KURIL ISLANDS ISSUE REGIONAL AND GLOBAL GEOPOLITICAL IMPLICATIONS
Abstract
The issue of the Kuriles can be seen as a result of World War II and a reflection of the Cold War era. Although 73 years have passed since the end of World War II, no peace treaty between Japan and USSR/Russian Federation has been signed because both parties claim sovereignty on the Northern Territories/South Kuriles. The islands had been controlled by Japan until the World War II. Since then, they have been under Russian Federation control. The Kuril Islands, being resource-rich and strategically important, have evolved from an ordinary territorial issue between the two countries to an instrument of geopolitical settlement and vantage point for great powers. The islands form the Eastern borders of Russian Federation and provide the access of the Pacific Fleet, the second largest fleet of Russian Federation, to the Pacific Ocean. On the other hand, if the Kuril Islands come under Tokyo's rule, it will allow the United States, Japan's biggest ally, to maintain its military superiority over the Russian Federation. This article examines the issue of the Kuril Islands as a point of great power conflict, on which the Russia’s New Eurasianism and the western containment theories intersects and its potential to affect the regional and global balance of power. The article examines the issue in terms of international law, current geopolitical objectives of the related actors and the roles of the US and the PRC.
Keywords
References
- Alekseyev, A. (1991). Kurily: Russko-Yaponskiy Rubezh (Kuriles: Russian-Japanese Border). Yojno-Sakhalinsk: Obkom KP RSFCR.
- Alekseyev D. (2005). Kuril’skaya Problema i Natsionalniye Interesi Rossii. Vesnik Tihookeanskova Gosudastvennova Ekonomiçeskova Universieta. The Journal of Pasific State University of Economics, 0(4), 86-95.
- Amanzholov Z. M. and Akhmetov Y. B. (2013). Japanese-Russian Territorial Disagreement and Their International Legal Substantiations. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research (Special Issue of Politics and Law), 0(13), 16-24.
- Andrews-Speed P.; Liao X. and Dannreuther R. (2002). The Strategic Implications of China's Energy Needs. New York: Oxford University Press for The International Institute for Strategic Studies.
- Bassin M. (2011). Klasik’ ve ‘Yeni’ Avrasyacılık: Geçmişten Gelen Devamlılık (Classical and New Eurasianism: Continuity from the Past). Bilge Strateji, 2(4), 122-129.
- Bazin O. (2017). New Factors in Solving Southern Kuriles in the Period of Perestroika. Bulletin of PNRPU. Culture. History. Philosophy. Law, 0(1), 76-83.
- BBC News. (2016). Soglasitsya li Putin na Vozvrasheniye Kuril’skih Ostrovov (Will Putin Accept Secession Kuriles to Japan?). Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/russian/features-38325710. on December 25, 2018.
- Beliakov, D. and Bibushkina N. (2015). Sotsyal’no-Ekonomicheskiye I Geopoliticheskiye Posledtsviya Ustupki Alyaski (Socio-Economic and Geopolitical Consequences of Alaska Concession). Theoretical and Practical Economics, 0(4), 1-10.
Details
Primary Language
English
Subjects
Political Science
Journal Section
Research Article
Publication Date
June 30, 2021
Submission Date
February 8, 2021
Acceptance Date
April 15, 2021
Published in Issue
Year 2021 Volume: 5 Number: 16