I heard that in Russia they consider it's natural to separate parts of the country by people's referendum...
Aren't the islands full of Russian people? I imagine a referendum wouldn't yield a result that was unfavourable to Russia.
[deleted]
Japan has declared today that the southern Kurils is their sovereign territory
221–230 of 310 posts
Re: Japan has declared today that the southern Kurils is their sovereign territory
#222For people who want to read up, this is quite a complex situation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuril_Islands_dispute#World_Wa...
The history is complex. The current politics are not. It's just a way of Japan reminding Russia how unhappy it is with the war in Ukraine. The islands are barely inhabited.
> The islands are barely inhabited.
It's not about the inhabitants, it's about the 200 nautical mile radius around the islands that becomes yours for economic purposes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusive_economic_zone
Re: Japan has declared today that the southern Kurils is their sovereign territory
#223Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's pretty delusional even in Japan, nobody seriously expects Russia to return them. Early in the post-Soviet era there were some serious-ish proposals about Russia handing them back in exchange for massive financial aid, but ever since Putin took the reins it's been obvious that this is just not going to happen. I don't think even the Japanese government wants them back at this point, Hokkaido (the nearest big isla…
I'm not a fishing expert but I think officially owning those islands would affect their Exclusive Economic Zone. If the fishing there is good they could turn a profit even if administering the islands costs some yen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusive_economic_zone#Japan
And would that include whaling? If so, I'm opposed to this and hope the islands stay with Russia.
Re: Japan has declared today that the southern Kurils is their sovereign territory
#224The current situation is already a catastrophe as it is. The best possible outcome at this time is that this war is ended as soon as possible even when this means handing a few victory points to Russia. It is the only way at lot less Ukrainians will die and then I'm just ignoring the potential outcome of further escalation. Nothing the West is doing right now is working towards this outcome. We still seem to believe…
It was proven over and over again, that the more you give to Russia, the more they will take next time. We have to stop them now or never. War is already on going between Russia and the west (Putin himself and his chief of spies already said, that they deem sanctions akin declaration of war), hiding from this fact won't help.
Re: Japan has declared today that the southern Kurils is their sovereign territory
#225What are all these comments about not _necessarily_ returning Crimea to Ukraine? Is HN being spammed by Russians?
Ukraine's been unable to take it back in eight years of conflict. Formally ceding it might be the sort of concession that lets Putin claim enough of a win to end the conflict. Right now, he's got no ability to save face, and that risks continued escalation.
Re: Japan has declared today that the southern Kurils is their sovereign territory
#226Earlier quoted context omitted.
On what basis are you fantasizing about demilitarization of a nuclear state? How would that work? I hate Putin as much as the next person, but nothing will happen to the Russia proper -- they'll start throwing nukes, tactical first, then strategic.
Peace treaties in the past contained all sorts of demilitarization clauses. It is not unprecedented.
Counties sign such peace treaties when they lose hard enough to start losing their territory proper, or they are forced to capitulate, are occupied. How would a nuclear state lose their territory proper? There were indeed various peace treaties in the past, but not a nuclear state losing their territory proper.
Re: Japan has declared today that the southern Kurils is their sovereign territory
#227Earlier quoted context omitted.
This will very likely end by both parties pronouncing they are the victors here. For Ukraine the victory might be that Russia will most likely be unable to take Kiev and need to "withdraw" closer to their own borders i.e. the victory is not submitting in the "heroic" sense. However with a staggering economic loss and loss of life (including the refugees that might never return). For Russia their victory will be claim…
The loss of life is the real problem for Ukraine. I don't doubt that once this is over, the US and the EU will launch a generous reconstruction plan. Ukraine may end up with much better infrastructure in place of the destroyed one. This could be financed from seized oligarchs' wealth. No need to spend taxpayer money. And Western construction companies will like those contracts, doubly so after Covid.
Loss of life and refugees who might not return home after the war.
Re: Japan has declared today that the southern Kurils is their sovereign territory
#228Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the same reference you provided, a declaration was made and it was about regulation of trade and other activities.My Japanese and Russian are a bit rusty. Original is below but do you have French or English version? https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%20263/v2... You reference says "...no peace treaty has yet been signed, and the islands remain under Russian administration" Edit: Ok. Per this ref…
There's a translation at https://worldjpn.grips.ac.jp/documents/texts/docs/19561019.D... . It seems pretty clear on the end of the war, even if there were plans to have additional agreements later that fell through. Both parties agreed to end the war, and signed the agreement. It doesn't have to have the words "Peace Treaty" in the text to be one.
That is why I said technically :-)
"A peace treaty is an agreement between two or more hostile parties, usually countries or governments, which formally ends a state of war between the parties" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_treaty
Re: Japan has declared today that the southern Kurils is their sovereign territory
#229Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why can't they remain part of Russia like they historically were (well, I mean since Russia took over form the Tatars, of course) and seem to want? It's not because Russia has taken Crimea back in a rather cavalier way that they should be split again just to weaken Russia. This can only perpetuate resentment and problems.
Speaking only as an American, I don't think we really know what Crimeans want. Russia isn't well-known for legitimate democratic voting, and the Crimean referendum has never been acknowledged by Western Democracies. I would not be starkly opposed to Crimean independence, nor even Russian-integration, but in essence it looks like Russia took Crimea and then held a fake referendum to legitimize it. But the question alw…
> Should we support the concept of the Confederate States of America seceding from the United States? If California or Texas wanted to secede, should we support it?
Yes. The Tenth Amendment reads, 'The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.' There is no power delegated to the United States by the Constitution to eject states, therefor the power to leave the union is reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Secession was and is perfectly constitutional. The fact that the Confederate States did so for a truly bad reason doesn't change that fact. The right thing would have been to … let them go.
Brexit is a great example of how things should work: a state freely decided to leave a suprastate body, and that body let it.
Re: Japan has declared today that the southern Kurils is their sovereign territory
#230Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just yesterday I was thinking: What if we piss off a nuclear power all around the world now? Wouldn't that be fortunate timing to solve global warming? FTFY. I mean sure we only have another 50 years before the planet is unlivable for us, but why desperately try to accelerate it? EDIT: here is Russias military doctrine from 2000 https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2000-05/russias-military-doc...
> nuclear power Is it though? Russian conventional army has clearly been devastated by corruption and bad administration, as the generals and staff didn't anticipate that it would actually be used in a real all-out war. What makes you think that nuclear forces are in better shape?
Search Bulava / Topol tests 201x, RU test fires ICBMs successfully every year. Reporting of current RU incompetence doesn't suggest anything deficient with their rocketry functionality except not much missiles were used, and a few precision strikes on runways were consistently off course by several meters and missed the runway, indicating user error. Several meters doesn't matter with nukes.