“A disagreement between allies”: The United Kingdom,the United States,and the Soviet-Japanese territorial dispute, 1945–1956

Russian-Japanese relations are frozen in time by their territorial dispute over the Kuril Islands. In untangling the dispute, scholars have studied the history of Russo-Japanese relations, the USSR’s annexation of the islands in 1945, and the role of the United States as the USSR’s erstwhile wartime ally and Japan’s postwar partner. The United Kingdom, a key player in 1945, has been neglected in these studies. This article analyzes the evolution of the British position on the Soviet-Japanese territorial dispute from 1945 to the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries in 1956. The article reveals the marked divergence in this position from that of the United States, proceeding from a disagreement over the interpretation of the 1945 Yalta Agreement. In addition, the article highlights the manipulation of the territorial dispute by the United States to further its own political and security objectives and the British reaction to these maneuvers. Her recent publications includeBack in the USSR: Russia’s Intervention in the Internal Affairs of the Former Soviet Republics and the Implications for United States Policy Toward Russia (with Pamela Jewett) (John F. Kennedy School of Government, 1994).     

Gorbachev’s “new directions” in Asia

The Gorbachev regime has made a dramatic attempt to alter the political environment for Soviet policy in Asia and to shift regional perceptions in its favor. As elsewhere, the major components, of this new approach are the downplaying of the utility of military instruments of power, an emphasis on the peaceful resolution of regional disputes, a deemphasizing of the role of ideology, and a stepped-up effort to pursue relations with regional states through traditional diplomacy. The various elements of “new thinking” as qpplied to Asia have contributed to improved Soviet relations with China, South Korea, and several non-Communist states of Southeast Asia, and created an opportunity for improved relations with Japan. Carolyn McGiffert Ekedahl is a senior analyst at the Central Intelligence Agency and co-author ofThe Soviets and the Third World Under Gorbachev, (Westview Press, forthcoming).     

Decentralization and the Precontract Dispute in Soviet Industry

Precontract negotiations between enterprises play an important role in determining the detailed product mix and the timing of delivery in the Soviet planning system. This paper uses a comparative institutional framework drawn from the law and economics literature to analyze the legal regulation of these negotiations by Gosarbitrazh. In view of features of the Soviet economy which weaken the buyer's influence on the supplier, the key hypothesis is that Gosarbitrazh should favor the buyer in resolving precontract disputes, thereby forcing the supplier to satisfy the buyer's demand. This hypothesis is supported by the reported case law. Journal of Economic Literature, Classification Numbers: 052, 124.     

The Future of the Japanese–Chinese Relationship: The Case for a Grand Political Bargain

Compared with the strained relationship during the Koizumi era, Japanese-Chinese relations today seem to prove that despite many bilateral problems, a solution can always be found. This attitude is too complacent as a closer examination of the three main disputes shows: the history-related issues, the territorial disputes in the East China Sea, and Taiwan. Bilateral agreements, understandings, or protracted negotiations may provide temporary relief but may turn out to be very costly in the long run to Japan's national interests and to regional stability while time is not on Japan's side in view of the shifting comprehensive power relationship between the two countries. Instead, Japan should clarify its position in the Japan–US–China triangle, reform its economy, strengthen its Asian policy and sort out its priorities concerning the three main problems by striking a grand bargain.     

Yeltsin’s visit and the outlook for Japanese-Russian relations

The article clarifies a major misunderstanding prevalent among Americans, who tend to regard Japan’s request for the return of the Northern Territories as a narrow-minded, national-egoistic demand. Instead, the issue has become a global one. The author evaluates Yeltsin’s December 1992 visit to Tokyo, which has set a basic framework for further negotiation over the territorial disputes. Predicting optimistically the possible resolution of the dispute in the future, the author proposes concretely what may be done by the Japanese and the Russians. serves as first vice president of the International Council for Central and East European Studies (ICSEES). Dr. Kimura’s publications includeBeyond Cold War to Trilateral Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific Region: Scenarios for New Relationships Between Japan, Russia, and the United States (Cambridge, MA, 1992).     

The Soviet union,Japan, and east Asia: The security dimension

This article explores the ways in which the Gorbachev regime has tried to improve what Soviet policymakers perceive as an unfavorable balance of power in Northeast Asia. It argues that Gorbachev’s initial response, which emphasized regional arms control proposals, has not been successful because Japanese leaders do not see them as meaningful concessions. More recent changes in Soviet policy offer greater prospects for accommodation. Changes in the global East-West environment and domestic trends in Japan also may have a positive impact on Soviet-Japanese security relations. She is the author ofJapan and Arms Control (Canadian Centre for Arms Control and Disarmament, Ottawa, 1987).     

The relationship between the Baltic states and Japan during the interwar period

Abstract

Japan and the Baltic states set up official relations when the latter achieved independence after the First World War. At the Paris Peace Conference of 1919, the provisional governments in the Baltic provinces tried to contact the Japanese delegation as part of their quest for de jure recognition. The Japanese government, however, recognized them only in 1921–22. Several treaties were signed between the Baltic states and Japan during the interwar period, and consulates and a legation were established. Japan later sought closer relations with the three countries as part of an effort to end the international isolation that followed its withdrawal from the League of Nations in 1933. On the eve of World War Two, the Baltic states were also regarded as an important base for collecting intelligence about the USSR, yet the Soviet incorporation of 1940 soon brought all diplomatic relationships to an end. This article surveys the existing literature and presents some further little-known diplomatic episodes from the period.     

依靠美国：日本解决领土纠纷问题之路——原贵美惠对东北亚领土纠纷问题的主要观点

自称日本＂海外＂学者原贵美惠近几年发表了许多有关东亚领土纠纷问题研究成果,引起学界关注。作者提出东亚地区领土纠纷问题出现,都与美国战后主导《旧金山对日媾和条约》有关,是美国设置于有关国家之间的＂楔子＂,便于美国实施未来亚太战略。关于东亚领土纠纷问题如何解决,作者提出采用奥兰群岛模式,在多国框架内解决等。笔者认为,原贵美惠的研究成果确实比较新异,但并未脱离日本学者局限,依靠美国解决日本与周边国家间领土纠纷,是日本朝野上下的共同选择。     

Satellite Communications in the USSR

Satellite communications, specifically TV distribution, constituted the first commercial application of space technology in the USSR. Soviet comsat systems have been costly and technologically unsophisticated. The capacity of these systems is low. Little has been achieved in exploiting the potential of communication satellites for other tasks important for operation of the economy, such as telephony, facsimile transmission, or data exchange, due in part to competition with the military. The USSR has rejected membership in the International Telecommunications Satellite organization in favor of its own Intersputnik system, but has been an active member of the international organization Inmarsat. Journal of Economic Literature, Classification Numbers: 052, 124, 620.     

东盟国家处理海域争端的方式及其对解决南海主权争端的启示

东盟国家在解决南海以外的海域争端时,基本上采用以下三种方式:对争议海域进行共同开发;通过提交国际法院裁决;武力对抗加政治谈判。从实践来看,不同方式取得了不同的效果。近年来,东盟部分成员国采用不同方式不断侵占中国的南海海域,使南海问题呈现越来越复杂的态势。中国在南海主权争端中,面临来自东盟国家的巨大挑战,如何解决南海海域争端已成为中国与部分东盟国家面临的最棘手问题。东盟国家解决海域争端的方式,对于解决南海主权争端提供了一定的启示。     

对战后初期美国转变对日政策原因的再审视

战后美日关系的变动,始终是影响东亚地区稳定的重要因素。战后初期美国对日政策的重心经历了从改造到扶持的转变过程。这一转变有着复杂的历史背景和原因,经历了曲折的转变过程,转变的直接结果奠定了之后的美日关系,且至今仍对东亚地区国际政治格局的变化存在着重要影响。战后初期影响美国转变对日政策的诸因素,并非先前中外学者所分析的平行并重,而是有先有后,有主有次,诸因素形成一个逻辑因果链,最终导致"旧金山体制"形成。在美国转变对日政策过程中,意识形态分歧和美苏大国间国家利益的博弈互为表里,时而契合,时而背离,但最终依归是各自的国家利益。所有这些对于预判目前东亚地区国际政治格局的走向和趋势、对于确立处理该地区国际事务的基调和对策是有重要的现实借鉴意义的。     

Soviet Electric Power After Chernobyl': Economic Consequences and Options

A review of the role of nuclear power in Soviet electricity production and of economic and design factors that may have contributed to the accident at the Chernobyl' Atomic Power Station sets the stage for analysis of its economic and other impacts on the USSR and Eastern Europe. The paper outlines methods for estimating direct costs stemming from lost generating capacity, agricultural output, and plant infrastructure; clean-up and relocation; and medical care. Longer-term costs in the form of environmental and public health problems, reexamination of energy development strategies, and effects on international trade will be greater but more difficult to determine. Journal of Economic Literature, Classification Numbers: 027, 124, 723.     

Sino-Japanese Relations Adrift in a Changing World

The Sino-Japanese dispute over the arrest of the Chinese fishing trawler captain is the most serious bilateral incident since 1952. Japan took an action viewed by Beijing as provocative and China overreacted. Feeling humiliated, Japan has sought allies to check on China. But China is not isolated. When it seeks to recover from its diplomatic setbacks in 2010, Beijing looks elsewhere because it has little trust in the DPJ government. As the world's second and third largest economies, China and Japan should improve relations. Without improved ties, they will find it even harder to manage emotionally charged disputes next time around. China and Japan are rivals but they are not yet enemies. The Chinese and Japanese governments need to exercise leadership, which includes making compromises when and where they become necessary. Since they have weakened capacity to deal with bilateral disputes, they should avoid them in the first place.     

Restructuring the Mechanism of Foreign Economic Relations in the USSR

An up-to-date paper by the Deputy Chairman of the State Commission on Foreign Economic Relations, USSR Council of Ministers, details recent economic reforms in the foreign trade sector of the USSR. Particular emphasis is placed on direct business relations between Soviet enterprises and their foreign counterparts, and on joint ventures with CMEA partners as well as firms in Western and developing countries. Anticipated changes in the role exports and imports are to play in the Soviet economy are also discussed. Journal of Economic Literature, Classification Numbers: 052, 124, 420.     

China’s Surging Energy Demand: Trigger for Conflict or Cooperation with Japan?

This article revisits a conventional interpretation of Sino-Japanese energy relations from geopolitical and zero-sum viewpoints. Contemporary Sino-Japanese disputes over the East China Sea and their scramble over a crude-oil pipeline from Russia have drawn global attention to the intensification of the rivalry between the two giant energy consumers. Beijing and Tokyo, however, have gradually found common interests resulting from business opportunities, environmental countermeasures, etc. Russia’s failure in driving a wedge between China and Japan, and the United States’ proactive engagement in Asia-Pacific energy issues, appear to provide new opportunities in which the East Asian powers’ energy rivalry can be reduced.

Japan’s Quest for “Soft Power”: Attraction and Limitation

Japan is seeking to project its “soft power” through the allure of manga and anime in its public diplomacy. The production, diffusion and global consumption of manga and anime are driven by market forces and consumer tastes and not by the Japanese state. However, the latter is seeking to harness this popular culture to burnish Tokyo’s international image. Despite the attractiveness of Japanese pop culture and other more traditional forms of public diplomacy, Tokyo’s pursuit of “soft power” and a good international image is undermined by its failure to overcome its burden of history.

Other publications received

(a 28‐page pamphlet, in the series Fifty Years of Soviet Oriental Studies, published in 1967 by Nauka Press for the Institute of the Peoples of Asia of the USSR Academy of Sciences).

N. A. Kuznyetsova and L. M. Kulagina, and entitled Iz istorii Sovyetskogo Vostokovyedyeniya 1917–1967

(From the History of Soviet Orientalism, 1917–1967),

(Moscow, Nauka Press for the Institute of Oriental Studies of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1970, 252 pp.).

Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 7, no. 3, October 1971, pp. 363–65

(see Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. VII, no. 2, May 1971, pp. 237–39).

V. V. Lyebyedyev's Pozdniy sryednyearabskiy yazik (XIII‐XVIII vv.)

(The Late Middle‐Arabic Language: The 13th‐18th Centuries), Moscow, Nauka Press, 1977; 92 pp.

A. A. Kovalyev and G. M. Gabuchan, was published by Moscow University Press in 1968 and comprises 208 pages.

V. S. Khrakovskiy's Ochyerki po obshchyemu i Arabskomu sintaksisu (Essays on General and Arabic Syntax), (Moscow, Nauka Press for the Institute of Linguistics of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1973; 290 pp.).

V. M. Byelkin's Arabskaya Lyeksikologia (Arabic Lexicology), (Moscow University Press, 1975; 200 pp.).

F. L. Shapiro and edited by B. M. Grande, entitled Ivrit‐Russkiy slovar’ (Hebrew‐Russian Dictionary), (Moscow, Government Press for National and Foreign Dictionaries, 1963, 768 pp.).

B. M. Grande's Kurs Arabskoy grammatiki v Sravnityel'no‐istorichyeskom osvyeshchyenii (A Course of Arabic Grammar, From a Comparative Approach), (Moscow, Oriental Literature Press for the Institute of the Peoples of Asia of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1963, 596 pp.).

A. A. Kovalyev and G. Sh. Sharbatov, entitled Uchyebnik Arabskogo Yazika (Textbook for Learning Arabic), (Moscow, Nauka Press for the Institute of Oriental Languages at Moscow University, 1969, 688 pp.).

E. Dz. Myemmyedov's Al‐Lugha al‐'Arabiyya (The Arabic Language), (Baku, Ma'arif Press, 1971, 404 pp.).

G. V. Tsyeryetyeli, entitled Arabskaya Khryestomatiya (An Arabic Anthology), (Tiflis University Press, 1975; 107, 16pp.).

O. B. Frolova's Mi govorim po‐Arabskiy (We speak Arabic), (Moscow, Nauka Press for the Oriental Faculty of Leningrad University and for the Institute of Oriental Studies of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1972, 303 pp.).

I. S. Danilov, V. I. Ridzkov and M. G. Anisimov, entitled Arabsko‐Russkiy i Russko‐Arabskiy voyenniy slovar’ (Arabic‐Russian and Russian‐Arabic Dictionary of Military Terms), (Moscow, USSR Ministry of Defence Press, 1965, 704 pp.).

Kh. K. Baranov's Arabsko‐Russkiy slovar’ (Arabic‐Russian Dictionary), (2nd edition, Moscow, Government Press for Foreign and National Dictionaries, 1958, 1189 pp.)

T. A. al‐Farhi and V. N. Krasnovskiy, entitled Karmanniy Russko‐Arabskiy slovar’ (Pocket Russian‐Arabic Dictionary), (Moscow, Government Press for Foreign and National Dictionaries, 1959, 695 pp.).

G. Sh. Sharbatov's Russko‐Arabskiy uchyebniy slovar’ (A Russian‐Arabic school dictionary), (Moscow, The Soviet Encyclopaedia Press, 1964, 1056, 140 pp.).

V. M. Borisov's Russko‐Arabskiy slovar’ (Russian‐Arabic Dictionary), (Moscow, The Soviet Encyclopaedia Press, 1967, 1120 pp.).     

The Japan-Soviet far east trade relationship: A case of the cautious buyer and the overconfident seller

Given Japan’s resource scarcity, the eastern Soviet Union’s wealth of natural resources and dire need for large infusions of investment capital and technology, and the close distance between the two, one would believe that trade between the two countries would be quite sizable. However, the converse is the case, with each country providing no more than 2 percent of the other’s foreign trade. To explain this phenomenon, it is necessary to explore the intrinsic and self-imposed obstacles to expanded Japanese-USSR trade. It turns out that both countries do not pursue trade for mutual advantage but rather seek an entirely different set of ulterior zero-sum motives. The article discusses what would appear to be a natural “fit” between the two countries’ needs and abilities, explores the extensive joint Siberian development projects of the 1960s and 1970s to explain the undesired side effects of Japanese-Soviet trade, details Japanese and Soviet business, government, and economist arguments for and against expanded economic relations, explains the maldevelopment of a resource-extractive versus commodity-producing eastern USSR as a product of climate, labor shortages, investment policies, and a Stalinist-planned system, outlines Japanese desires to accrue political advantages from its trade with the Soviet Union, and predicts the inability of Gorbachev’s economic reforms to truly expand Japanese-Soviet trade at a low cost to its larger geopolitical concerns. Although continuing private Japanese efforts are being made to work out joint venture deals with the USSR (thus belying the notion of a completely consensus-unified “Japan, Inc.”), they are still anomalies. Ultimately, if expanded trade ties are to occur (and indeed it is this article’s contention that they must for the USSR to survive as a superpower), then they must be made on Japan’s terms.     

Are Russian Judges Still Soviet?

The Soviet model of judging incorporated an educational and political role for judges. In addition to resolving disputes, judges were expected to use cases as a way of inculcating Soviet values. They could sidestep the law when it conflicted with the interests of the state and/or the Communist Party. In recent years, reforms aimed at raising the status of judges and stripping away their Soviet veneer have been introduced. In theory, the introduction of the principle of adversarialism should shift responsibility away from judge and onto litigants. The article explores how these reforms have played out. It draws on field work in arbitrazh courts, including observations of judicial proceedings, conversations with judges and litigants, and review of case files.     

Why did We Get the End of the Cold War Wrong?

In many important ways the history of modern international relations (IR) begins at the point when the international order collapses in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Indeed, the withering of communism in Central and Eastern Europe followed by the break–up of the USSR two years later, posed what many in the field saw then (and continue to regard now) as a series of problems to which the hitherto dominant paradigm in IR—realism—had no ready or easy answers. This article neither seeks to defend nor criticize realism. Rather it shifts the debate about the end of the cold war—and why most experts failed to anticipate it—away from the field of IR to the more specific study undertaken in the West of the Soviet system. It goes on to argue that the source of so much academic embarrassment may be better explained not through a rehearsal of realism's supposed flaws as an international theory, but rather through a detailed examination of the different ways that different writers understood, or more precisely failed to understand, the operation of the Soviet system itself. The conclusion reached is that few analysts could have predicted what happened between 1989 and 1991. In fact, as the article seeks to show, their often complicated and diverse theories about the USSR as the living alternative to market capitalism led most of them (with one or two notable exceptions) to the conclusion that whatever problems faced the Soviet Union as a power in the 1980s, the system as such was likely to endure.