From: masuda@fcs280b.ncifcrf.gov (Michiaki Masuda)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.japan
Subject: Re: Northern Islands (flash news)
Date: 10 Oct 92 02:33:55 GMT
Organization: Frederick Cancer Research and Development Center

In article <1992Oct9.041554.3837@Csli.Stanford.EDU> hiraga@Csli.Stanford.EDU (Yuzuru Hiraga) writes:
>In article <1992Oct8.161937.6963@Csli.Stanford.EDU> I wrote:
>>I have just overheard the following in a news broadcast feed from Japan:
>
>Some corrections and supplement to my previous post:
>sources are revision of the Fuji-TV news and "Today's Japan"
>
>>Yeltsin stated (in the Russian congress?) that he'll be considering
>>returning two islands (the Habomais and Shikotan) to Japan.

  Good to hear that.

>	Correction: this was in a Russian TV interview show on Wednesday.

>>The points I picked up were:
>>* My[=Yeltsin's] visit to Japan had to be cancelled/postponed because
>>  Japan was making the absurd claim that all four islands must be
>>  returned [at once?].

   I agree with Yeltsin that the Japanese claim of the simultaneous return
of four islands is unrealistic if not absurd. However, this
claim is not something new, and it is very likely that he had already known
about the claim even before he planned a visit.

>>* However, recently Japan has softened its position to first accept
>>  the return of the two islands, and postpone further negotiation
>>  until the Peace Treaty is signed.
>>* The return of the two islands are acceptable.
.....
>	A more accurate transcription of the Fuji news is:
>	However, recently Japan has softened its position so that if
>	Russia confirms the 1956 Japan-USSR Joint Declaration which
>	stated the return of the two islands, then Japan will be
>	flexible and will consider postponing the time of their return
>	after the signing of the Peace Treaty.  It is possible for
>	Russia to compromise along this line.
>	[ So the possibility of the return of two islands is (implicitly?)
>	approved, while the below remains unchanged:

   This seems to be a reasonable comment from the Russian side.

   I think that the statement in the 1956 Joint Declaration is still valid,
and that both countries should esteem it.  

>>* The return of all the islands [i.e. in particular, Kunashiri and Etorofu]
>>  is still out of the question.

  Probably, it means that the "simultaneous" return of all the four islands
(Yon-tou ikkatsu henkan) is out of question. This comment may not necessarily
mean that the Russian side has no intention to negotiate over Kunashiri
and Etorofu for ever.

>	The issue is further complicated, however, according to
>	"Today's Japan".  It says that Yeltsin has misquoted remarks
>	by Foreign Minister Michio Watanabe (as given above).
>	The nature of the misquote, as far as I understand,
>	is that in the above quote by Yeltsin, Watanabe has mentioned
>	about only two islands (Habonais and Shikotan), not mentioning
>	Kunashiri and Etorofu.  Watanabe has denied this and says
>	there is no change to Japanese policy to have all four islands
>	returned, though Japan can be flexible about the time of return.

   This might not be a misquote. Watanabe might have really mentioned
about only Habomai and Shikotan. However, it does not mean that Japan will
give up Kunashiri and Etorofu. "The felxibility of the time of return"
would mean that the four islands do not have to be returned at the same time.
His words quoted by Yeltsin and his following comment could be consistent.
 
   Watanabe is very smart. Smarter than he looks 8-).

>	Further on "Today's Japan": "It is not known where Yeltsin got
>	this misquotation from.  Meanwhile, Russian Deputy Foreign
>	Minister Georgy Kunadze said there was confusion of information
>	in Russia.

   As has always been the case 8-).

>       He said that Yeltsin's aides were deliberately
>	passing misinformation to Yeltsin.  According to Kunadze,
>	one example of misinformation is the belief that there will
>	be a general election in Japan in October, and the Japanese
>	cabinet may be reshuffled [which is incorrect], and this
>	information was also a basis for postponing Yeltsin's visit
>	to Japan."

   Wouldn't it be possible that someone deliberately made Yeltsin's aides
give him wrong information?
Let's think. Who on the Japanese side would be most benefited by the
cancellation of Yeltsin's visit? Who gained the most points after the
cancellation?

>>* I will be willing to visit Japan to discuss our problems.

   I wonder whether "our problem" means "Russia's problem" or "the
problems between Japan and Russia."

>	This was said in a commentary of Fuji.
>	In "Today's Japan", Yeltsin is quoted as saying "If Miyazawa
>	is as flexible as Watanabe, then he would visit Japan".

   Here we go. This is Micchii's first step towards signing the agreement
of the return of the islands as Prime Minister.

   The general scenario would be:

  Peace Treaty -> Return of Habomai and Shikotan -> Significant financial
and technical aids from Japan to Russia -> Opening the discussion on 
Kunashiri and Etorofu -> (hopefully) Return of K. & E.

  Peace Treaty might be signed as early as next year, I hope.

>So, the nature of Yeltsin's comment, as well as Russian policy in general,
>might be in a state of confusion.
>
>This is as far as I got right now.

  I appreciate your informative input. Thank you, Hiraga-san.

Michiaki Masuda
Newsgroups: soc.culture.japan