In the state Duma commented on the Kuril Islands

In the state Duma commented on the Kuril Islands

MOSCOW, January 10 — RIA Novosti. The head of the Duma Committee on regional policy and problems of North and Far East Nikolai Kharitonov (Communist party) does not support the draft on the prohibition of the transfer of the Kuril Islands, because, in his words, considers unacceptable the conversation about the transfer of Russian territory.

The Deputy from LDPR Sergey Ivanov has previously submitted to the state Duma the bill “About territorial claims to the Russian Federation from Japan”, which establishes the territorial belonging of the Kuril Islands to Sakhalin region of the Russian Federation and the prohibition to apply the legal acts containing provisions for the exclusion of these territories.

“In the head, no one thought about any transfer (Kuril Islands), this means reviewing the results of the Second world war. Lieutenant General (Kuzma) Derevianko destroyer “Missouri” on 2 September 1945, the Soviet Union signed the act of unconditional surrender of Japan in world war II. What are we talking about?” — told RIA Novosti Kharitonov.

According to the parliamentarian, the conversation about the transfer of the Kuril ridge of Japan is not consistent with the document of 2 September 1945, and “many other decisions”.

“Tomorrow will tell, Kaliningrad give or something tell, this topic is closed. If you want, you can make a peace Treaty, without conditions,” — said Kharitonov.

Answering the question of whether he will support the draft law, Kharitonov said that he opposes the talks on the transfer of the Kuril Islands, because it is “implementing intentions”.

Earlier, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in an interview with TV channel “Asahi” said that Japan claims the southern Kuril Islands, but its position on the territorial issue with Russia does not imply the eviction of Russians living there. It was also reported that the Japanese government develops the plan, which can offer Russia to refuse mutual claims for compensation related to the four Kuril Islands, claimed by Tokyo and calls them its “Northern territories.”

On Wednesday, the Ambassador of Japan in Moscow Touchesa Kazuki was invited to the Russian foreign Ministry in connection with the frequent statements of the Japanese leadership on the issue of a peace Treaty, in which Moscow was perceived as “an attempt to artificially whip up the atmosphere around the issue of a peace Treaty, to impose the other side’s own scenario for its resolution.”

Relations between Russia and Japan for many years overshadows the absence of a peace Treaty.

Japan claims the Islands of Kunashir, Shikotan, Iturup and Habomai, referring to bilateral Treatise on trade and borders of 1855. In 1956 the USSR and Japan signed a Joint Declaration in which Moscow has agreed to consider the possibility of transfer of Japan of the Habomai and Shikotan after the conclusion of a peace Treaty, and the fate of Kunashir and Iturup are not affected. The USSR hoped that the Joint Declaration will put an end to the dispute, Japan believed the document only part of the solution, not abandoning claims to all the Islands.

Later the negotiations failed, the peace Treaty after the Second world war and was not signed. There is a view that serious opposition arose from the United States, which threatened that if Japan would agree to the transfer of only two of the four Islands, it will affect the process of the return of Okinawa under Japanese sovereignty (the agreement on the return of Okinawa to Japan entered into force in 1972). Moscow’s position is that the Islands became part of the Soviet Union at the end of the Second world war and the Russian sovereignty over them cannot be questioned.

In Singapore on 14 November was held a summit between the leaders of Russia Vladimir Putin and Shinzo Abe. Following the meeting, the Japanese Prime Minister said that the sides agreed to accelerate negotiations on a peace Treaty on the basis of Joint Soviet-Japanese Declaration of 1956. This is a serious concession on the part of Japan, because until now, its official position was to demand the return of the four Islands of Kunashir, Iturup, Shikotan, Habomai and only then — the conclusion of a peace Treaty.