Abstract on the topic:

“Disputed territories”

Pupil 8 "A" class

linguistic gymnasium №13

Korostyleva Vladimir

Scientific adviser: Lokteva Galina Ivanovna

I.Introduction…………………………………………p.1

II.History of the discovery and development of the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin Island……………………..page 2

III. The problem of the "Northern Territories" after the second

World War…………………………………..page 4

IV.Conclusion…………………………………..page 10

V. Bibliography…………………………………p.11

Globalization processes are beginning, countries are actively cooperating with each other, but still there are unresolved problems, territorial issues, for example, the dispute over Western Sahara between Mauritania and Morocco, over the island of Mayote (Maore) between France and the Federal Islamic Republic of the Comoros, about the Falkland (Malvinas) Islands between Great Britain and Argentina, the War of Independence of Palestine, etc. Russia is also among the disputants, Japan lays claim to the southern part of the Kuril archipelago. This is what I am going to talk about in my essay.

The Problem of the “Northern” Territories

The ancient and medieval history of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands is full of secrets. So, today we do not know (and we are unlikely to ever know) when the first people appeared on our islands. Archaeological discoveries of recent decades only allow us to say that this happened in the Paleolithic era. The ethnic affiliation of the population of the islands remains a mystery until the first Europeans and Japanese appeared here. And they appeared on the islands only in the 17th century and were caught in the Kuriles

and southern Sakhalin Ainu, in northern Sakhalin - Nivkhs. Probably already then the Ulta (Oroks) lived in the central and northern regions of Sakhalin. The first European expedition that ended up near the Kuril and Sakhalin

coast, was the expedition of the Dutch navigator M.G. Friz. He not only explored and mapped the southeast of Sakhalin and the South Kuriles, but also proclaimed Urup a possession of Holland, which, however, was left without

any consequences. Russian explorers also played a huge role in the study of Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands. First - in 1646 - the expedition of V.D. Poyarkov discovered the north-western coast of Sakhalin, and in 1697 V.V. Atlasov learned about the existence of the Kuril Islands. Already in the 10s. 18th century the process of studying and gradually joining the Kuril Islands to the Russian state begins. The success of Russia in the development of the Kuriles became possible thanks to the entrepreneurial spirit, courage and patience of D.Ya. Antsiferov, I.P. Kozyrevsky, I.M. Evreinov, F.F. Luzhin,

M.P.Spanberg, V.Valton, D.Ya.Shabalin, G.I.Shelikhov and many other Russian explorers-explorers. Simultaneously with the Russians, who were moving along the Kuriles from the north, the Japanese began to penetrate into the South Kuriles and the extreme south of Sakhalin. Already in

second half of the 18th century. here appear Japanese trading posts and fishing, and since the 80s. 18th century - scientific expeditions begin to work. Mogami Tokunai and Mamiya Rinzo played a special role in Japanese research.

At the end of the XVIII century. research off the coast of Sakhalin was carried out by a French expedition under the command of J.-F. Laperouse and an English expedition under the command of V.R. Broughton. The emergence of the theory about the peninsular position of Sakhalin is connected with their work. The Russian

navigator I.F. Kruzenshtern, who in the summer of 1805 unsuccessfully tried to pass between Sakhalin and the mainland. G.I. Nevelskoy put an end to the dispute, who in 1849 managed to find a navigable strait between the island and the mainland. The discoveries of Nevelskoy were followed by the accession of Sakhalin to Russia. Russian military posts and villages appear one after another on the island. In 1869-1906. Sakhalin was the largest penal servitude in Russia. Since the beginning of the XIX century. Sakhalin and the Kuriles become the object of the Russian-Japanese territorial dispute. In 1806-1807. on South Sakhalin and Iturup, Russian sailors defeated Japanese settlements. The answer to this was the capture by the Japanese of the Russian navigator V.M. Golovnin on Kunashir. Over the past two centuries, Russian-Japanese

the border has changed several times. In 1855, in accordance with the Shimodsky Treaty, the border passed between the islands of Urup and Iturup, while Sakhalin was left undivided. In 1875, Russia handed over to Japan the Northern Kuriles that belonged to it, receiving in return all rights to Sakhalin. Early 20th century Sakhalin and Kurile Islands met in different states. Sakhalin was part of the Russian Empire, the Kuril Islands were part of the Japanese Empire. The issue of the territorial belonging of the islands was resolved by the Russian-Japanese

an agreement signed in 1875 in St. Petersburg. In accordance with the St. Petersburg Treaty, Japan ceded to Russia all its rights to Sakhalin. Russia, in exchange for this, ceded the Kuril

islands. As a result of Russia's defeat in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905. Japan managed to seize South Sakhalin from her. In 1920-1925. Northern Sakhalin was under Japanese occupation.

The last time the Russian-Japanese border changed was in 1945, when our country regained South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands as a result of victory in World War II. In August-September 1945, with US approval, the Soviets occupied all the Kuriles, and in 1946 the US Occupation Administration announced to the Japanese government that the entire Kuril chain, including Habomai, was excluded from Japanese territory. In 1951, Japan began peace negotiations with the United States and its allies. Moscow participated at first, but then withdrew from the talks under the pretext of disagreements over US actions in the Cold War. Despite this, the final text of the San Francisco Peace Treaty establishes quite unambiguously that Japan "renounces all rights, claims and claims to the Kuril Islands."

At that time, Prime Minister Shigeru Yoshida, who was negotiating on the Japanese side, publicly stated that Japan was unhappy with this wording, especially with regard to the southern part of the islands. Administratively, Habomai and Shikotan under Japanese rule

always referred to Hokkaido, and not to the Kuriles. As for Iturup and Kunashir, the historical fate of these two islands differs from the fate of the rest of the Kuriles, the rights of Russia to which were recognized by Japan back in 1855.

Nevertheless, Yoshida signed the treaty. All he could get from the Americans, represented by the ardent anti-communist Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, was that if Japan had such strong feelings for Habomai, it might try

apply to the International Court of Justice. Regarding the Japanese claims to the rest of the islands, the answer was very loud silence.

In 1955, Japan began trying to negotiate a separate peace treaty with Moscow. Japan understood the weakness of its position regarding the islands. But she hoped that there was an opportunity to get at least some

concessions regarding Habomai and Shikotan and to ensure that the United States, France and Britain recognize that at least these islands do not belong to the Kuril Islands, which Japan abandoned in 1951.

To Tokyo's surprise, the Soviets agreed to this demand: they wanted to stop Tokyo from moving closer to the US. But the conservatives in the Foreign Ministry, fearing any Japanese-Soviet reconciliation, immediately intervened and included Iturup and Kunashir in the list territorial claims. Moscow said no, and the conservatives calmed down.

Nevertheless, in 1956, Prime Minister Ichiro Hatoyama decided to try to break the stalemate and sent his conservative foreign minister, Mamoru Shigemitsu, to Moscow with the authority to negotiate peace.

Shigemitsu started with the already standard Japanese requirements of Iturup and Kunashir - - was immediately refused. However, the Soviets again offered to return Shikotan and Habomai on the condition that a peace treaty be signed.

contract. Shigemitsu decided to accept this offer. However, when news of a possible deal leaked out, the Tokyo anti-communist

The Conservatives are back in action.

Shigemitsu was recalled and on the way home was "intercepted" by the same John Foster Dulles, who only five years earlier forced the Japanese to abandon the Kuril Islands, including most of what is now called the Northern Territories. Dulles warned that if Japan stopped claiming all of the Northern Territories, the US would not

will return Okinawa to the Japanese. Tokyo immediately broke off negotiations with Moscow.

Scientists argued a lot about how Dulles managed to make such a 180-degree turn. One theory claims that the US knew in 1951 that if it did not abide by the Yalta Accords over the Kuriles, Moscow might cease to abide by the Yalta Accords.

agreements on Austria—the problem had all but disappeared by 1956. Another interesting theory put forward by Professor Kimitada Miwa of Sophia University in Tokyo claims that the American position in 1951 was the result of a deal with the Soviets that secured Micronesia to the United States by decision of the UN Security Council three years earlier.

And, finally, there is such a theory that the insidious Dulles thought everything over and planned in advance. His intention from the very beginning was to force Japan to give up the Kuriles in 1951 and, knowing that the Japanese would later try to return the islands, to include in the peace treaty an article

Allowing the US to turn in its favor any concession that the Japanese might make to the Russians in the future. In short, if Japan allows the Soviets to hold even part of the Kuriles, the US is holding Okinawa. Today's Japanese position completely ignores all the subtleties described above. She simply states that the Northern Territories are ancestral Japanese lands ("koyu no ryodo") and as such must be returned. As far as the San Francisco Treaty is concerned, Tokyo puts forward two highly controversial arguments. The first is that, since the treaty does not say who exactly should receive the very Kuriles that Japan refused, then anyone, including Japan itself, can claim them. Another argument is that the Northern Territories do not belong to those Kuril Islands that Japan refused, and indeed cannot be treated, being, again, "original Japanese lands." With the last argument, however, not everything is in order. If Japan had not really given up the Northern Territories in 1951, then why would Yoshida have declared to the whole world in 1951 that he was devastated by the loss of the Northern Territories? Upon his return from San Francisco, he appeared before Parliament and was asked whether the term "Kuril Islands" used in the San Francisco Treaty included Iturup and Kunashir. The Office of Treaties of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, responding officially to this request on behalf of the Prime Minister, replied to Parliament on October 19, 1951: "Unfortunately, yes, it includes." Over the following years, Foreign Ministry officials commented on this key point in the following way: that the answer to parliament on October 19 was: a) misunderstood, b) outdated, and, finally, c) was "kokunai flour", that is, "for internal use" , - in other words, foreigners like me should not stick their nose into such matters. Foreign Ministry officials also like to indicate vigorous support from the United States, which, since 1956, has officially stated that Iturup and Kunashir definitely do not belong to the territories, which Japan abandoned in San Francisco. It is clear that the US, saying exactly the opposite of what it said in 1951, is simply using a little Cold War-style ploy to keep Tokyo and Moscow at bay - but such an assumption is politely ignored. But not only the United States participated in this process. In 1951, Britain played a major role in forcing Japan to give up the Kuriles, and the British embassy in Tokyo has in its archives a report from 1955, where the unexpected demand by the Japanese of Iturup and Kunashir was called "amusing and naive." Today Britain supports the same demand as perfectly reasonable. Australia, which in 1951 made efforts to prevent any concessions to Yoshida on territorial issues (for fear that post-war Japan would use any border uncertainty as an excuse for militarization), today also unequivocally supports the Japanese position. In short, what began as an exercise in punishing Japan for wartime aggression turned into the most successful operation of the Cold War to keep Japan in the West's camp. I am not suggesting that the Japanese position be completely abandoned. If Tokyo would refer to the reluctance with which Yoshida abandoned the Kuriles, and especially from their southern part in San Francisco, and would present some secret documents demonstrating what exactly the United States forced him to surrender, this would constitute a good legal basis for that. to push for a revision of this part of the peace agreement. But today Japan is trapped in its own claims that it never gave up the Northern Territories, so it no longer dares to tell the truth about what exactly happened in 1951. It is easier for her to blame everything on the former Soviet Union than on the United States. It vainly insists on the return of these "primordial lands" by Moscow, not realizing that in the face of precisely such a demand, Moscow cannot yield, even if it wanted to, for fear of setting a precedent that would allow its other neighbors to lay claim to the former "primordial lands". ". Hashimoto's suggestion that Moscow can control the territories for a few more years, provided it recognizes Japanese sovereignty over them, shows how inadequate Tokyo perceives both the laws of international diplomacy and the Russian mentality. Meanwhile, most Japanese, even educated ones, have completely forgotten what exactly happened back then, in the 50s, and are convinced that Tokyo's demands are absolutely legal. The government is being urged to continue negotiations in a hard-line manner and ignore Moscow's regular hints that it is still ready to return Shikotan and Habomai. Such a dispute is doomed to eternal extension. And John Foster Dulles is giggling to himself in his coffin.

I believe that the Kuriles should belong to Russia, because. Japan abandoned them in 1951 and it is too late to abandon their decisions, she lost the war and must endure the hardships associated with this. After all, if all peoples demand their lands, then there will be no such states as the USA, Great Britain, Russia, etc. And secondly, Russia and Japan are still at war, and from the beginning it is necessary to sign a peace treaty, and only then talk about territorial disputes.

On September 28, 1939, the Treaty of Friendship and Border between the USSR and Germany was signed. It was signed by German Foreign Minister Ribbentrop and People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs of the USSR Molotov. We decided to talk about the five disputed territories of Russia with other states.

The treaty between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union was concluded on September 28, 1939. It was signed after the invasion of Poland by the armies of Germany and the USSR by German Foreign Minister Ribbentrop and People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs of the USSR Molotov. According to this agreement, the territory of Poland was divided between Germany and the USSR. The text of the treaty and a map with the border line between the USSR and Germany were published in the Soviet press. Under this treaty, Lithuania passed into the sphere of influence of the USSR. This provided the Soviet Union with German non-intervention in relations with Lithuania, which resulted in the establishment of the Lithuanian SSR on June 15, 1940.

disputed islands

The Kuril Islands include 30 large and many small islands. They are part of the Sakhalin region of Russia and are of great military-strategic and economic importance. However, the southern islands of the archipelago - Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and the Habomai group - are disputed by Japan, which includes them in the Hokkaido prefecture.

Moscow's principled position is that the southern Kuril Islands became part of the USSR, of which Russia became the legal successor, and are an integral part of the territory of the Russian Federation on legal grounds following the results of the Second World War, enshrined in the UN Charter, and Russian sovereignty over them, which has an appropriate international legal confirmation, no doubt.

In Japan, they say that the northern territories are the centuries-old territories of this country, which continue to be under the illegal occupation of Russia. According to the Japanese position, in the event that the northern territories belong to Japan, it is ready to flexibly approach the time and procedure for their return. In addition, since the Japanese citizens living in the northern territories were forcibly evicted by Joseph Stalin, Japan is ready to come to an agreement with the Russian government so that the Russian citizens living there will not suffer the same tragedy. In other words, after the return of the islands to Japan, she intends to respect the rights, interests and desires of the Russians now living on the islands.

They took one and a half islands

Problem disputed islands Tarabarov and Bolshoi Ussuriysky arose in 1964, when a new draft agreement on the border between Russia and China was developed. And the story was like this. In 1689, the Treaty of Nerchinsk was concluded, when Russia recognized China's rights to lands on the right bank of the Amur and in Primorye. In the middle of the 19th century, taking advantage of the weakness of China, Russia annexed 165.9 thousand square kilometers of Primorye, which were under joint control. China was left without access to the Sea of ​​Japan. During World War II, between Stalin and the commander-in-chief of the PLA, Mao Zedong, who controlled the northern regions of China, an agreement was concluded on drawing a border line along the Chinese bank of the Amur and Ussuri rivers. Thus, China was actually deprived of the right to use the fairway of these rivers, but received support from the USSR.

In 2004, an agreement was signed between Russia and China on the Russian-Chinese state border on its eastern part. The document defines the border in two sections: in the area of ​​Bolshoy Island in the upper reaches of the Argun River (Chita Region) and in the area of ​​the Tarabarov and Bolshoy Ussuriysky Islands at the confluence of the Amur and Ussuri Rivers near Khabarovsk. Tarabarov is completely given to China, and Ussuriysky is only partially. The border line, according to the document, runs both along the middle of the rivers and on land. The territory of both sites (about 375 sq. km) is distributed approximately in half.

Wanted to cut off a piece

Estonia lays claim to the Pechora district of the Pskov region and the right bank of the Narva River with Ivangorod. On May 18, 2005, the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Russia and Estonia, Sergey Lavrov and Urmas Paet, signed agreements on the state border and delimitation of maritime spaces in the Narva and Gulf of Finland, fixing the passage of the state border between the two states along the former administrative border between the RSFSR and the Estonian SSR "with a slight adjustment on the conditions adequate territorial compensation”. One of the main subjects of negotiations on the Russian-Estonian border is the Saatse boot. It was planned to transfer it to Estonia, exchanging it for other territories. The agreement was not ratified by Russia, due to the amendments made to it by the Estonian side.

fish war

For almost half a century, Russia has been waging an undeclared fish war with Norway. Most of the fighting takes place on the territory of the famous "twilight zone" in the Barents Sea. This is a disputed body of water the size of half Germany or Italy, two-thirds of the UK.

The essence of the dispute boils down to the fact that Russia drew the border along the coast of the island of Svalbard, Norway believed that the border should be equidistant from Svalbard on the one hand and Franz Josef Land and Novaya Zemlya on the other. Since the states were on friendly terms, the dispute over the border rarely resulted in any actions, and occasionally there were detentions of Russian fishing boats. However, in the future, the dispute escalated, since hydrocarbon reserves were discovered in the Barents Sea, including in the disputed territories. In April 2010, the parties agreed that the new delimitation line would divide the disputed territory into two equal parts, the 40-year-old dispute was finally settled on September 15, 2010 after the signing of the agreement "On the delimitation of maritime spaces and cooperation in the Barents Sea and the Arctic Ocean" transfer of 90 thousand sq. m. km. in favor of Norway.

Crimea territory of disputes

For many years, disputes around perhaps the most beautiful and favorite vacation spot of the Soviet people have not subsided. Crimea is not only an "all-Union health resort", but also a strategic territory.

In 1991, when the Soviet Union collapsed, relations between Ukraine and Russia worsened. The people living in Russia, after the loss of so many territories, remembered the Crimea, which could be returned, because. transferring it to Ukraine in 1954 was disapproved by many. At the same time, 80 percent of Crimean residents said they consider themselves citizens of Russia, and Crimea is part of its territory. But Ukraine had one very significant lever of pressure on Russia - the Black Sea Fleet. In January 1992, the then President of Ukraine L. Kravchuk announced that he had taken the Black Sea Fleet under his guardianship. It was a collapse for Russia. But the transfer of Crimea to Ukraine is a very huge loss for Russia.

If you look at the map, then it clearly shows the boundaries separating one state from another. Everything looks clear and unambiguous. Unfortunately, the reality is not so rosy. Every day the borders change: some states disappear, others appear, others seek to expand their territory at the expense of their neighbor. We offer an overview of the disputed territories claimed by several powers, not recognizing each other's rights.

Greece and Turkey have never been able to coexist peacefully, and the problem of Cyprus just gives them the opportunity to express dissatisfaction with each other in full. After several times the territory of the island passed from hand to hand, now it is divided into two parts. 37% is under Turkish control, 63% of the southern part is the Republic of Cyprus, between them there is a buffer zone under NATO control.

These cities on the northern coast of Morocco are the only remaining territories in Africa for Spain. Morocco regularly appealed to the Spanish government to grant them independence, but the local population categorically rejected such an idea. On this moment they are officially part of the EU.

Relations between the Singaporean and Malayan governments have never been easy, and most recently Malaysia has accused Singapore of illegally managing its lands. Point 20, a small piece of reclaimed land in Singapore, Malaysia claims it is within its territorial waters.

People are ready to fight in the modern world for anything, and New Moor Island is proof of this, not even an island, but a 10-square-meter spit. It appeared in 1970 in the Bay of Bengal after a cyclone and disappeared in 2010 due to rising sea levels. That's what India and Bangladesh have been fighting for for 40 years.

Another amazing territorial dispute involving a deserted island in the North Atlantic. It is claimed by Great Britain, Iceland and Ireland.

Although no one shed blood for this territory, anyway, it has long been divided, empty and hypothetically. And so the question of property constantly arises.

The dispute began when an Argentine whaling company created a Falkland Islands base around the time the UK annexed them. During the Falklands War, they briefly came under Argentine rule, but soon returned to British jurisdiction.

Although there is no sharp conflict between Great Britain and Spain over territories, they are still opponents in this matter.

The region, which is mostly desert, is one of the most sparsely populated areas in the world. It once belonged to Spain, but is now claimed by Morocco and the Saharan Arab Democratic Republic.

It has long been known that Sudan is not calm at all. For many years the country is torn apart Civil War and bloodshed, and South Sudan achieved its independence. Abyei is a region located at the very center of the conflict between the two countries. And although South Sudan claims it, it is controlled by its northern neighbor.

Unusual disputed territory. Its peculiarity lies in the fact that they are not fighting for it, but two countries are trying to get rid of it - Egypt and Sudan.

Despite gaining independence in 1981, Belize has been fighting off the territorial claims of Guatemala for the past 30 years. On some maps of the restless neighbor, Belize is listed as the 23rd district.

If you think that if three million people declare independence and form a new state, then all the other 200 countries will happily nod their heads and recognize it, then you are mistaken. In 1991, Somaliland declared independence from Somalia, but no one batted an eyelid. Perhaps it was necessary to choose a different name for the state?

More recently, there was a war between Argentina and Britain, which ended with the recognition of the status of British territory behind the islands. And in 2007, the President of Argentina again offered to resume negotiations.

Although most of the world community perceives Tibet as an autonomous region within China, the Tibetan government in exile in India strongly disagrees.

After decades of violent conflict, Kosovo, which was part of Serbia, declared independence in 2008. Since then, it has been recognized by 88 countries, including the US, UK and France. Russia and China, not to mention Seribia, were categorically against it.

Although the Kuril Islands officially became part of the USSR after the end of World War II, Japan still calls them its northern territories.

The narrow strip between Ukraine and Moldova has turned into a self-proclaimed republic, which was recognized only by two countries - South Ossetia and Abkhazia, which themselves are in the same status. For the rest of the world, it is an autonomous territorial unit within Moldova.

After World War II, the Korean Peninsula was divided along the 38th parallel. As a result, North Korea was formed in the north, and the Republic of Korea in the south. Both states claim their rights to the entire peninsula, once this has already led to the Korean War, after which a demilitarized zone appeared between them.

There are two countries claiming the name "China". These are the PRC and the Republic of China (Taiwan). Both are completely unprepared to recognize the existence of each other and claim the same territory.

21. Spratly Islands

The two self-proclaimed republics have been seeking independence from Georgia for about a century. A fierce confrontation did not stop in the region, in which they were helped by Russian Federation. As a result, only a few countries recognized their independence - Russia, Venezuela, Nicaragua and several Pacific islands.

The territory of Kashmir, located between India and Pakistan, is actually divided between three powers - India in the south, Pakistan in the northwest and China in the northeast. Neither side agrees to recognize the rights of others to these territories.

One of the most conflict regions on the world map for many centuries. The territory passed into the hands of various states many times. After the establishment of the State of Israel in 1947, the situation did not improve, there are constant shootings here, and serious military clashes periodically take place.

The last territorial conflict in the recent history of Ukraine and Russia.

No one undertakes to predict how such conflicts may end, but scientists have included them in

Territorial claims from time immemorial have had a significant impact on public policy, although the further we go from the time of the Middle Ages, the less reasonable disputes about small islands, bays and plots of land seem.

However, from time to time the issue of territorial claims attracts attention.

In the modern world, the importance of territorial disputes is still falling: more and more states today understand that large territory v is not at all a reason for pride, but if we talk about the past (sometimes very close), then -

From the depths

Historians generally divide territorial disputes into several categories. These are disputes over areas of military strategic importance, economic importance and political significance.

This division is rather conditional, since each disputed case has its own characteristics and nuances.

Territories that can become "transit points" for attack in case of war are of military importance. Particularly dear to states are areas that can be used for reconnaissance activities, for example, today, for the deployment of radar stations.

Economically important regions include straits, canals, as well as areas rich in natural resources or with great potential for the development of the tourism business. Most often, disputes between states arise in the division of water areas rich in fish, as well as in determining the boundaries of oil shelves.

Areas that are historically disputed are politically significant, and usually do not play a significant role geographically or economically. On the other hand, territorial claims can become a way of scoring political points in the election campaign.

Who claims what

Today, almost everyone knows that some of the islands of the Kuril chain are the subject of Japan's territorial claims. But not only Japan makes territorial claims against Russia.

The question of the current borders has been periodically raised or raised by other neighbors, not to mention the former republics of the USSR. The roots of these problems go deep into the centuries, when a lot of different lands were annexed to the Russian Empire. The Russian Empire included present-day Finland, and a significant part of Poland, the Caucasus, and the famous Alaska.

After the reshaping of the world map as a result of wars in the 20th century, many controversial issues, if not left unresolved, left a significant mark on the "collective unconscious" of neighboring nations. After the collapse of the USSR, there were a few more problems. In terms of the length of its borders, Russia ranks first in the world - 60 thousand kilometers.

Moving along the border, let's comment on the problems in relations with neighboring states related to the territorial issue.

Russia v USA

Russia and the US have the longest maritime border in the world. The only problem for a long time was the question of delimiting the waters of the Bering Strait. In 1990, an agreement was signed between the two USSR and the USA on the delimitation of maritime spaces (territorial waters, the economic zone and the shelf were delimited). It's about five thousand kilometers.

Russia v Japan

Russia and Japan do not have a border treaty. There is no peace treaty either. The Japanese link his conclusion to the solution of the problem of the South Kuriles.

Russia v North Korea

There is an agreement on the demarcation (marking on the ground) of borders and the delimitation of maritime space, the borders are clearly marked not only on the map, but also on the ground. And they are well guarded. In China, Japan and South Korea, North Koreans illegally enter much more often, and most of the North Korean illegal immigrants that the media wrote about in the 1990s were workers who fled from the DPRK-owned timber industry enterprises in Russia.

Russia v China

Border disputes have marred relations between the USSR and China since the 1960s. The culmination of border disputes is considered to be the events of 1969, when China laid down more than one thousand of its soldiers in the battle for Damansky Island (in those days, this piece of land, one and a half by half a kilometer in size, covered with silt and overgrown with reeds, was not yet a peninsula).

In 1991, an agreement was signed on the demarcation of the eastern part of the border with a length of about 4200 km. Demarcation completed. However, the parties failed to agree on two of its sections: on the Argun River (Bolshoi Island) and on the Amur (Bolshoy Ussuriysky and Tarabarov Islands). Here it was not even possible to delimit the borders (mark them on the map), not to mention the demarcation.

On the western border of China with Russia, about 50 km long, there is an agreement on delimitation. Demarcation has begun.

Russia v Mongolia

There is a border treaty and demarcation agreements.

Russia v Kazakhstan

The issue of the border has not yet been raised by either side. Now there is a very conditional "inter-republican border."

Caspian Sea

So far, Russian-Iranian agreements on the division of the Caspian Sea are in force. However, new independent littoral states v Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan v demand the division of the Caspian (primarily its bottom). Azerbaijan, without waiting for the determination of the status of the Caspian Sea, has already begun to develop its subsoil.

Russia v Azerbaijan

A bilateral commission on the delimitation of the border has been set up. Its activity is complicated by the fact that Lezgins live in some areas on both sides of the border - the people are divided.

Russia v Georgia

Since 1993, the border delimitation commission has been operating. Its activities are hampered by the presence of unrecognized entities - Abkhazia, South Ossetia (Georgia) and Chechnya (Russia). The problems of the Black Sea border have not been resolved: territorial waters, the economic zone and the shelf will have to be demarcated.

Russia v Türkiye

All border issues were resolved back in the Soviet period.

Russia v Ukraine

Russia considers that the Sea of ​​Azov with Kerch Strait should be considered an inland sea of ​​Russia and Ukraine. Kyiv insists on its division. The problems of the land border are being discussed along with the whole range of bilateral Russian-Ukrainian problems and are being solved as difficult as all the others.

R Russia v Belarus

The question of the border between the two states has not yet been raised.

Russia v Latvia

After gaining independence in 1991, Latvia raised the issue of recognizing the agreement with the RSFSR of 1920 and the illegality of the transfer of the Abrensky (Pytalovsky) region of Latvia to Russia in the late 1940s. Actually, Latvia did not demand the return of the territories, and in the mid-1990s, it completely removed all claims against Russia, fulfilling the conditions necessary for joining the EU.

Russia v Estonia

Despite the allegations spread by a number of media, Estonia does not officially make claims against Russia.

Kaliningrad region

This Russian semi-enclave has common boundaries with Poland and Lithuania. There are no border problems here, although, according to a number of Russian media, the idea of ​​annexing the region is growing in popularity in Germany and Lithuania.

Russia v Lithuania

An agreement on the demarcation of the border was signed. However, this treaty has not yet been ratified by Russia.

Russia v Finland

There is an agreement on the state border, documents on its demarcation have been signed.

Russia v Norway

The land border and territorial waters are documented and demarcated. The main problem of bilateral relations is the delimitation of the maritime economic zone and the shelf. Negotiations on this have been unsuccessful since 1970. The Norwegians believe that the Russian “border of polar possessions” should be revised, and insist on the principle of equal separation of the border from the island possessions of both countries.

The border of the polar possessions of Russia was established by a decree of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee in 1926. This sector, with its peak resting on the North Pole, included all the islands of the eastern part of the Arctic Ocean. Many countries are increasingly making statements about its illegality.

How real are the claims?

It is unlikely that any of Russia's current neighbors would be able to get involved in a war in order to realize their territorial claims. However, in today's world there are many other ways to achieve your goals. Russian experts are very fond of building scenarios like:

"Border conflicts are possible, fuss over the demarcation of the border, as was the situation with the Upper Lars border checkpoint on the border with Georgia"
"It is impossible not to take into account the possible provocation of ethnic and interethnic conflicts on the territory of Russia from the outside. As is happening now in the Caucasus in connection with Chechnya, on the border with Dagestan, with Abkhazia and Georgia."
"Possibly a gradual change, not in favor of Russian citizens, of the ethnic balance in the adjacent Far Eastern territories in connection with the penetration and settlement of Chinese citizens there."
"A kind of 'economic blackmail' as a reaction to an internal cataclysm in Russia. If something happens to us, some of our neighbors may present their pending territorial claims to Russia as bills for payment."

This is interesting

In addition, according to journalists' estimates, in Russia itself, over the past 10 years, about 30 territorial claims of the subjects of the Federation against each other have manifested themselves.

Moscow is arguing with the Moscow region about the ownership of Sheremetyevo and Vnukovo airports, the Tver region is arguing with the Yaroslavl region about the islands on the Mologa River. Shadrinsky and Dolmatovsky districts of the Kurgan region gravitate towards the Sverdlovsk region. Because of the disputed territories, Kalmykia and the Astrakhan region are at enmity. And this is not a complete list.

Particularly dangerous are regions such as Kabardino-Balkaria and Karachay-Cherkessia, where there have long been calls for separation.

Territorial dispute - an international dispute between states over the legal ownership of a certain territory. Demarcation disagreements of the parties, as well as a unilateral territorial claim, are not a territorial dispute.

Currently, approximately 50 countries of the world dispute certain territories with their neighbors. According to the American researcher Daniel Pipes, there are 20 such disputes in Africa, 19 in Europe, 12 in the Middle East, and 8 in Latin America.

In the post-Soviet space, the most serious territorial dispute arose due to Nagorno-Karabakh, a territory in the south-west of Azerbaijan inhabited by Armenians. In 1991-1994 A war was waged between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh. Nowadays, Nagorno-Karabakh is a de facto independent state, calling itself the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. Azerbaijan and the international community consider Nagorno-Karabakh to be part of Azerbaijan.

In December 1963, due to the aggravation of relations between the Cypriot Greeks and Turks, caused by outside interference in internal affairs Cyprus, the joint activities of the Greek and Turkish members of the House of Representatives ceased. Turkish Cypriots do not participate in the work of the House of Representatives, the Council of Ministers and other state bodies of Cyprus. The Greek Community Chamber was abolished in March 1965. The Turkish Cypriots in December 1967 created a “provisional Turkish administration”.

The Executive Council of the “Provisional Turkish Administration”, headed by the Vice-President of the Republic, exercised executive power in the Turkish regions of Cyprus. On February 13, 1975, the leadership of the Turkish community unilaterally proclaimed the so-called “Turkish Federative State of Cyprus” in the northern part of the island. Rauf Denktash was elected as the "first president" of the "Turkish Federative State of Cyprus". In June 1975, the Turkish community approved the constitution of this “state”. On November 15, 1983, the Legislative Assembly of the “Turkish Federative State of Cyprus” unilaterally proclaimed the so-called. an independent Turkish Cypriot state, which is called the "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus". The “Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus” is still recognized only by Turkey.

Some islands of the Kuril chain are the subject of Japan's territorial claims against Russia. The Japanese link the conclusion of a peace treaty with the solution of the problem Southern Kuriles.

Kashmir is a disputed area in the far north of the Indian subcontinent. India lays claim to all of its territory. Pakistan and China are contesting India's rights, with Pakistan initially claiming possession of the entire area, and now it has actually included the northwestern part of Kashmir in its composition. Under Chinese control is the northeastern part of the territory of Kashmir. The rest is occupied by the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir.

One of the most important problems in relations between China and India over the past fifty years has been the unresolved territorial-border dispute over Tibet. On August 25, 1959, the first widely publicized Sino-Indian armed incident took place. Following this incident, the PRC presented significant territorial claims to India.

The conflict between Syria and Israel has not been resolved golan heights. In 1967 they were occupied by Israel. In 1973, the UN established a buffer zone between Syrian and Israeli forces. In 1981, the heights were annexed by Israel. The new status is not recognized by the world community.

Argentina claims to Falkland (Malvinas) Islands in the South Atlantic. Disputes between Argentina and Great Britain about the ownership of the islands began in the early 19th century, when the first British settlers appeared on the islands.

Territorial dispute flares up between Canada and Denmark Hans Islands located near Greenland. Large deposits of oil and gas have been discovered on the shelf between Greenland and Hans, and both countries lay claim to these resources.

Islands of strategic importance Bassa da India, Europe, Juan de Nova and Glorioso(Indian Ocean near the African coast of Madagascar) are the subject of a dispute between France and Madagascar. Now controlled by France.

In December 1996 Imia rocks(Greek name) or Kardak (Turkish) in the Aegean became the cause of the conflict between Greece and Turkey. The conflict was stopped by the international community, but both countries did not give up their claims.

Chagos Archipelago in the Indian Ocean, consisting of 65 islands, the largest of which is Diego Garcia, with an area of ​​40 sq. km, is the subject of a dispute between Mauritius and the UK.

Spratly Archipelago V pacific ocean- the subject of a dispute between China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Malaysia and the Philippines. Brunei has also claimed part of the archipelago since 1984. The struggle for these islands has repeatedly led to armed conflicts. In particular, in 1974, a naval battle took place between the navies of China and South Vietnam.

Paracel Islands in the South China Sea are the subject of dispute between China and Vietnam. China took over the islands in 1974 and is now home to a Chinese-built air force base.

Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea are now disputed between Japan, China and Taiwan, but are controlled by the Japanese Navy. Oil reserves have been discovered near them.

Islands in Corisco Bay on the coast West Africa, the largest of which is the island of Bagne, with an area of ​​several hundred square meters, are the subject of a dispute between Equatorial Guinea and Gabon. The reason for the dispute is the unsettled state borders that were formed back in the colonial era.

San Andres Islands And Providencia in the Caribbean are the subject of a dispute between Nicaragua and Colombia. This territorial dispute is extremely difficult to resolve, because the maritime borders of not only Nicaragua and Colombia, but also Costa Rica, Honduras, Jamaica and Panama depend on the ownership of the islands.

Island Abu Musa and the Tanb Islands (Indian Ocean, Persian Gulf, Strait of Hormuz) - the subject of a dispute between Iran and the United United Arab Emirates. The islands are now controlled by Iran, which took control of them in 1971. The conflict between Iran and the UAE periodically flares up and turns into a phase of an exchange of harsh statements.

The most peaceful dispute over territory of Antarctica, which are claimed by seven states: Australia, France, Norway, New Zealand, Argentina, Chile and Great Britain, with the latter three countries contesting a number of territories of the ice continent from each other. Since all claimants to the territory are parties to the Atlantic Treaty, signed in 1959, recognizing the sixth continent as a zone of peace and international cooperation, free from weapons, the transition of these disputes to a military stage is practically impossible.

The material was prepared on the basis of information from RIA Novosti and open sources