and ending with the end of World War II.

Anatoly Shestakov.

Act of delimitation of Sakhalin Island between Russia and Japan.

Russo-Japanese Demarcation Commission Sakhalin Island, composed of an equal number of Members, under the Chairman from the Russian side of the General Staff, Colonel Lileev and with Japanese side Major General Oshima, according to Article 9 of the Treaty of Portsmouth August 23, 1905, IIadditional articles and instructions received from their Governments during 1906 and 1907, identified and marked on the ground with permanent signs of the a personal line between the possessions of the Russians and the Japanese kimi on Sakhalin Island as follows:

I. The border of Russia and Japan on the island of Sakha The line is drawn along the 50th parallel of northern latitude.

II. Fiftieth parallel north latitude determined by astronomical observations on the ground, from Sea of ​​Okhotsk to the Tatar Strait, at 4 points:

1) non the eastern coast of Sakhalin Island, washed by the Sea of ​​Okhotsk, tract Narmind,

2) in the central part of Sakhalin Island, on on the right bank of the Poronai River, in the Sakai tract,

3) in the central part of Sakhalin Island, south of the Khandasy 2nd settlement, in the Ho tract sino and

4) on the western coast of Sakhalin Island, washed by the Tatar Strait, south of Pi Bay to the left, in the tract Abosi.

Sh. More stone pillars are installed in the indicated four points , on concrete bases, numbered east of IbeforeIV pillars * ; they serve as the main basis for boundary line definitions.

IV. Between the indicated astronomical point ami the boundary line corresponding to the 50th parallel on the ground is determined by geodetic; in 17 points of this line, put 1 up to the 17th.

V. In some places between the intermediate and boundary stone pillars are installed wooden poles for better indication to the population borders*** .

VI. A cut through the entire boundary line eka, 10 meters wide; moreover, from IV astronomical boundary pillar to the western shores dug a moat one and a half meters wide **** .

VII. The surroundings of astronomical points, at a distance of one square kilometer, were taken on a scale of 1:10,000; similarly, plans were made for the entire border strip extending from the border 2 kilometers to the north, 2 kilometers to south 1:40,000.

VIII. A description of the border has been drawn up with a general map of the 4-kilometer border strip 1:200,000 attached to it.

IX. A survey was made of the sea lanes washing Sakhalin Island south of the 50th parallel, which found that, in addition to several stones, of which the more significant "Rock of Danger", only two islands adjoin the southern part of Sakhalin: Moneron (Todomosiri) and Tyuleniy (Roben). A list and description of the said islands, produced defining them geographical location and made ana shooting them at a scale of 1:40,000.

X. Names are given to some of the most important mountains and rivers located on the border and did not have a name ***** .

XI. Approved by signatures made in Russian and Japanese, 2 copies each, the following documents and plans drawn in the conventional signs of both states.

Having completed the assigned work, the Chairmen of the Boundary Commission: from the Russian side, Colonel Lileev, from the Japanese side, Major General Oshima, in the presence of the Members of the Commission, at a meeting on March 28 / April 10, 1908 in the city of Vladivostok, drew up this Act in Russian in Japanese, two copies each, and, having approved it with their signatures, exchanged one copy of this Act, together with one copy of the documents named below, for submission to their Governments in two texts, Russian and Japanese...

Chairman of the Commission from the Russian side, the General Staff, Colonel Lileev.

( in Japanese): Chairman of the Commission from the Japanese side Major General Oshima.

Notes.

* In these four points, more stone pillars are installed, on concrete foundations, numbered from the east of I to IV and called astronomical boundary pillars...
ByAccording to the definition of the Russian boundary commission, stone boundary pillars had the shape of a “four-sided truncated pyramid”, which in orthogonal projection consists of six sides - a base, an upper section (plane) and four trapezoidal side faces. However, in reality, the upper part of the stone pillars was crowned by the Japanese with a tetrahedral top, similar to a four-pitched (hip, but not tent) roof, where two faces, southern and northern, also had a trapezoid shape, and two faces, eastern and western, had a triangular shape or hip, with the steepness of each upper face, approximately 40 - 50 degrees. In an orthogonal projection, each pillar on the former Russian-Japanese border had nine sides, that is, one base and eight visible faces, where four faces were lateral, and four faces were upper. It is possible that the uppermost edge of the tetrahedral top of the pillars among the Japanese symbolized the 50th parallel of northern latitude, as a line corresponding to the direction of the line of the real parallel. In this case, the length of the line of the upper edge on each column had its own length. For example, the length of the upper rib on the first astronomical boundary pillar was eighteen centimeters, although the length of the upper rib on the "small" intermediate boundary pillar was four centimeters longer...
On the southern, Japanese, edgeastronomical pillars carvedchrysanthemum bas-relief,about 28 centimeters in diameter,in which each of the sixteen petals was adapted to the play of light and shadow on the new border between Russia and Japan on the island of Sakhalin. Above the chrysanthemum in a semicircle, reading the inscription, from right to left, five hieroglyphs are carved with words "Great Japanese Empire"國 帝 本 日 大) . Moreover, each hieroglyph is carved exactly opposite the stone petal of the chrysanthemum with the hieroglyph本 (hon) "book" in the center. Under the chrysanthemum, from right to left, two hieroglyphs are carved with the word "border" ( 界 境) , which, in turn, were located on pillars on both sides of the central petal of the chrysanthemum...

At present, not a single astronomical boundary pillar with the state symbols of Russia and Japan remains on the former Russian-Japanese border.

Thus, the third and fourth astronomical boundary pillars disappeared without a trace from the former border, the fate of which has not yet been established.
As for the third astronomical boundary pillar, the Sakhalin Regional Museum of Local Lore has a stone boundary pillar, which, however, has no historical relation to the original pillar.

In August 1988, on the eastern coast of Sakhalin Island, in the Narumi tract, I discovered the first astronomical boundary pillar knocked down from a concrete base, which I urgently evacuated in the same monthwith the help of a group of Soviet border guardsfrom the former border to a safe place.

The first astronomical boundary pillar that was erected by the Japanese

on the eastern coast of Sakhalin Island in the forest tract "Narumi" in 1907.

In 1995, on the right bank of the Poronai River, unknown persons knocked down the second astronomical boundary pillar from the concrete base, and then secretly taken to Japan and sold there to the Japanese authorities. Now this pillar is illegally stored in the Hokkaido Island Museum.

NOTE: However, for the first time the presentation of this pillar took place in June 1990 at the 15th regional review of amateur films and videos, which was held in the city of Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk as part of the third All-Union Festival of Folk Art of the RSFSR, during the screening of the amateur film "The Secret of the North Side". I was one of the authors of this and other films about the former Russian-Japanese border on Sakhalin Island, which were subsequently incorrectly used by my former co-author,amateur cinematographer, including in the Japanese media. And although this gave rise to a lot of speculation regarding the astronomical boundary pillars, nevertheless, they did not touch on the most terrible secret of Karafuto on Sakhalin Island - the Secret of the Double-Headed Eagle ...

Thus, of the four astronomical boundary pillars that were once located on the former Russian-Japanese border, only one stone pillar with east coast Sakhalin Island, which is now stored in the Sakhalin Regional Museum of Local Lore ...

** …at 17 points on this line flaxes on concrete foundations, small stonepillars called intermediate boundarypillars and numbered from the east of 1 to 17th.

Ghost "Karafuto" #4.

*** « In some places between the intermediate and boundary stone pillars are installed wooden poles for better indication to the population boundaries."

The wooden poles were made from a single tree trunk, presumably from a local larch species. The total length of the pillars was three meters and fifty centimeters. Of these, two meters had a cylindrical shape, one meter and thirty-five centimeters - a square shape and fifteen centimeters - the top of the pillars. At the same time, the tops had four-slope (tent) shapes, where each slope had a triangular shape, the tops of which, in turn, converged at one central point of all pillars. Moreover, each of the four sides of the slope had a slope of approximately 50 degrees. The height of the wooden poles above ground level was two meters, and the width of the sides was forty centimeters.

The pillars were dug into the ground to a depth of 1.5 meters and had four thin round timbers cut into the base of the pillars and protruding outwards crosswise, which kept the pillars from squeezing them onto the surface of the earth in winter time of the year. In order to protect the pillars from decay, their cylindrical part, about fifty centimeters, protruded above the ground and had four steep slopes to drain water from the flat surface of each of the four sides of the pillars.

On the wooden poles there were state symbols of Russia and Japan and identical identifying inscriptions in Russian and Japanese.

So on the northern, Russian, side of the pillars was drawn in black ink double headed eagle, the drawing of which was located at the very top of each pillar. Judging by the wingspan of the Double-Headed Eagle, the diameter of the drawing was at least twenty centimeters.

It has long been said that the drawing of the Double-Headed Eagle, both on wooden pillars and on four stone astronomical pillarsdescribed above,made in a conditional, emblematic form, which is not allowed in relation to state symbols in general and the Russian state emblem in particular.

Under the drawing of the Double-Headed Eagle, the word "ROSS II". However, orthographically in the word "ROSS II"uppercase and lowercase letters of the Russian alphabet are incorrectly placed, which, in fact, is a direct spelling mistake. First of all, this concerns the pre-reform letter « I, i» (decimal) in word "ROSS II", which was written as a capital letter « I» ("AND"), but marked with a dot as a lowercase letter « i» ("And"). Therefore, correctly on the pillar, the name of the Russian state should have been written with one uppercase and five lowercase letters, like the word Ross iI". The key to the puzzle was the capital letter " R " against the background of which the dot above the capital letter is especially striking « I" ("AND"). I note that above the capital letterI » the dot was not put in the pre-reform alphabet.

Below, vertically, the word is also written in large Russian letters "BORDER". However, if we compare the height of the letters of the word "BORDER" in the photograph of a wooden pole and in its drawing it turns out that their height is completely different. So in the photo of the column, the height of the letters is the same as the height of the word "ROSS II", and in the drawing it is smaller. For example, in the drawing the word "BORDER" although it is written in capital letters, the reduced height of the letters creates the appearance of a lowercase version of the letters for this word. For example, like this the word would look "border"consisting of only lowercase letters.
More n The numbers below indicate the year the column was installed. "1907", which is placed in the center of the column at the level of the third letter " A " and fifth letter " And " in a word "BORDER". At the same time, the height of the numbers in the photograph and in the drawing also do not correspond to each other, since in the first case it is equal to the height of the word "ROSS II", and in the second case, the height of the word "BORDER".

On the southern, Japanese, side of the pillars, a round 16-petalled chrysanthemum was drawn in black ink, under it, from top to bottom, in the center of the pillar, the word "Greater State of Japan" (大日本帝 国 ) and the word "border"(境界 ). On the eastern side of the wooden pillars, the year of installation was indicated in hieroglyphs - "Meiji 40" (明 治 四十 年 ) , that is, 1907.

It should be noted that the issue of installing wooden poles on the former Russian-Japanese border was resolved only in July 1907, when, practically, at least two months remained until the end of the field season of boundary work. At the same time, it was decided to carry out the installation of pillars in river valleys and other convenient places at the discretion of each commission separately. Moreover, the question of the size and shape of the pillars was resolved in three words and consisted in their height above the ground (2 meters), in a geometric figure (“square”) and the width of the sides (40 cm). At the same time, the serial numbers at the wooden poles were not specified in the commissions. As a result, in early October 1907, both commissions agreed that they would not indicate wooden poles on their plans.

**** A cut through the entire boundary line eka, 10 meters wide, moreover, from IV astronomical boundary pillar to the western The banks were dug with a moat one and a half meters wide.

As for the clearing, judging by the act, it was “cut through” absolutely along the entire length of the boundary line from the Sea of ​​Okhotsk to the Tatar Strait. Consequently, the total length of the clearing, like the entire length of the former Russian-Japanese border on Sakhalin Island, established by the Russian-Japanese demarcation commission, was 131.7 kilometers. However, the presence of a moat 1.5 meters wide and 345 meters long on the western coast of Sakhalin Island may indicate the absence of a clearing in this section of the former Russian-Japanese border. It is possible that the ditch was dug in a wasteland with sparse vegetation and single trees, which are usually formed on Sakhalin Island as a result of repeated forest fires. In addition, by the end of the field season of demarcation work in 1907on the former border, passing in the Poronai valley, areas with the presence of a "burnt" forest were recorded and marked on maps ...

In the first year of 1906 field demarcation work, a border clearing began to be laid to the west of the Poronay River by the forces of both commissions, as a result of which seven kilometers of a clearing were cut in the Poronay valley. However, later the Russian commission refused to continue working with the Japanese, arguing that the Japanese coolies, against their will, slowed down the entire course of work because of their inability to chop and fell wood. Perhaps this was one of the main reasons why the chairman of the Russian commission, Lieutenant Colonel of the General Staff V. I. Voskresensky, suggested that the Japanese commission split up and work in two directions at once, that is, east and west of the Poronai River. At the same time, despite the fact that the distance from the Poronai River to the eastern coast of Sakhalin Island was twenty kilometers more than to the western coast of Sakhalin Island, the Russian commission moved east, and the Japanese commission moved west. As a result, by the end of the field season, the Russian commission laid thirty-six kilometers of clearing ten meters wide in the virgin Sakhalin taiga, and the Japanese, not counting the seven kilometers traveled together, only seven kilometers ...

NOTE: As for the work of the Japanese from the so-called "ninth verst", voiced on the pages of one Sakhalin publication, the information about this, apparently, was taken by the author from an unverified source. However, I am familiar with the source of this information, which the author hid from readers.in his short publication about the former Russian-Japanese border beyond 2008 . In addition, this also applies to my former amateur film co-creator, who in 2009 illegal used my research material in his festival work. In this regard, I plan to publish in the appendix to the article "Unknown border" Karafuto "Sakhalin Island" a brief calendar of the work of the Russian demarcation commission on Sakhalin Island for 1906, where I will use information from archival materials, including information from the same source of information hidden from readers and viewers by the above authors dated March 17, 1907. And I, with a clear conscience,I use this information without fear for my reputation, since all the materials were acquired by me legally, confirmed by the relevant documents and records...

«… If you trace this clearing, starting at least from the Sea of ​​​​Okhotsk, then from the coast it immediately enters an extremely dissected mountainous country with a very difficult terrain, crosses numerous rivers heading east to the Sea of ​​\u200b\u200bOkhotsk, climbs a high watershed and descends to the second largest after Tymi to the Poronai River ... Further to the west from the Poronai clearing, it first follows a rather low-lying area. And then re-enters the maze mountain peaks, crosses the western watershed and descends steeply to the waters of the Tatar Strait. Thrown across wild ridges and gorges, this clearing, as a whole, is completely unsuitable for movement either with pack horses or even on foot, although in some places, especially between the Okhotsk coast and the Poronai River, a good path built by sappers has been preserved along it, which served for delivery food for those who worked, however, not supported by anyone and serving only a few hunters, it quickly falls into decay ... Now, in the wild and deserted taiga, you come across all kinds of border posts and signs, and in this desert they alone remind the traveler that to the north Sakhalin goes, and to the south - Karafuto. Cit. Quoted from: D. V. Sokolov. Russian Sakhalin. M. 1912. S. 39-41.

***** Names are given to some of the most important mountains and rivers located on the border and did not have a name.

On the former Russian-Japanese border, there were more than twenty geographical names of mountains, tracts and rivers, which were given to them as a result of the delimitation of Sakhalin Island between Russia and Japan in 1906-1907. So the names of mountains and rivers on the site of the former Russian-Japanese border from the eastern coast of Sakhalin Island to the Poronai River, in addition to two Japanese names, were given by the Russian demarcation commission. The names of the mountains and tracts from the Poronai River to the western coast of Sakhalin Island were given by the Japanese demarcation commission. Only a few Russian names of such mountains and rivers as Mount Camel, Mount Brusnichnaya, r. South, r. Cascade and, possibly, r. Muleyka. Concerning Japanese titles, then here the name of the tract "Narumi" could well have reached our days, where the first astronomical point was located on the former Russian-Japanese border of Sakhalin Island.

Anatoly Shestakov (" Pervomaiskiy").

ANNOUNCEMENT.

... Thus, without these basic concepts of the border, Russia, by the beginning of the twentieth century, would simply be open to the penetration of enemy armies on all more or less dangerous sea and land sections of the Russian border from the North Seas to the Great Ocean. Therefore, the strengthening of Russian borders, including sea ones, from enemy raids has always been considered an important and paramount matter for Russia, up to the present day. Russia has a wealth of experience regarding the tactical, strategic, political and other properties of the line of state borders with neighboring countries, and this experience, accumulated by Russia over many centuries, is the very priceless gift that is the property of our Russian state.

Japan is a country with a unique culture and a special structure of society. The uniqueness of Japan lies in its history, life and borders of this state. A country rising sun on land it does not border on any other state, but on the sea its borders are in contact with three countries at once.

Who borders Japan?

Japan's maritime borders pass close to the following countries:

• the Russian Federation;
• the Republic of Korea;
• And with China.

These states are not only neighbors of the Japanese, but also have territorial disputes with them that have not been resolved in any way for several decades.

Japan is trying to share the Kuril Islands with Russia. Claims in relation to Korea and China are also associated with the island territories.

The Japanese borders pass through the Pacific Ocean, as well as through the Sea of ​​Japan and the Sea of ​​Okhotsk. Borders also lie in the East China Sea, some of them cover the Philippine waters.

« The Land of the Rising Sun is island nation. Japan has over 3,000 different islands.».

The length of the Russian-Japanese border is approximately 194 kilometers. From the Russian point of view, the border with Japan captures the La Perouse, Sovetsky, Kunashirsky and Treason Straits. The Japanese, because of their claims to the Kuril Islands, draw the border through Frieza and La Perouse.

Since Japan, even today, is quite closed from the outside world, there are no customs and checkpoints on many of its borders. Entry into the country is fraught with many difficulties, and the list of things that cannot be brought into Japanese territory is quite impressive. Despite the difficulties of obtaining a visa, thousands of tourists regularly visit Japanese lands, because the culture of this state is worthy of being known to all its foreign connoisseurs.