Abstract on the topic:

“Disputed Territories”

Student of 8"A" class

linguistic gymnasium No. 13

Korostylev Vladimir

Scientific supervisor: Galina Ivanovna Lokteva

I.Introduction……………………………………………………page 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…………………………………page 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 Comoros, regarding the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) between Great Britain and Argentina, the War of Palestinian Independence, etc. Russia is also among the disputants; Japan is laying 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 are unlikely to ever know) when the first people appeared on our islands. Archaeological discoveries of recent decades allow us to say only that this happened in the Paleolithic era. The ethnicity of the population of the islands remains a mystery until the arrival of the first Europeans and Japanese. And they appeared on the islands only in the 17th century and found them in the Kuril Islands

and southern Sakhalin Ainu, in northern Sakhalin - Nivkh. Probably even then, the Ulta (Oroks) lived in the central and northern regions of Sakhalin. The first European expedition to reach the Kuril and Sakhalin

shores, was the expedition of the Dutch navigator M.G. Fries. He not only explored and mapped the southeast of Sakhalin and the Southern Kuril Islands, but also proclaimed Urup the possession of Holland, which, however, remained 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 discovers the northwestern coast of Sakhalin, and in 1697 V.V. Atlasov learns about the existence of the Kuril Islands. Already in the 10s. XVIII century The process of studying and gradually annexing the Kuril Islands to the Russian state begins. Russia's successes in the development of the Kuril Islands became possible thanks to the enterprise, courage and patience of D.Ya. Antsiferov, I.P. Kozyrevsky, I.M. Evreinov, F.F. Luzhin,

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

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

At the end of the 18th century. Research off the coast of Sakhalin was carried out by a French expedition under the command of J.-F. La Perouse and an English expedition under the command of V.R. Broughton. Their work is associated with the emergence of a theory about the peninsular position of Sakhalin. The Russian also made his contribution to this theory.

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. Nevelskoy's discoveries were followed by the annexation of Sakhalin to Russia. Russian military posts and villages appear on the island one after another. In 1869-1906. Sakhalin was the largest penal servitude in Russia. From the beginning of the 19th century. Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands are becoming the object of a Russian-Japanese territorial dispute. In 1806-1807 On Southern Sakhalin and Iturup, Russian sailors destroyed Japanese settlements. The response to this was the capture of the Russian navigator V.M. Golovnin by the Japanese in Kunashir. Over the past two centuries, Russian-Japanese

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

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

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

The last time the Russian-Japanese border underwent changes was in 1945, when our country, as a result of victory in World War II, regained South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands. In August-September 1945, the Soviets, with US approval, occupied all of the Kuril Islands, and in 1946 the US Occupation Administration announced to the Japanese government that the entire Kuril Islands 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 negotiations under the pretext of disagreements regarding US actions in the Cold War. Despite this, the final text of the San Francisco Peace Treaty clearly states that Japan “renounces all rights, claims and claims to the Kuril Islands.”

At this time, Prime Minister Shigeru Yoshida, who was leading the negotiations on the Japanese side, publicly stated that Japan was dissatisfied with this formulation, especially in relation to the southern part of the islands. Administratively, Habomai and Shikotan are under Japanese administration

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

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

appeal to the International Court of Justice. Regarding Japanese claims to the remaining islands, the answer was a very loud silence.

In 1955, Japan began attempting 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 United States. But conservatives in the Foreign Ministry, fearing any Japanese-Soviet reconciliation, immediately intervened and included Iturup and Kunashir in the list of territorial claims. Moscow said no, and the conservatives calmed down.

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

Shigemitsu began with the standard Japanese demands of Iturup and Kunashir, but was immediately refused. However, the Soviets again offered to return Shikotan and Habomai, provided that a peace treaty was signed.

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

Conservatives again took decisive action.

Shigemitsu was recalled and on his way home was “intercepted” by the same John Foster Dulles, who just 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 ceased to claim all of the Northern Territories, the United States would not

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

Scientists have argued a lot about how Dulles managed to make such a 180-degree turn. One theory claims that in 1951 the United States knew that if it did not comply with the Yalta agreements on the Kuril Islands, Moscow might cease to comply with the Yalta agreements.

agreement on Austria - this problem had practically disappeared by 1956. Another interesting theory, put forward by Professor Kimitada Miwa of Sophia University in Tokyo, argues that the American position in 1951 was the result of a deal with the Soviets, which, by decision of the UN Security Council, assigned Micronesia to the United States three years earlier.

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

Allowing the United States to turn to its advantage 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 Kuril Islands, the US holds Okinawa. Today's Japanese position completely ignores all the subtleties described above. It simply states that the Northern Territories are Japan's ancestral lands ("koyu no ryodo") and as such should be returned. Regarding the San Francisco Treaty, Tokyo puts forward two extremely controversial arguments. The first is that since the treaty does not say who exactly should receive the very Kuril Islands that Japan abandoned, anyone can lay claim to them, including Japan itself. Another argument is that the Northern Territories do not belong to those Kuril Islands that Japan abandoned, and cannot, being, again, “original Japanese lands.” The last argument, however, is not all right. If Japan had not really given up the Northern Territories in 1951, then why would Yoshida tell the world in 1951 that he was upset about 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 Treaty of San Francisco included Iturup and Kunashir. The Foreign Office's Treaty Office, responding officially to this request on behalf of the Prime Minister, replied to Parliament on October 19, 1951: "Unfortunately, yes, it does." Over the following years, Foreign Ministry officials commented on this key point: that the response to parliament on October 19 was: a) misunderstood, b) outdated, and, finally, c) was “kokunai muki,” 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 point out the vigorous support from the United States, which, since 1956, has officially maintained that Iturup and Kunashir are definitely not territories which Japan abandoned in San Francisco. It is clear that the US, which says the exact opposite of what it said in 1951, is simply using a little Cold War-style ploy to keep Tokyo and Moscow at bay - but this suggestion is politely ignored. But not only the United States participated in this process. In 1951, Britain was instrumental in forcing Japan to give up the Kuril Islands, and the British embassy in Tokyo has in its archives a report from 1955 calling the Japanese unexpected demand for Iturup and Kunashir "ridiculous and naive." Today, Britain supports the same demand as entirely reasonable. Australia, which in 1951 made efforts to prevent any concessions to Yoshida on territorial issues (out of fear that post-war Japan would use any border uncertainty as a pretext for militarization), also now unequivocally supports the Japanese position. In short, what began as an effort to punish Japan for wartime aggression turned into the most successful operation of the Cold War to keep Japan in the Western camp. I am not suggesting that the Japanese position should be completely abandoned. If Tokyo referred to the reluctance with which Yoshida abandoned the Kuril Islands, and especially their southern part in San Francisco, and presented some secret documents demonstrating what exactly the United States used to force him to surrender, this would constitute a good legal basis for that to seek a renegotiation of this part of the peace agreement. But today Japan is trapped by 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 that Moscow return these “ancestral lands,” not realizing that in the face of precisely this demand, Moscow cannot give in, even if it wanted to, for fear of creating a precedent that will allow its other neighbors to lay claim to the former “ancestral lands.” ". Hashimoto's proposal that Moscow can control the territories for several more years, provided that it recognizes Japanese sovereignty over them, shows how inadequately Tokyo perceives both the laws of international diplomacy and the Russian mentality. Meanwhile, most Japanese, even educated ones, have completely forgotten what exactly happened then, in the 50s, and are convinced that Tokyo’s demands are absolutely legal. The government is under pressure to continue negotiations in a tough manner and ignore Moscow's regular hints that it is still ready to return Shikotan and Habomai. Such a dispute is doomed to continue forever. And John Foster Dulles is giggling in his grave.

I believe that the Kuril Islands should belong to Russia, because... Japan abandoned them in 1951 and it is too late to abandon its decisions; it lost the war and must endure the hardships associated with it. After all, if all nations 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 first they need to sign a peace treaty, and only then talk about territorial disputes.

There are quite a lot of territorial disputes surrounding the nationality of certain islands and territories and, as practice shows, resolving them is quite difficult.

Relations between Russia and Japan have been clouded for half a century by the question of the unsettled status of the four islands of the Kuril chain. The solution to the Kuril problem has been postponed indefinitely, but relations between Russia and Japan are only suffering as a result.

Often islands of discord become the reason for political and diplomatic battles and sometimes lead to bloody armed conflicts. As a rule, the reason for battles is not the islands themselves, but what is located next to them - oil, commercial fishing areas, etc. Ownership of one or another island gives the state the right to economic control over a vast area of ​​the ocean. At the same time, sometimes the claims of powers to a God-forgotten piece of land are sometimes perceived as a political curiosity.

One of the textbook examples of the successful resolution of a territorial dispute is the dispute over the uninhabited Clipperton Island between France and Mexico. At the beginning of the 18th century, the island was discovered by the British pirate Clipperton; in 1855, France declared it its territory on the basis that Clipperton had been a privateer in the service of the King of France for some time. In 1897, the island was captured by Mexico, which declared it its property on the grounds that it was located near its territorial waters and was actively used by Mexican fishermen and sailors. In 1935, international arbitration awarded the right to the island to France.

In the 1970s, compromises were reached between Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, Bahrain and Qatar (Hawar Islands). In 2000 Saudi Arabia and Yemen decided on jurisdiction over the Farasan Islands, and Yemen and Eritrea, with international mediation, agreed on the fate of the Hanish Islands.

Falkland Islands (Malvinas). South Atlantic

Two large islands and about 100 small ones. The islands were discovered by the British navigator Francis Drake back in the era of the Great geographical discoveries(independently of him, these islands were discovered by the Spaniards). And since then the UK considers them to be under British jurisdiction. However, they are located near the Argentine coast and approximately 16 thousand km from London. Disputes between Argentina and Great Britain over the ownership of the islands began in the early 19th century, when the first British settlers appeared on the islands. In 1980, about 1.8 thousand people lived permanently on the islands.

In 1982, Argentine troops captured the Falklands. These actions were condemned by the UN Security Council. The British expeditionary force, which arrived at the islands, drove back the Argentines. During the fighting, 250 British and 750 Argentine soldiers were killed. Argentina did not renounce its rights to the islands. The conflict is unlikely to be resolved in the near future, as large oil deposits have been discovered in the Falklands region.

Machias Seal Island. North Atlantic, Gulf of Maine near the coast of the USA and Canada

The two-hectare island is claimed by the United States and Canada. An American captain first landed on Machias Seal Island in 1826. However, in 1828 a British guard post was established on it (Canada was part of the British Empire). Diplomatic battles over the ownership of a piece of land were fought in the mid-19th century, but gradually lost their intensity. Nowadays this question periodically comes up in the press. The diplomatic departments of both countries prefer not to raise it. Nowadays there is a lighthouse on the island and two caretakers - Canadians - live permanently. In addition to them, the island is home to several million seabirds. American and Canadian tourists are free to visit the island.

Islands in Corisco Bay. Coast of West Africa

Several tiny pieces of land, the largest of which is the Bagne Islands, covering an area of ​​several hundred square meters, are the subject of dispute between equatorial Guinea and Gabon. The reason for the dispute is the unsettled state borders that were formed during the colonial era. Clashes between police, military and civilians of both countries have been ongoing for about 20 years, since it is in this area that fishermen from both countries conduct intensive fishing. Attempts by the Organization of African Unity to resolve the conflict, undertaken in the mid-1980s, did not lead to concrete results. Oil discoveries were made in the area in the 1990s, making resolving the dispute even more challenging.

Hans Island. North Atlantic, near Greenland

The small island is not listed on all geographical maps. Denmark claims that the island was discovered by the Vikings and is geographically closer to Greenland than to Canada and therefore belongs to it. Canada refers to the fact that the island once belonged to Great Britain. Fishing is active near the island, and Eskimos use it for migration. In late 2002, Denmark sent a patrol ship to the island to demonstrate its priority. The move sparked outrage in Canada. The parties are currently negotiating the fate of the island.

Islands of San Andres and Providencia. Caribbean Sea

A group of islands and coral reefs located off the coast of Nicaragua. There are a number of resorts located on them. The islands are the subject of a dispute between Nicaragua and Colombia. In 1928, the two countries entered into a treaty recognizing Nicaragua's sovereignty over the Mosquito Coast and Colombia's sovereignty over the islands. In 1979, after the victory of the Sandinista revolution in Nicaragua, Managua announced that it would denounce the 1928 treaty under the pretext that in 1928 Nicaragua was under the control of US troops. The islands were declared an integral part of Nicaragua.

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. Through the mediation of the Organization of American States, the parties agreed not to use force in resolving this conflict - all military formations and warships were withdrawn from the disputed zone.

Islands of Sapodilla Cayes. Caribbean Sea

The islands are part barrier reef. Nobody lives on them. The government of Belize declared its sovereignty over the islands, which caused protests from neighboring Honduras and Guatemala, which also declared their rights to these pieces of land. The subject of dispute is, first of all, the fish stocks of this area, as well as their tourism opportunities (9 thousand tourists visit them annually). The parties exchanged notes of protest and are now preparing claims to be filed in international courts.

Navassa Island. Caribbean Sea

The island, with an area of ​​approximately 10 km², is located between the coasts of Haiti, Cuba and Jamaica and is currently the subject of a dispute between the United States and Haiti. In 1857, American entrepreneurs began developing guano reserves on the island, and the United States declared it its territory. In 1858, the Haitian Empire made a similar statement. There were no armed conflicts between the parties to the dispute. In 1898, guano mining was completed, and the island lost its permanent population. There is a lighthouse on it and Haitian fishermen periodically land there. The United States plans to create a nature reserve on it.

Islands of Perejil, Velez de la Gomera, Penon, Chafarinas, etc. Strait of Gibraltar, Mediterranean Sea

These uninhabited islands are the subject of a dispute between Spain and Morocco (formerly a Spanish colony). The smaller islands are constantly used by drug traffickers, smugglers and illegal immigrants. In addition, they are located in a busy shipping area.

In July 2002, Moroccan troops captured the island of Perejil and left behind a six-man garrison. Spain first tried to resolve the conflict diplomatically, and then landed rangers and returned the island. Neither side suffered any losses. Morocco, which managed to declare Perejil its territory, called Spain’s actions a declaration of war, but did not take any retaliatory steps. The parties refused direct negotiations, so the conflict was resolved with the help of mediators. Currently, there are no state flags or other signs of nationality on the island, and there are no permanent military posts.

Imia Island (Kardak). Aegean Sea

In December 1996, the Imia (Greek name) or Kardak (Turkish) rocks became the cause of conflict between Greece and Turkey. The history of ownership of the islands is very confusing. They were part of the Ottoman Empire before Greece gained independence in the 18th century. After this, no one claimed the islands until the Dodecanese archipelago, which includes Imia, was occupied by Italy at the beginning of the 20th century. In 1923, the islands were transferred by Italy to Greece. In the 1970s, Turkey made a number of statements proving that Italy, which seized these islands from Turkey, did not have the right to transfer them to Greece.

In 1996, a Turkish ship was wrecked off the coast of Imia, which turned for help not to the Greeks, but to the Turks. This was the beginning of the conflict because Greece perceived the entry of Turkish military rescuers into its territorial waters as an act of aggression. A week later, a correspondent from the leading Turkish newspaper Hürriyet landed on the island, tore down the Greek flag that was flying on the island, and installed a Turkish one. A few hours later, Greek sailors landed on the island and restored the status quo. Military squadrons of both states began cruising near Imiya.

The conflict was stopped by the international community, but both countries did not give up their claims. Attempts to resolve the issue in an international court are rejected by Turkey, which believes that its historical rights to these territories do not need to be confirmed, and the treaties to which the Greeks refer were not approved by the League of Nations (the forerunner of the UN).

Bassas da India Islands, Europa, Juan de Nova and Glorieuses. Indian Ocean near the African coast of Madagascar

The strategically important islands (the largest has an area of ​​200 m²) are the subject of a dispute between France and Madagascar (a former French colony). The conflict did not go beyond the exchange of diplomatic notes. Now controlled by France.

Tromelin Island. Indian Ocean, near the East Coast of Madagascar

Subject of dispute between France and Mauritius. The conflict did not go beyond the exchange of diplomatic notes. Now controlled by France.

Chagos Archipelago (practically the geographical center of the Indian Ocean)

65 islands, the largest of which is Diego Garcia, with an area of ​​40 km². Subject of dispute between Mauritius and Great Britain. Diego Garcia is home to a large air force base of great strategic importance. From it, in particular, American bombers carried out combat missions during military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Mauritius and Chagos were once colonies of France and were under the same rule. Then these colonies were captured by Great Britain. After it was decided to grant independence to Mauritius in 1965, Great Britain tore Chagos away from it. In 1972, when the decision was made to create a military base, Great Britain resettled approximately 2 thousand indigenous inhabitants of the archipelago (mostly descendants of black slaves) to Mauritius. Now they are demanding the return of their lands. The conflict did not go beyond the exchange of diplomatic notes and protest demonstrations.

South Talpatty Island (New Moor). Indian Ocean, Ganges Delta

The “new” island - South Talpatti - Bangladeshi name, New Moore - Indian - arose as a result of land reclamation by the waters of the Ganges and Brahmaputra rivers. The island is important because it allows for control of shipping in the busy delta. In addition, significant oil reserves have been explored nearby. So far the conflict has not entered an active stage, since it is not clear what India and Bangladesh should share - now even accurate maps of the island are missing.

Abu Musa Island and Tanb Islands. Indian Ocean, Persian Gulf, Strait of Hormuzd

The subject of the dispute between Iran and the United United Arab Emirates. The islands are now controlled by Iran, which took control of them in 1971. The history of ownership of the islands is complicated: at first they were part of Persia and Iran, in the 19th century the British drove out the Iranians and created their own naval base there to fight pirates, and when the UAE was granted independence, they transferred the rights to these islands to the new state. The Iranians captured these territories two days before the withdrawal of British troops and the formal declaration of independence of the UAE. The conflict between Iran and the UAE periodically flares up and enters the phase of exchanging harsh statements.

Spratly Archipelago. Pacific Ocean

A group of approximately 100 islets and reefs in the South China Sea. Approximately 7 billion tons of high-quality oil have been discovered nearby. The oil is shallow, but international energy companies refuse to develop these fields until questions of the islands' nationality are resolved. Disputed between China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Malaysia and the Philippines, these powers have garrisoned 45 islands. Part of the archipelago has also been claimed by Brunei since 1984, but there are no Bruneian soldiers in the conflict zone yet. The struggle for these islands has repeatedly led to armed conflicts. In particular, in 1974, a naval battle took place between the Chinese and South Vietnamese navies. In 1988, the Chinese sank a Vietnamese transport carrying soldiers.

Paracel Islands. Pacific Ocean. South China Sea

Subject of dispute between China and Vietnam. China captured the islands in 1974 after a fierce battle with the South Vietnamese garrison. Nowadays, several hundred people live on the islands, who mainly fish and maintain a large air force base built by China. The islands are of great strategic importance - they are a kind of “key” to the South China Sea. In addition, the adjacent waters are rich in fish.

Pedra Blanca Island (Pulau Batu Puteh) and two small islets. Indian Ocean, Singapore Strait

The islet is a disputed territory between Singapore and Malaysia. Singapore built a lighthouse on the island, prompting protests from Malaysia. The island has no economic significance and can only be used as a navigational landmark. The parties perceive their rights to these territories as a matter of national honor. Singapore and Malaysia are constantly negotiating the fate of the islands, and naval exercises of both countries take place near them.

Matthew and Hunter Islands. Pacific Ocean, approximately midway between Australia and South America

The islands were once jointly owned by France and Great Britain and administratively belonged to the New Hebrides archipelago. In 1975, France officially declared the islands its territory. In 1980, the New Hybrids gained independence, became the Republic of Vanuatu and laid claim to the islands. In 1982, the islands were officially declared part of Vanuatu (under the names Unaenag and Umaenupane). There is a small French garrison on the islands. Sovereignty over the islands gives the right to claim control over a significant part of the Pacific Ocean.

Takeshima Islands (Tok-Do, Liancourt). Pacific Ocean, between South Korea and Japan

The uninhabited islands (total area of ​​about 250 meters²) were discovered by French navigators, and since 1904 they have been declared part of Japan. They were under the administrative control of Korea, which at that time was part of the Japanese Empire. After Korea gained independence, it laid claim to the island. In 1952, South Korea officially declared Takeshima as its territory and planted its flag. In response, Japanese sailors landed on the island, arrested six Koreans and hoisted the Japanese flag. A few hours later, superior Korean forces recaptured the islands. Over the course of six decades, South Korea has built a radio station and a lighthouse on the island and permanently maintains a garrison of 12 people on it. All these acts caused notes of protest sent by the Japanese Foreign Ministry. Negotiations about the fate of the island have been ongoing since 1965.

In Japan, there is the "Takeshima Society", which demands the return of ancestral Japanese lands. She organizes many actions together with the Northern Territories Society, demanding the transfer of four islands of the Kuril chain to Japan. Control over Takeshima gives the right to control 20 thousand km² of ocean rich in fish.

Senkaku Islands. Pacific Ocean, East China Sea

Eight islands with a total area of ​​7 km². Oil reserves were discovered near them. The islands were discovered by Chinese navigators, but in 1895 Japan declared them its property, to which the then Chinese government did not pay attention. Now the islands are the subject of a dispute between Japan, China and Taiwan, but are controlled by the Japanese Navy. Periodically, extremist demonstrators from Japan, China and Taiwan head to the islands and try to plant national flags on them. Sometimes these actions turn into violent fights with representatives of the opposite camp or the Japanese military. In 1996, one person died as a result of a similar collision. In 2003, the Japanese government announced that it intended to lease the three islands to a Japanese entrepreneur. Taiwan and China immediately issued strong statements condemning the decision.

On September 28, 1939, a Treaty of Friendship and Border between the USSR and Germany was concluded. It was signed by German Foreign Minister Ribbentrop and People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs of the USSR Molotov. We decided to talk about 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 the German Foreign Minister Ribbentrop and the People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs of the USSR Molotov. According to this treaty, 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. According to this agreement, Lithuania passed into the sphere of influence of the USSR. This ensured the Soviet Union that Germany would not interfere in its relations with Lithuania, which ultimately led to 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 have important military-strategic and economic significance. However, the southern islands of the archipelago - Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and the Habomai group - are disputed by Japan, which includes them in 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 Russian Federation on legal grounds based on the results of the Second World War, enshrined in the UN Charter, and Russian sovereignty over them, which has appropriate international legal confirmation, is not subject to doubt.

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

They took one and a half islands

Problem disputed islands Tarabarov and Bolshoy 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 China's weakness, Russia annexed 165.9 thousand square kilometers of Primorye, which were under joint management. China was left without access to the Sea of ​​Japan. During World War II, an agreement was concluded between Stalin and the commander-in-chief of the PLA, Mao Zedong, who controlled the northern regions of China, to draw 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 ​​Tarabarov and Bolshoy Ussuriysky islands at the confluence of the Amur and Ussuri rivers near Khabarovsk. Tarabarov was completely given to China, and Ussuriysky - only partially. The border line, according to the document, runs both in the middle of the rivers and on land. The territory of both sections (about 375 sq. km) is distributed approximately in half.

They wanted to chop 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 Sergei Lavrov and Urmas Paet signed agreements on the state border and delimitation of maritime spaces in the Narva and Finnish Gulfs, which secured the passage of the state border between the two states along the former administrative border between the RSFSR and the Estonian SSR “with minor adjustments to 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 in exchange for other territories. The treaty was not ratified by Russia due to 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 in the famous “twilight zone” in the Barents Sea. This is a disputed body of water the size of half Germany or Italy, two thirds Great Britain.

The essence of the dispute comes down to the fact that Russia drew the border along the coast of the island of Spitsbergen, Norway believed that the border should be equidistant from Spitsbergen on one side and Franz Josef Land and the island of Novaya Zemlya on the other. Since the states were on friendly terms, the border dispute rarely resulted in any action, and Russian fishing vessels were occasionally detained. However, the dispute later escalated, as hydrocarbon reserves were discovered in the Barents Sea, including in the disputed territories. In April 2010, the parties agreed that a new delimitation line would divide the disputed territory into two equal parts; the 40-year-old dispute was finally resolved 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. km. in favor of Norway.

Crimea territory of disputes

For many years, controversy has not subsided around, perhaps, the most beautiful and favorite vacation spot of the Soviet people. 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 Crimea, which could be returned, because... many did not approve of its transfer to Ukraine in 1954. At the same time, 80 percent of Crimean residents said that they consider themselves citizens of Russia, and Crimea is part of its territory. But Ukraine still had one very significant lever of pressure on Russia - the Black Sea Fleet. In January 1992, the then President of Ukraine L. Kravchuk announced taking the Black Sea Fleet under his wing. This was a disaster for Russia. But the transfer of Crimea to Ukraine is a very huge loss for Russia.

This list of territories of the Holy Roman Empire contains territories that were once part of it. Featured in alphabetical list links recommend either an article of the same name directly, in the case of cities, mainly a general city article... Wikipedia

Territorial dispute is an international dispute between two or more states over the legal ownership of a certain territory. Each of the parties to the dispute claims that this territory is its property, since... ... Wikipedia

Europe- (Europe) Europe is a densely populated, highly urbanized part of the world named after a mythological goddess, forming together with Asia the continent of Eurasia and having an area of ​​about 10.5 million km² (approximately 2% of the total area of ​​the Earth) and ... Investor Encyclopedia

This term has other meanings, see Ingushetia (meanings). Coordinates: 43°19′ N. w. 45°00′ E. d. / 43.316667° n. w. 45° E. d. ... Wikipedia

People's Republic of China, People's Republic of China, state in the Center, and East. Asia. The name China adopted in Russia comes from the ethnonym Khitan (aka China) of the Mong group. tribes that conquered the northern territory in the Middle Ages. regions of modern times China and formed the state of Liao (X... ... Geographical encyclopedia

Lavrov, Sergey- Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Minister of Foreign Affairs of Russia since 2004. He held this post in the offices of Vladimir Putin (from May 2008), Viktor Zubkov (2007-2008) and Mikhail Fradkov (2004-2007). Previously, the Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to... ... Encyclopedia of Newsmakers

BYZANTINE EMPIRE. PART II- Law and Church Reception of Roman law in Byzantium. The concept of Byzantine law Legal culture of V. and. from the beginning of its history until the fall of the field, it was based on the reception of classical Roman law. Sources of Rome. rights were divided into... Orthodox Encyclopedia

Perhaps this article or section needs to be shortened. Reduce the volume of text in accordance with the recommendations of the rules on the balance of presentation and the size of articles. More information may be on the talk page... Wikipedia

View of Balaklava, TASS

Territorial claims to Russia, as to the most big country on the planet, the phenomenon is not new and Russia’s reaction in this matter is a real reason for pride. For each “disputed” territory, he calmly and politely, with sympathy and understanding, tries to explain that all lands belonging to Russia and the Russian people will forever remain with Russia. But the leaders of a number of countries do not want to take this obvious position into account, constantly making noise around the so-called “disputed” Russian territories.

But the most interesting thing is that Russia does not make territorial claims to any country in the world, and as it has happened historically, this is how it has turned out. After all, if we start presenting it, we will have to remember the powerful Russian Empire, whose territory back in the 19th century was 21.8 million km² (that is, 1/6 of the land) - it ranked second in the world, after the British Empire. And this does not take into account the territory of Alaska, which was part of it from 1744 to 1867 and occupied an area of ​​1,717,854 km², without taking into account the Aleutian Islands, as well as parts of the Pacific coast of the USA and Canada... Russia does not remind us of all this, but it could ...

So which countries have territorial claims to Russia?

The Republic of Korea: Noktundo Island

Photo: smitsmitty.livejournal.com

Noktundo has belonged to the Korean Joseon Dynasty since the 15th century. In 1587, a battle took place on its territory between detachments of Jurchen nomads and a local garrison under the command of Yi Sunsin, the national hero of Korea.

During the shallowing of the northern branch of the Tumannaya, the river bed changed from time to time, as a result of which Noktundo sometimes connected with the land of Primorye. Despite this, the territory of the island continued to be under Korean jurisdiction.

In 1860, without the consent of the Korean side, Noktundo ceded to the Russian Empire in accordance with the Beijing Treaty between Qing China and Russia. Throughout the 20th century, the territory of the island was part of the Khasansky district of Primorsky Krai.

In 1990, the USSR and the DPRK signed an agreement on establishing the state border line along the Tumannaya fairway, thanks to which the territory former island was recognized as Soviet. This deal was not recognized by South Korea, which continues to consider the Noktundo territory its own.

Japan: Kuril Islands

Perhaps the most relevant today are Japan's claims against Russia regarding the southern Kuril Islands: Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan and the Habomai archipelago. These territories first appeared on the map of Russia in the middle of the 18th century, when the captain of the Russian fleet, Martyn Petrovich Shpanberg, marked the Lesser Kuril Ridge on it. Catherine II formalized these annexations by decree of 1786, calling them “lands acquired by Russian sailors.”

However, already in 1855 they were transferred to Japan according to the Treaty of Shimoda as a guarantee of “permanent peace and sincere friendship between Russia and Japan.” This agreement was followed by the St. Petersburg Treaty, according to which all the Kuril Islands were transferred to Japan in exchange for the Japanese part of Sakhalin. The latter was subsequently lost during the Russo-Japanese War.

The chance to return the lost territories presented itself after the Yalta Conference on February 11, 1945, at which an agreement was reached on the USSR's entry into the war against Japan, subject to the transfer of Southern Sakhalin and all the Kuril Islands to it. In accordance with this agreement, General of the Allied Forces Douglas MacArthur in 1946, by a special Memorandum, excluded the Kuril Islands (Chishima Islands), the Habomai group of islands (Habomadze) and the island of Sikotan from the territories of the Land of the Rising Sun.

However, a peace treaty between Russia and Japan was never signed. Japan refused to recognize a number of the Kuril Islands, which were transferred to Russia, as “Kuril Islands”. According to the official position of the Land of the Rising Sun, the islands of Iturup, Shikotan, Kunashir and Habomai (Southern Kuriles) were not part of the Kuril Islands and Japan did not abandon them.

The territorial dispute only worsened during the Cold War. In 1956, the USSR, according to the maritime declaration, was ready to cede the islands of Habomai and Shikotan to Japan, leaving behind the strategically important Kunashir and Iturup. However, in the event of such a compromise, the United States threatened the Land of the Rising Sun with the deprivation of the Ryukyu archipelago with the island of Okinawa, which was then under American control.

The failed compromise was, in fact, the last precedent in history when the Kuril issue could move forward. The Treaty on Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan, adopted shortly after this, legitimized the presence of American troops on Japanese territory, which was naturally regarded by the USSR as a threat to its own interests. The dispute “about the northern territories” has reached a complete dead end.

Today, the four islands of the South Kuril Islands, as well as the status of the Northern Islands and South Sakhalin, remain the main stumbling block in Russian-Japanese relations, which prevents summing up the results of World War II and signing a peace treaty. According to Russia’s position, all the Kuril Islands, including Iturup, Shikotan, Kunashir and Habomai, as well as all of Sakhalin, belong to the Russian Federation legally, following the results of World War II.

Russia is still ready to make concessions in the form of the islands of Habomai and Shikotan. Japan, whose position is consistently supported by the United States, considers all the Southern Kuril Islands to be its ancestral lands, illegally occupied by Russia, and the Northern Kuril Islands and Southern Sakhalin as territories with an uncertain status. For its part, a peace treaty is possible only with the return of all four disputed islands. At the same time, there is a third force - the indigenous Ainu people, who insist on their sovereign rights to Southern Islands.

Indigenous people of Aina

The situation sometimes reaches the point of absurdity. Thus, in 2012, the Japanese government officially expressed regret over Russian President Dmitry Medvedev’s visit to Kunashir Island, calling it “serious obstacles in bilateral relations.”

The return of the Kuril Islands is the cornerstone of the foreign policy of the current Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. Today, Japanese media take the position that the territorial issue has finally moved forward, due to Vladimir Putin's statement that the lack of a peace treaty with Japan is abnormal.

Latvia: claims to Pytalovo

The legacy of the revolution and the subsequent division of the Russian Empire was a long-term territorial dispute between Russia and Latvia over the Pytalovsky district of the Pskov region. This territory was transferred to the latter under the terms of the Riga Peace Treaty between Soviet Russia and Latvia of 1920. According to the official Latvian version, when determining the border in 1920, the ethnographic principle was applied. According to other sources, Latvia insisted on transferring this region to it, since it had an important railway junction. In any case, Pytalovo became part of the separated Latvia, and was soon renamed Jaunlatgale.

But the lost territories were returned twenty years later, in 1940, after Latvia was included in the USSR as the Latvian SSR. And in 1944, Pytalovo and the surrounding area became part of the RSFSR, after liberation from Nazi occupation. After the collapse of the USSR, Latvia refused to recognize these territorial changes, calling its inclusion in the Union of Socialist Republics an occupation, and Pytalovo an illegally annexed territory, insisting on the return of the 1920 borders. The area with the telling name “Pytalovo” has long become a source of irritation in relations between Moscow and Riga.

He disrupted the signing of the Russian-Latvian border agreement when Latvia unexpectedly included in the project a unilateral, “clarifying” declaration with claims to these territories. According to Latvian politicians, the fact that Pytalovo was owned by Russia violated the Latvian constitution, according to which the border (naturally, corresponding to the 1920 border) cannot be changed without the consent of citizens in a referendum. In response to this, Vladimir Putin uttered his famous phrase: “It’s their ears from a dead donkey, not the Pytalovsky district.”

Latvia could have insisted for a long time on its undoubted ownership of the “five kilometers” of the Pskov region, if not for its desire to join the European Union, one of the main requirements of which is clearly defined borders. In 2007, President Vike-Freiberga renounced her territorial claims, expressing the hope that this would: “help unfreeze the really frozen relations with our eastern neighbor.”

Finland: the Karelian question

While Latvia has abandoned its territorial claims, in Finland there is a growing number of public organizations advocating for the return of Karelia and other territories lost during the Second World War. Vesti Karelia reported about the upcoming public discussion on hypothetical ways of returning Karelia, which could take place in the very near future. According to them, among the initiators are the revanchist organization ProKarelia, the Karelia club, as well as the magazine Karjalan kuvalehti.

During its history, Karelia was a Swedish duchy, a Korelsky district, and an Olonets governorship. This land has become disputed more than once.

The Karelian question arose as a result of the terms of the Tartu Peace Treaty of 1920, at the end of civil war in Finland and the Soviet-Finnish war. According to its terms, Western Karelia became the property of Finland. The territories were returned during the Second World War, and the Karelian-Finnish population was evacuated to Finland. In 1956, the Karelo-Finnish SSR was transformed into autonomy within the RSFSR.

Despite the fact that Finland does not officially raise the issue of revising borders, in the country, according to recent polls, 38% of respondents are in favor of the return of Western Karelia. In 2011, the leader of the ProKarelia movement, already known to us, Veikko Saksi, came up with a similar initiative, reporting that the return of Karelia to Finland complied with all EU standards. However, the President of Finland, Sauli Niiniste, during his working visit to Moscow in 2013, denied this information, saying that he had never heard such a proposal among Finnish legislators.

China: dispute over 17 hectares

Today, China has territorial claims to almost all of its neighbors. Russia is no exception. More recently, in 2005, the Russian-Chinese border underwent changes in the form of 340 square kilometers: a plot of land in the area of ​​Bolshoy Island and two sections in the area of ​​Tarabarov and Bolshoy Ussuriysky islands, at the confluence of the Amur and Ussuri rivers, came under the jurisdiction of the PRC. However, this was not the end of China’s territorial claims to Russia.

In 2012, when checking the state border between the countries, China announced the need to shift it deeper into Russia, putting forward a claim to “originally Chinese” 17 hectares of the Altai mountainous area. It is worth noting that the dispute arose due to a small area of ​​inaccessible territory, located at an altitude of 2500-3000 meters, and not equipped, on this moment, checkpoints. As a result, the Chinese side was unable to provide any documents in support of its claims to the Altai 17 hectares, which turned, overnight, into disputed territories.

Ukraine Crimea

View of Balaklava, TASS

Crimean peninsula, where the Republic of Crimea and the federal city of Sevastopol are located, became part of Russia on March 18, 2014, following the results of a referendum held on its territory, in which the overwhelming majority of Crimeans voted for reunification with Russia.

When seceding from Ukraine, Crimea used the same grounds as it did in 1991 when seceding from the USSR, namely:

• The right of peoples to self-determination
• Security threat due to coup d'etat
• Continuation of centuries-old historical traditions

Ukraine, of which Crimea had previously been a part, had already lost its previously existing statehood at the time of the referendum, since the coup, during which the current president was deposed by parliament with obvious violations of constitutional procedures, automatically placed all power in the country outside the constitution and legally destroyed the state as such.

The results of the referendum are not openly recognized by Ukraine and the West; the rest of the world for the most part simply avoids the issue. In any case, the topic will remain open for some time, among other things, because in 1954 Crimea was transferred to Ukraine with different borders - since then the northern part of the Arabat Spit with the village of Strelkovoe still remains in the Kherson region. In general, the issue is closely related to future fate Novorossiya.