RUSSO-JAPANESE TERRITORIAL DISPUTE THE HISTORICAL AND LEGAL ASPECTS

This article reviews the Russo-Japanese territorial dispute through historical and legal analysis, focusing on the southern Kurils/Northern Territories. It surveys treaty milestones—the 1855 Treaty of Shimoda, 1875 Treaty of St. Petersburg and 1951 San Francisco framework—alongside wartime declarations and the 1945 occupation. Competing interpretations of cession, conquest and uti possidetis are contrasted with postwar state practice and principles of decolonization. The paper explains how juridical arguments intersect with strategic interests, fisheries, and the politics of alliance management. It assesses negotiation rounds after the Cold War’s end, confidence-building measures and proposals for joint development, showing why symbolic sovereignty questions complicate otherwise pragmatic cooperation. The analysis clarifies points of convergence and identifies incremental steps that can preserve space for a durable settlement.

The body’s historical section reconstructs cartographic evidence, island administration and population movements across the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. A legal chapter parses the applicability of pacta sunt servanda, effectivités and acquiescence, including debates over whether the islands were encompassed by wartime instruments. The geopolitical section situates the dispute within evolving Russia-Japan relations, U.S. alliance considerations and the economic agenda of energy and investment. It evaluates confidence-building measures—visa-free exchanges, memorial visits and fisheries quotas—while noting domestic constituencies that constrain compromise. Comparative cases (eg, Gulf of Maine, Pedra Branca) illuminate adjudication pathways and the limits of judicialization. The conclusion proposes a stepwise approach: codified CBMs, joint resource management mechanisms, and phased legal understandings that bracket sovereignty while deepening cooperation to reduce the dispute’s salience.