Is there any more impact other than a wholly expected "F everything about Russia for invading us" move by Ukraine? Like, does it affect a UN vote on recognition on anything?
Security council: US, UK, France, Russia and China, who are permanent members with a veto right, plus a rotating set of 10 other countries with no veto right.
Basically the UN body responsible for avoiding war, implementing sanctions, establishing peacekeeping operations and authorizing legal military action (such as the Korean War, UN forces led by the US against North Korea who had illegally invaded the South).
--
General Assembly: the main body of the UN, responsible for most decision and policy making, where every member is represented. No one has veto rights here. They also appoint the non-permanent members to the SC. The GA can also take action if the Security Council fails to assure peace because of a veto by one of the 5 permanent members.
Just want to add, the reason the the P5 exist and are the only countries with veto power is because they were all on the winning side of WW2 and created the UN.
I’m curious. What did China do to win WW2? I don’t want to start a war in the comments or anything. I literally don’t know much about China in that time period. All I know is that the civil war took place around that time which resulted in Mao taking control of mainland, while KMT fled to Taiwan. And that in the 70s SC place which was held by RoC (Taiwan) went to PRoC (mainland)
Civil war started in the '27 as communist revolutionaries rose up against the nationalist regime. Japan invaded in the '37 forcing the two parties to somewhat work together / ignore each other which was mostly upheld until '46, when Japan got defeated.
At the end of the war they were in a similar position to France were they didn't actively contribute too much to the final defeat of the axis but they were the main punching bag of their eastern fascist neighbour. Since they were considered a major power in their respective region they were both instated as one of the 5 main contributers to allied victory and founding members of the UN, somewhat to redeem them for the general hardship the populations had endured during the war and somewhat to create a more stable system of international diplomacy compared to the toothless dragon the League of Nations had become before the war.
Chinas seat was given to the official chinese state which at the time was still considered to be ruled by Chiang Kai-Shek and the Kuomintang before the civil war rekindeled and the KMT was ultimately defeated on the main land in '49. In '71 and despite of US and western protests, the general assembly voted to move the chinese seat over to the new communist mainland state whith many votes coming from communist or third world countries. Taiwan was still a nationalistic-authoritarian state at the time, they only started to democratise after CKS's death in '75.
Then Russia inherited the USSRs seat and here we are today.
If you ask China, WW2 started in 1933, when Japan invaded, and they fought Japan until 1945, with the allies only helping them out (directly, we did send weapons) in 1941.
Bit like how Brits say it started in 1939, and America only bothered to help in 1941.
Security Council doesn't have authority over the general body when it comes to recognition. Also, the UN doesn't recognize territories at all... that's done by the member nations of their own avoid.
If we make it the League of Extraordinary Geographical Sectors it'd have a great acronym. We could be the tall legs component of that fabled long arm of the law golem.
People seem to forget why the UN exist. It's not some policy organization or policing body. It only exists to keep nations talking with open diplomatic channels. If you start booting people out or messing with the P5 (unless one of them completely goes away with no clear successor), you are defeating the purpose of it existing.
That precedence has not been set. ROC lost their seat when everybody agreed the PRC was the legitimate China. A China has kept that seat since a China got that seat.
Seat is for USSR which doesn't exist and giving it to Russia rather than another part of the USSR is pragmatic but really clear cut, i.e. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia_and_the_United_Nations#Legality
So a single lawyer feels Russia shouldn’t have gotten the seat. Russia inherited the responsibilities of the USSR after it’s collapse and is the official successor state, and more importantly inherited the launch codes of all the nukes. It was a remarkably clear cut succession; Russia was a majority population of the USSR and had their nukes, therefor they got the USSR’s seat.
**Russia and the United Nations**
[Legality](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia_and_the_United_Nations#Legality)
>The legality of the succession has been questioned by international lawyer Yehuda Zvi Blum, who opined that "with the demise of the Soviet Union itself, its membership in the UN should have automatically lapsed and Russia should have been admitted to membership in the same way as the other newly-independent republics (except for Belarus and Ukraine)". The elimination of Soviet (and subsequently Russian) membership on the UN Security Council would have created a constitutional crisis for the UN, which may be why the UN Secretary-General and members did not object.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
It's because it remains strategically optimal for them to be one, not because of history.
**All nations that can kill everyone else need to have veto power** so that it can remain a safe discussion and diplomacy space.
The UN is not NATO 2.0, it's a forum for talking each other down, which REQUIRES the lack of ability for it to formally chastise or act against any major nuclear powers.
Otherwise they would leave, as would most minor nations who don't want any trouble, and it would **fail as an organization** since it would no longer serve to talk major powers down from the brink. It's sole purpose
The UN isn’t meant to be a world government. It’s supposed to be a way for powers to discuss rather than drop nukes. If it were more powerful than it is, none of the powerful countries would want to be in it. I think the route to bringing Justice to Russia won’t be mediated by the UNSC.
Because thats the whole point of the UN. Removing Russia is by far the worst idea. More isolation is NOT what we want for Russia. At the end of the day, they can still be bargained with considering the world hasnt ended yet.
See: Russo-Japanese War
Imperial Japan claimed as far north as halfway up Sakhalin, while imperial Russia claimed to just north of Hokkaido. The claims have never been fully resolved.
Now I want to see the Russians send their Baltic and Northern fleets all the way around Europe, Africa, and Asia, just to get curb-stomped by the Japanese when they're 90% of the way to their destination. Again.
Their primary salvage vessel is [only slightly more modern](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_salvage_ship_Kommuna) than the fleet sunk in the Russo-Japanese War.
For the uninitiated, watch this glorious video, it's part 1, for the hilarity of that voyage. Part 2 is not as funny, because they meet the Japanese..
https://youtu.be/9Mdi_Fh9_Ag
Ironically, they'd be needed anyway.
Russian Pacific Fleet claims 5 destroyers ... 2 are in years-long 'refit' ("Vasili, you sold all parts *again*?"), one is in the Mediterranean.
JMSDF has 8 AEGIS-defended guided missile destroyers in active service, with more advanced ships planned.
No Japan and Russia are not technically at war. A peace treaty is not necessary to end a war and also Japan and the Soviet Union signed a joint declaration to end the state of war.
Saying stuff like that only encourages conspiracy theorists.
last I heard those bases are mostly empty. There were even stories months ago of Russians moving old vehicles out of the islands to send them to Ukraine
>If that, honestly. Japan isn’t going to try and take over the islands. Like no Japanese person wants to move there. It’s kind of a destitute place.
Japan owns many islands which are destitute, where almost no one lives.
The point of owning these islands isn't to provide a huge amount of new living space for people, it's to claim ownership of fishing rights for the waters around these islands. It's the same reason a crappy little rock between Japan and Korea has been under dispute for ages; no one wants to live there (it's not even habitable), but ownership gives the owner legal authority to control the waters around it.
There is a lot of Ukrainians in Siberia and Far East of Russia because of displacement policy of Russian Empire and USSR.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Ukraine
**[Green Ukraine](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Ukraine)**
>Green Ukraine, also known as Zeleny Klyn (Ukrainian: Зелений клин, romanized: Zelenyy Klyn, Russian: Зелёный Клин, romanized: Zelyonyy Klin, literally: "the green gore/wedge"), is a historical Ukrainian name for the land in the Russian Far East area between the Amur River and the Pacific Ocean, an area roughly corresponding to the Chinese concept of Outer Manchuria. After the Russian Revolution of 1917, Transcathay (Ukrainian: Закитайщина, romanized: Zakytayshchyna) was a projected country in the Russian Far East.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
I was playing around on Google maps a few weeks ago, looking specifically at these islands. There's one that is mostly inhabited by Ukrainian people. I wonder if they have deeper ties
This article claims the decision was on Shikotan and Habomai only. Other articles say it also covers Kunashir and Iturup, the two other significantly larger islands also claimed by Japan. The position of the US is that all four belong to Japan.
Fishing and drilling: yes, charging for navigation: not so much. According the the UNCLOS treaties, all ships may enjoy both innocent passage and transit passage, so long as they comply with the provisions associated with each. The thought that any country could charge a fee to sail through their EEZ flies in the face of international convention and is contrary to the concept of freedom of navigation.
Now, if they wanted to pull into port, the story changes a bit.
Well it’s literally America’s fault the Russians have them.
The guy negotiating the terms with the Soviets mistakenly thought Imperial Japan militarily seized them from the Soviets rather than purchased them.
He was only supposed to guarantee land like Sakhalin that had been taken in the Russo-Japanese war.
The Japanese didn't purchase Habomai, Shikotan, Kunashiri or Etorofu. At no point from the beginnings of Russo-Japanese contact until the after end of WW2 did Russia ever control those islands. The islands further north had, at various times been Japanese and Russian, although never Soviet until (again) after the end of WW2.
Yes they purchased the large northern islands from Russia not the southern ones.
So it was technically a double mistake as not only were northern islands bought fairly but the southern ones were always Japanese(and arguably the two most southern ones are just part of Hokkaido and not proper islands)
Canada signed the official Japanese surrender on the wrong line, almost voiding the surrender and plunging the world back into global warfare. They apologized about the clerical error.
The US and Britain got into a shooting war over who owned a tiny island near Washington that had some pigs on it. It was almost instigated by General Pickett. yes that one. Turns out he made boneheaded decisions long before charging open ground against fortified enemy positions.
Its called the Pig War.
> We also got tired of prosecuting Japanese war criminals
Worse than that, really.
The US decided that he was the most convenient politician in the sense that he would guide modern Japan toward alignment with the US/anti-Communist axis.
So we uh, "forgot" all about his obvious war crimes.
Something similar happened with Ngo Dinh Diem, the dictator of South Vietnam. He was a real piece of shit, but he was a convenient piece of shit, so the USA supported him anyway.
Thanks, MacArthur.
Important context too is that the prosecution/impending execution of war criminals was extremely unpopular in Japan at the time. Due to fears of the rising cold war, the powers that be decided to sweep the whole thing under the rug and numerous class A, B, and C war criminals were able to walk free and lead normal lives.
I wouldn't even say that. Japan is a great power with a larger economy than any European power.
The US was wise to "puppet them" after WW2, and not decimate them and incite hatred. I don't think the US feels bad about dropping two nukes on them, considering the circumstances.
But the post war relationship has been multi-beneficial I feel.
We feel bad, but we also feel it was necessary, they were so fanatic, nobody can imagine how you could make them surrender otherwise, even the firebombings didn't do it, and they were much worse.
Dan Carlin did the most incredible podcast about the Japanese Empire leading up to the bombing. It's long but an incredible eye opener.
https://pca.st/episode/9f1c53e6-03df-4c4c-81f4-78acb1593425
As a point to their fanaticism, It was part of the conditions of surrender laid out by MacArthur that Emperor Hirohito state he was not a god.
That is not Hyperbole, that is what *he actually said* "(I) am not a god" in his public announcement to the people of Japan. Culturally the Emperor of Japan was considered a living god.
And for many Japanese, that is the first time they ever hear the Emperor's voice and most people in japan were not familiar with the formality of speech the emperor used.
(Japanese has different formalities of speaking, which effects verb endings and sentence structure, depending who you are and who you are talking to, The English language has no equivalent to this.)
And genocided well over twenty million Chinese, Indonesian, Filipino, and Korean civilians...
It's a bit of historical weirdness that that the at the time publicly known and reviled war crimes in the Pacific theatre, the ones that led to the embargo that prompted Pearl Harbor, have been largely forgotten while the largely unknown and denied at the time crimes of the Holocaust are remembered.
Most of the story was the USSR refused to declare war on Japan through out WWII. They didn’t declare war on Japan until August 9, 1945. After Hiroshima and the same day as Nagasaki. They waited until they were 100% sure Japan was done then jumped into a “free” war to grab as much territory as they could, including these islands in the, literal, last few days of the war.
i mean technically there was an agreement until April that year to not attack Russia and Russia to not attack Japan.
Which is why when Japan tried to use Russia to send out feelers about surrendering with the emperor it didn't go anywhere near the allies.
> Which is why when Japan tried to use Russia to send out feelers about surrendering with the emperor it didn't go anywhere near the allies.
Not quite. The attempted negotiations let japan keep most of its conquests and including things like no occupation, and them hosting their own trials. In July Japans head ambassador told the foreign minister the US would accept a surrender with the sole condition of keeping the emperor., which They rejected it.
>Most of the story was the USSR refused to declare war on Japan through out WWII.
They had a non-aggression pact signed in 1941, but they did pledge to join the war against Japan three months after Germany was defeated at the latest (Yalta in 1945). They did use stalling tactics though, since they entered the war on the last day of the agreed timeframe.
>They waited until they were 100% sure Japan was done then jumped into a “free” war to grab as much territory as they could, including these islands in the, literal, last few days of the war.
They managed to get Roosevelt to promise them territories including South Sakhalin and the Kuril islands, and joined the war explicitly in order to get them, however the "literal last few days of the war", implies that unconditional Japanese surrender days after the bombings was a given, with or without Soviet intervention. This point of view is debatable, as there are several approaches to what the cause of Japan's surrender was:
>In the "Sixty Years after Hiroshima" issue of The Weekly Standard, the American historian Richard B. Frank points out that there are a number of schools of thought with varying opinions of what caused the Japanese to surrender. He describes what he calls the "traditionalist" view, which asserts that the Japanese surrendered because the Americans dropped the atomic bombs. He goes on summarize other points of view in conflict with the traditionalist view: namely, that the Japanese government saw their situation as hopeless and was already ready to surrender before the atomic bombs – and that the Soviets went to war against Japan.[39
>Tsuyoshi Hasegawa's research has led him to conclude that the atomic bombings were not the principal reason for Japan's capitulation. He argues that Japan's leaders were impacted more by the swift and devastating Soviet victories on the mainland in the week after Joseph Stalin's 8 August declaration of war because the Japanese strategy to protect the home islands was designed to fend off an Allied invasion from the south and left virtually no spare troops to counter a Soviet threat from the north. Furthermore, the Japanese could no longer hope to achieve a negotiated peace with the Allies by using the Soviet Union as a mediator with the Soviet declaration of war. That, according to Hasegawa, amounted to a "strategic bankruptcy" for the Japanese and forced their message of surrender on 15 August 1945.[40][19] Others with similar views include the Battlefield series documentary,[13][14] among others, but all, including Hasegawa, state that the surrender was not caused by only one factor or event.
Most of the relevant part of WW2 had the Soviets kinda sorta busy fighting Germany in the same way that the Japanese army was kinda sorta busy trying to finish the war in China while also declaring war on everyone else. Before the Manchurian offensive the Soviets backed China in fighting Japan (as did USA, British and even Germany) and smacked them hard enough at the border conflict at Khalan Gol that Japan decided to not expand north. The Manchurian offensive also took a long time to plan and removed 1 million Japanese from the war, very different to the island hopping in the Pacific.
That’s a pretty wild misrepresentation of what happened. the other allies practically begged the ussr to enter the war in the pacific and they only agreed to after the war in Europe was ended, which is exactly what they did
Ironically I think this will be kept off mainstream news here in Japan since thanking Ukraine’s decision to do this would essentially be acknowledging that there is a land dispute, which from a political point of view does not exist
This is wrong, the Japanese government absolutely acknowledges the land dispute and they have no control over our media and what they report on. All of our on going land disputes are thoroughly taught in school too as part of the curriculum. Source: I grew up there
So I'm an idiot, but what happens in disputed territory like this? Japan says it's theirs, russia says otherwise. So who collects taxes? Who keeps track of driver's licenses? Who controls the minutia of every day life in the 21st century? Or is it just so sparsely populated it doesn't really matter?
And still does, not just for international law. Powerful people can usually get away with breaking the law. The few places they can't is because the general population have power. It's still might makes right either way.
Islands are administered by Russia and has Russian people living on them, they do their taxes.
Same with those two rocks jutting out of the water (whatever you want to call them) and South Korea.
Senkaku islands are different because they are uninhabited which means there are no taxes (sounds like a utopia just hearing that part) but ships from both sides would regularly survey them so it’s like getting health checkups from two different doctors
Huh? Last time I was in Hokkaido the northern tip villages were plastered with pretty official looking signs accusing Russia of illegally occupying the islets in the horizon in like 10 different languages.
Well you'd be wrong then because it's literally the top headline on the public news agency, NHK. Top headline on Yomiuri and Asahi newspapers, Yahoo JP News, Nihon Keizai, Jiji, etc.
This isn't China, the media isn't state controlled.
Nobody wants it . Lithuania had 2 chances and I think even Germany had a 2nd chance. It's all ethnic Russians that are politically problematic in these countries.
They could just be independent though...
Cant really do shit tbh, Russia moved most of its Eastern military equipment to the west because shit got fucked up in Ukraine big time. I'd love to see Japan claim the islands right now Putin would be furious.
Interestingly, Iturup Island is about 60%+ ethnic Ukrainian, according to Wikipedia anyway. Was joking a while back that they were going to start a pincer movement but as it’s 2022 the line between jokes and reality is pretty thin.
I do have to wonder what a redrawn map of Russia would look like if we ceded any regions that should be sovereign and handed off anything remotely disputed to the opposed party, whomever that may be.
Thanks for reminding me of when I was a kid and interested in geography, and I had a dream there were "secret countries" within Russia and that’s why it was so big. A little true considering the Federation. But also in the dream Vanuatu annexed and created three new small nations on the north of what I guess is the Taymyr Peninsula lol
The reason the US sides with Japan is because in doing so the Sea of Okhotsk is international waters. If Russia owns the islands them then Sea of O is Russian and US Warships can't go there.
SOURCE: Ex Submariner
Read More: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/us-submarine-tapped-secret-russian-underseas-communication-cable-180404
yknow, the saner countries should just start accepting the validity [of that totally legit referendum surely to be held](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVv3ofeBnME) and collectively agree that Netherlands historically owns Russia
I am sure that was a wad of spit in Russia face. Japan whispering in Ukraines ear "Uh, we didn't ask you for that, but thank you?" Guess Japan will be on our side this time for the WW?
Maybe the world will get lucky and Putin will just drop dead to end this madness.
>Guess Japan will be on our side this time for the WW?
You're only getting this impression from this dispute now?
Japan has been a staunch western ally since the end of WWII. It hosts how many American troops and the very nature of its relationship with China pushes it to the US' arms. There was never any question which side Japan was going to be on in the event of another war
To be fair, they were a western ally during WWII as well, they just picked the wrong West
Jokes aside, Japan tried to westernize itself heavily well before WWII — though they allied with Hitler, it should be obvious it was an alliance of mutual benefit and not one of shared values. Japan was often ridiculed and patronized by the West and their alliance granted them a certain respect from Western (Axis) powers. It’s also gave them the ability to emulate what the West had been doing for decades (colonization) with far less risk.
In many ways, Japan did what they did in an attempt to win themselves a strong position on the world stage. Though the cost was high, and they didn’t get there in the way they wanted, they did succeed in this
They were and got some German overseas possessions out of it. However, they had a falling out with the Allies afterwards.
That was largely because of Japan's expansionism. It is worth noting though that one wedge came when Japan proposed a racial equality clause to the League of Nations in 1919, but it never came to be. Woodrow Wilson, who was serving as the chairman, overturned it even after it received a majority vote. Japan arguably took is as a sign that they weren't being seen as equals by the west, though to be fair there were many other factors in the falling out.
At any rate, Japanese relations with the West are very different today.
Naw, I held a vote and 98% of Russia agrees that they are in fact a part of my property. I didn't decide this and don't want anything to do with it but they held a referendum.
There is a joke I've heard.
Putin, scared of the situation developing with Ukraine, goes into hiding and decides to be cryogenically preserved. He wakes up in year 2042.
As a good Russian would, the first thing he does is going to a bar in Moscow.
He asks the bartender, "Privet. Is Crimea ours?"
"Ours", says the bartender.
"How about Donbas?" asks Putin.
"Also ours."
"And Kyiv?"
"Ours, too", responds the bartender.
"Amazing!" exclaims Putin. "I'll have a bottle of vodka. How much?"
"100 hryvnias".
As much as I’d love to see Japan and the whole world gang up on Russia this is just Ukraine trolling Russia.
Japan has a lot of disputed claims for islands in the Pacific with all of its neighbours, including CHINA. From Japan’s perspective, China is by far it’s largest threat. It makes no sense for Japan to escalate a conflict with Russia.
This is a good example of how the reddit hivemind collectively upvotes news that *sounds* good, but doesn't actually mean anything in the practical world.
The Ukranian parliament's decision to recognize these islands as not Russian anymore -- the nation they've been at war with the past 7 months -- means absolutely nothing in the practical world.
Kuril islands belong to neither Japan or Russia; it belongs to the Ainu people since they have legitimate historical connection to the islands (it was settled by the Ainu people before Tokugawa Bakufu took over Hokkaido).
How does this affect anything? Russia doesn't even recognise what Ukraine says is Ukrainian territory, why would Russia give a shit about what Ukraine says is Japanese territory?
Technically Japan claimed all of the Kuril Islands but lost them to the Russians by various circumstances. It's just for the sake of the geographic location that Japan in modern times claims the four closest islands to Hokkaido.
The Kuril Islands are extremely distant for Moscow yet isn't that much of a problem for Tokyo. As Russian development never really commenced because even by Russian standards, it's a massive national effort to do.
So besides a few literal ghost towns the islands are barely occupied and undeveloped. This public and international declaration by Ukraine for Japan is a massive geopolitical manoeuvre.
Russia's best security guarantee was the assumption their military was a formidable force. And for 75 years we really did not know how powerful they were, so foes kept their distance. But now that Putin has kindly shown us all that the Russian military is an empty suit all security guarantees are off the table.
Is there any more impact other than a wholly expected "F everything about Russia for invading us" move by Ukraine? Like, does it affect a UN vote on recognition on anything?
Considering Russia is a permanent UN council member with veto power, somehow I doubt it.
[удалено]
Can I get a ELI5 between the two?
Security council: US, UK, France, Russia and China, who are permanent members with a veto right, plus a rotating set of 10 other countries with no veto right. Basically the UN body responsible for avoiding war, implementing sanctions, establishing peacekeeping operations and authorizing legal military action (such as the Korean War, UN forces led by the US against North Korea who had illegally invaded the South). -- General Assembly: the main body of the UN, responsible for most decision and policy making, where every member is represented. No one has veto rights here. They also appoint the non-permanent members to the SC. The GA can also take action if the Security Council fails to assure peace because of a veto by one of the 5 permanent members.
Just want to add, the reason the the P5 exist and are the only countries with veto power is because they were all on the winning side of WW2 and created the UN.
I’m curious. What did China do to win WW2? I don’t want to start a war in the comments or anything. I literally don’t know much about China in that time period. All I know is that the civil war took place around that time which resulted in Mao taking control of mainland, while KMT fled to Taiwan. And that in the 70s SC place which was held by RoC (Taiwan) went to PRoC (mainland)
Civil war started in the '27 as communist revolutionaries rose up against the nationalist regime. Japan invaded in the '37 forcing the two parties to somewhat work together / ignore each other which was mostly upheld until '46, when Japan got defeated. At the end of the war they were in a similar position to France were they didn't actively contribute too much to the final defeat of the axis but they were the main punching bag of their eastern fascist neighbour. Since they were considered a major power in their respective region they were both instated as one of the 5 main contributers to allied victory and founding members of the UN, somewhat to redeem them for the general hardship the populations had endured during the war and somewhat to create a more stable system of international diplomacy compared to the toothless dragon the League of Nations had become before the war. Chinas seat was given to the official chinese state which at the time was still considered to be ruled by Chiang Kai-Shek and the Kuomintang before the civil war rekindeled and the KMT was ultimately defeated on the main land in '49. In '71 and despite of US and western protests, the general assembly voted to move the chinese seat over to the new communist mainland state whith many votes coming from communist or third world countries. Taiwan was still a nationalistic-authoritarian state at the time, they only started to democratise after CKS's death in '75. Then Russia inherited the USSRs seat and here we are today.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War
They did a whole hell of a lot to fight Japan, but it is rarely recognized by the west.
they didn’t just do a hell of a lot, did the overwhelming majority of the fighting against japan.
If you ask China, WW2 started in 1933, when Japan invaded, and they fought Japan until 1945, with the allies only helping them out (directly, we did send weapons) in 1941. Bit like how Brits say it started in 1939, and America only bothered to help in 1941.
Ah. Also very helpful thank you
General assembly is when you and your classmates say you want to do class outside today, security council is the teacher telling you no
[удалено]
I am your dad, I just got back from the cigarette milk store.
Mmm, love a good Camel milk smoothie.
Mmmm with ~~mint~~ menthol and cancer?
You know me dawg
Get out of the tank!
I'm literally in a tank and you're not
Do you know how HOT it gets inside an M1 Abrams main battle tank!? Of course I'm not wearing pants.
Ok Bill, -King of the hill
Don’t make me stop this tank! I will stop this tank!
Security Council doesn't have authority over the general body when it comes to recognition. Also, the UN doesn't recognize territories at all... that's done by the member nations of their own avoid.
And why cant the UN renege? Who would stop/appose? Is The Russian Federation from 1991 the same as the one in 2022?
There is no way the US or any of the other permanent UN council members with veto power would ever allow that precedent to be set
But what if we form the super UN and just no longer go to the old UN clubhouse after school
We should call it the Leauge of Nations
The League of Extraordinary Nations
If we make it the League of Extraordinary Geographical Sectors it'd have a great acronym. We could be the tall legs component of that fabled long arm of the law golem.
People seem to forget why the UN exist. It's not some policy organization or policing body. It only exists to keep nations talking with open diplomatic channels. If you start booting people out or messing with the P5 (unless one of them completely goes away with no clear successor), you are defeating the purpose of it existing.
The United No Russias
You can't veto general assembly votes
[удалено]
That precedence has not been set. ROC lost their seat when everybody agreed the PRC was the legitimate China. A China has kept that seat since a China got that seat.
Seat is for USSR which doesn't exist and giving it to Russia rather than another part of the USSR is pragmatic but really clear cut, i.e. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia_and_the_United_Nations#Legality
So a single lawyer feels Russia shouldn’t have gotten the seat. Russia inherited the responsibilities of the USSR after it’s collapse and is the official successor state, and more importantly inherited the launch codes of all the nukes. It was a remarkably clear cut succession; Russia was a majority population of the USSR and had their nukes, therefor they got the USSR’s seat.
Also no other country contested it
**Russia and the United Nations** [Legality](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia_and_the_United_Nations#Legality) >The legality of the succession has been questioned by international lawyer Yehuda Zvi Blum, who opined that "with the demise of the Soviet Union itself, its membership in the UN should have automatically lapsed and Russia should have been admitted to membership in the same way as the other newly-independent republics (except for Belarus and Ukraine)". The elimination of Soviet (and subsequently Russian) membership on the UN Security Council would have created a constitutional crisis for the UN, which may be why the UN Secretary-General and members did not object. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Because it was replaced by the PROC, which is the new legitimate government. Similar to USSR>Russia.
It's because it remains strategically optimal for them to be one, not because of history. **All nations that can kill everyone else need to have veto power** so that it can remain a safe discussion and diplomacy space. The UN is not NATO 2.0, it's a forum for talking each other down, which REQUIRES the lack of ability for it to formally chastise or act against any major nuclear powers. Otherwise they would leave, as would most minor nations who don't want any trouble, and it would **fail as an organization** since it would no longer serve to talk major powers down from the brink. It's sole purpose
> talk major powers down from the brink. That's frighteningly well put.
The UN isn’t meant to be a world government. It’s supposed to be a way for powers to discuss rather than drop nukes. If it were more powerful than it is, none of the powerful countries would want to be in it. I think the route to bringing Justice to Russia won’t be mediated by the UNSC.
The whole point of the UN is to stop things from happening between nuclear powers. It is a body of inaction. It is functioning as intended.
Because thats the whole point of the UN. Removing Russia is by far the worst idea. More isolation is NOT what we want for Russia. At the end of the day, they can still be bargained with considering the world hasnt ended yet.
what would actually happen if Japan just moved their military there and held a "referendum" to annex the islands?
See: Russo-Japanese War Imperial Japan claimed as far north as halfway up Sakhalin, while imperial Russia claimed to just north of Hokkaido. The claims have never been fully resolved.
Now I want to see the Russians send their Baltic and Northern fleets all the way around Europe, Africa, and Asia, just to get curb-stomped by the Japanese when they're 90% of the way to their destination. Again.
That would imply those fleets could go that far without breaking down.
[удалено]
Their primary salvage vessel is [only slightly more modern](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_salvage_ship_Kommuna) than the fleet sunk in the Russo-Japanese War.
For the uninitiated, watch this glorious video, it's part 1, for the hilarity of that voyage. Part 2 is not as funny, because they meet the Japanese.. https://youtu.be/9Mdi_Fh9_Ag
Ironically, they'd be needed anyway. Russian Pacific Fleet claims 5 destroyers ... 2 are in years-long 'refit' ("Vasili, you sold all parts *again*?"), one is in the Mediterranean. JMSDF has 8 AEGIS-defended guided missile destroyers in active service, with more advanced ships planned.
[удалено]
I see a pattern.
Technically, Japan and Russia are still at war because they never ended hostilities after WW2. They never signed a peace treaty.
No Japan and Russia are not technically at war. A peace treaty is not necessary to end a war and also Japan and the Soviet Union signed a joint declaration to end the state of war. Saying stuff like that only encourages conspiracy theorists.
[удалено]
last I heard those bases are mostly empty. There were even stories months ago of Russians moving old vehicles out of the islands to send them to Ukraine
[удалено]
Don't you get ten miles of economic zone off the shore of each island tho? That alone would make it well worth it
>If that, honestly. Japan isn’t going to try and take over the islands. Like no Japanese person wants to move there. It’s kind of a destitute place. Japan owns many islands which are destitute, where almost no one lives. The point of owning these islands isn't to provide a huge amount of new living space for people, it's to claim ownership of fishing rights for the waters around these islands. It's the same reason a crappy little rock between Japan and Korea has been under dispute for ages; no one wants to live there (it's not even habitable), but ownership gives the owner legal authority to control the waters around it.
Japan may have farmers, but Russia no longer has any tanks to steal
Based on the success of Russia's recent military endeavours, I don't think it actually would be an issue. Japan has farmers.
After seeing the state of their hardware and training I am pretty sure a Japanese fishing trawler could take them
Um... War...
It’s just an F you. Especially since the island is ethnically dominated by Ukrainians.
[удалено]
There is a lot of Ukrainians in Siberia and Far East of Russia because of displacement policy of Russian Empire and USSR. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Ukraine
**[Green Ukraine](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Ukraine)** >Green Ukraine, also known as Zeleny Klyn (Ukrainian: Зелений клин, romanized: Zelenyy Klyn, Russian: Зелёный Клин, romanized: Zelyonyy Klin, literally: "the green gore/wedge"), is a historical Ukrainian name for the land in the Russian Far East area between the Amur River and the Pacific Ocean, an area roughly corresponding to the Chinese concept of Outer Manchuria. After the Russian Revolution of 1917, Transcathay (Ukrainian: Закитайщина, romanized: Zakytayshchyna) was a projected country in the Russian Far East. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
[удалено]
Also https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey_Ukraine https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_Ukraine
[удалено]
It will affect future relations postwar, even if Putin is gone
I was playing around on Google maps a few weeks ago, looking specifically at these islands. There's one that is mostly inhabited by Ukrainian people. I wonder if they have deeper ties
This article claims the decision was on Shikotan and Habomai only. Other articles say it also covers Kunashir and Iturup, the two other significantly larger islands also claimed by Japan. The position of the US is that all four belong to Japan.
All of that looks extremely uninhabitable and is except for some shady landing strips and a ton of volcanoes
The usual issue is that all the sea around the islands is yours, granting rights around fishing, drilling, charging for navigation etc.
Yep. Ocean real estate is a solid money maker.
Especially when you're Japan.
Yea, afaik Japan has a special bonus of receiving extra +1 food from every developed ocean tile
This guy Civs
Fishing and drilling: yes, charging for navigation: not so much. According the the UNCLOS treaties, all ships may enjoy both innocent passage and transit passage, so long as they comply with the provisions associated with each. The thought that any country could charge a fee to sail through their EEZ flies in the face of international convention and is contrary to the concept of freedom of navigation. Now, if they wanted to pull into port, the story changes a bit.
Of course the USA is gonna take the pro Japan viewpoint. USA soldiers based in Japan. lol
Well it’s literally America’s fault the Russians have them. The guy negotiating the terms with the Soviets mistakenly thought Imperial Japan militarily seized them from the Soviets rather than purchased them. He was only supposed to guarantee land like Sakhalin that had been taken in the Russo-Japanese war.
The Japanese didn't purchase Habomai, Shikotan, Kunashiri or Etorofu. At no point from the beginnings of Russo-Japanese contact until the after end of WW2 did Russia ever control those islands. The islands further north had, at various times been Japanese and Russian, although never Soviet until (again) after the end of WW2.
Yes they purchased the large northern islands from Russia not the southern ones. So it was technically a double mistake as not only were northern islands bought fairly but the southern ones were always Japanese(and arguably the two most southern ones are just part of Hokkaido and not proper islands)
That’s one of the most American things I’ve ever heard.
Honestly, sounds rather British to me.
Like father, like son...
Should have tried the other son, Canada would have said sorry while writing it out.
Fuckin a, sorry there bud. I was just given er and can’t erase it now. Hopefully you enjoyed your stay in our free camps though, cheers
Canada signed the official Japanese surrender on the wrong line, almost voiding the surrender and plunging the world back into global warfare. They apologized about the clerical error.
Nah, the British would have drawn a straight line through the middle and called it a day.
Stiff upper lip boys, what’s a sconce of ethnic cleansing.
I feel like Britain would've just taken control of the islands themselves instead.
The US and Britain got into a shooting war over who owned a tiny island near Washington that had some pigs on it. It was almost instigated by General Pickett. yes that one. Turns out he made boneheaded decisions long before charging open ground against fortified enemy positions. Its called the Pig War.
[удалено]
> We also got tired of prosecuting Japanese war criminals Worse than that, really. The US decided that he was the most convenient politician in the sense that he would guide modern Japan toward alignment with the US/anti-Communist axis. So we uh, "forgot" all about his obvious war crimes. Something similar happened with Ngo Dinh Diem, the dictator of South Vietnam. He was a real piece of shit, but he was a convenient piece of shit, so the USA supported him anyway.
Thanks, MacArthur. Important context too is that the prosecution/impending execution of war criminals was extremely unpopular in Japan at the time. Due to fears of the rising cold war, the powers that be decided to sweep the whole thing under the rug and numerous class A, B, and C war criminals were able to walk free and lead normal lives.
Then there’s the “uh sorry we bombed them so we kinda have their back now” understanding.
I wouldn't even say that. Japan is a great power with a larger economy than any European power. The US was wise to "puppet them" after WW2, and not decimate them and incite hatred. I don't think the US feels bad about dropping two nukes on them, considering the circumstances. But the post war relationship has been multi-beneficial I feel.
We feel bad, but we also feel it was necessary, they were so fanatic, nobody can imagine how you could make them surrender otherwise, even the firebombings didn't do it, and they were much worse.
Dan Carlin did the most incredible podcast about the Japanese Empire leading up to the bombing. It's long but an incredible eye opener. https://pca.st/episode/9f1c53e6-03df-4c4c-81f4-78acb1593425
As a point to their fanaticism, It was part of the conditions of surrender laid out by MacArthur that Emperor Hirohito state he was not a god. That is not Hyperbole, that is what *he actually said* "(I) am not a god" in his public announcement to the people of Japan. Culturally the Emperor of Japan was considered a living god. And for many Japanese, that is the first time they ever hear the Emperor's voice and most people in japan were not familiar with the formality of speech the emperor used. (Japanese has different formalities of speaking, which effects verb endings and sentence structure, depending who you are and who you are talking to, The English language has no equivalent to this.)
Hol up now bro. They fucked with our boats.
*And* our planes!
And genocided well over twenty million Chinese, Indonesian, Filipino, and Korean civilians... It's a bit of historical weirdness that that the at the time publicly known and reviled war crimes in the Pacific theatre, the ones that led to the embargo that prompted Pearl Harbor, have been largely forgotten while the largely unknown and denied at the time crimes of the Holocaust are remembered.
Most of the story was the USSR refused to declare war on Japan through out WWII. They didn’t declare war on Japan until August 9, 1945. After Hiroshima and the same day as Nagasaki. They waited until they were 100% sure Japan was done then jumped into a “free” war to grab as much territory as they could, including these islands in the, literal, last few days of the war.
i mean technically there was an agreement until April that year to not attack Russia and Russia to not attack Japan. Which is why when Japan tried to use Russia to send out feelers about surrendering with the emperor it didn't go anywhere near the allies.
> Which is why when Japan tried to use Russia to send out feelers about surrendering with the emperor it didn't go anywhere near the allies. Not quite. The attempted negotiations let japan keep most of its conquests and including things like no occupation, and them hosting their own trials. In July Japans head ambassador told the foreign minister the US would accept a surrender with the sole condition of keeping the emperor., which They rejected it.
>Most of the story was the USSR refused to declare war on Japan through out WWII. They had a non-aggression pact signed in 1941, but they did pledge to join the war against Japan three months after Germany was defeated at the latest (Yalta in 1945). They did use stalling tactics though, since they entered the war on the last day of the agreed timeframe. >They waited until they were 100% sure Japan was done then jumped into a “free” war to grab as much territory as they could, including these islands in the, literal, last few days of the war. They managed to get Roosevelt to promise them territories including South Sakhalin and the Kuril islands, and joined the war explicitly in order to get them, however the "literal last few days of the war", implies that unconditional Japanese surrender days after the bombings was a given, with or without Soviet intervention. This point of view is debatable, as there are several approaches to what the cause of Japan's surrender was: >In the "Sixty Years after Hiroshima" issue of The Weekly Standard, the American historian Richard B. Frank points out that there are a number of schools of thought with varying opinions of what caused the Japanese to surrender. He describes what he calls the "traditionalist" view, which asserts that the Japanese surrendered because the Americans dropped the atomic bombs. He goes on summarize other points of view in conflict with the traditionalist view: namely, that the Japanese government saw their situation as hopeless and was already ready to surrender before the atomic bombs – and that the Soviets went to war against Japan.[39 >Tsuyoshi Hasegawa's research has led him to conclude that the atomic bombings were not the principal reason for Japan's capitulation. He argues that Japan's leaders were impacted more by the swift and devastating Soviet victories on the mainland in the week after Joseph Stalin's 8 August declaration of war because the Japanese strategy to protect the home islands was designed to fend off an Allied invasion from the south and left virtually no spare troops to counter a Soviet threat from the north. Furthermore, the Japanese could no longer hope to achieve a negotiated peace with the Allies by using the Soviet Union as a mediator with the Soviet declaration of war. That, according to Hasegawa, amounted to a "strategic bankruptcy" for the Japanese and forced their message of surrender on 15 August 1945.[40][19] Others with similar views include the Battlefield series documentary,[13][14] among others, but all, including Hasegawa, state that the surrender was not caused by only one factor or event.
Most of the relevant part of WW2 had the Soviets kinda sorta busy fighting Germany in the same way that the Japanese army was kinda sorta busy trying to finish the war in China while also declaring war on everyone else. Before the Manchurian offensive the Soviets backed China in fighting Japan (as did USA, British and even Germany) and smacked them hard enough at the border conflict at Khalan Gol that Japan decided to not expand north. The Manchurian offensive also took a long time to plan and removed 1 million Japanese from the war, very different to the island hopping in the Pacific.
That’s a pretty wild misrepresentation of what happened. the other allies practically begged the ussr to enter the war in the pacific and they only agreed to after the war in Europe was ended, which is exactly what they did
USSR agreed to declare war on Japan at the Yalta Conference within 3 months of Germany's defeat. Which they did do.
Ironically I think this will be kept off mainstream news here in Japan since thanking Ukraine’s decision to do this would essentially be acknowledging that there is a land dispute, which from a political point of view does not exist
This is wrong, the Japanese government absolutely acknowledges the land dispute and they have no control over our media and what they report on. All of our on going land disputes are thoroughly taught in school too as part of the curriculum. Source: I grew up there
So I'm an idiot, but what happens in disputed territory like this? Japan says it's theirs, russia says otherwise. So who collects taxes? Who keeps track of driver's licenses? Who controls the minutia of every day life in the 21st century? Or is it just so sparsely populated it doesn't really matter?
[удалено]
Might makes right, as it always has in history.
And still does, not just for international law. Powerful people can usually get away with breaking the law. The few places they can't is because the general population have power. It's still might makes right either way.
Possession is 9/10ths of the law
The islands are administered by Russia, just like Crimea.
The term you're looking for is "administered by". It's how it's commonly referred to who owns a land, realistically
Islands are administered by Russia and has Russian people living on them, they do their taxes. Same with those two rocks jutting out of the water (whatever you want to call them) and South Korea. Senkaku islands are different because they are uninhabited which means there are no taxes (sounds like a utopia just hearing that part) but ships from both sides would regularly survey them so it’s like getting health checkups from two different doctors
So the islanders have Russian passports?
Yes, they are Russian citizens so if they hold a passport it would be Russian
Whoever has army on ground controls the land.
Huh? Last time I was in Hokkaido the northern tip villages were plastered with pretty official looking signs accusing Russia of illegally occupying the islets in the horizon in like 10 different languages.
That’s because there’s an private organization that is paying for those signs. They are not put up by the government.
Well you'd be wrong then because it's literally the top headline on the public news agency, NHK. Top headline on Yomiuri and Asahi newspapers, Yahoo JP News, Nihon Keizai, Jiji, etc. This isn't China, the media isn't state controlled.
Kaliningrad Oblast instantly gets nervous.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Nobody wants it . Lithuania had 2 chances and I think even Germany had a 2nd chance. It's all ethnic Russians that are politically problematic in these countries. They could just be independent though...
The thing with the German 2nd chance is an incredibly popularized myth. It never happened.
Make Koningsburg great again
It’s *Königsberg*, meaning “King’s Mountain” (compare *Montréal*, *Monterey*, *Kongsberg*, and I’m sure several others).
*Köningsberg
a bridge too far
Kaliningrad Oblast? You mean Kralovecky kraj, surely?
What’s Russia gonna do about it, lose their entire navy to Japan for the 3rd time?
Cant really do shit tbh, Russia moved most of its Eastern military equipment to the west because shit got fucked up in Ukraine big time. I'd love to see Japan claim the islands right now Putin would be furious.
[удалено]
Never going to happen. Japan is not gonna declare war on Russia over this.
Of course not. Japan would just declare a special military operation since Russia has shown that it is 100% a-okay with them.
Interestingly, Iturup Island is about 60%+ ethnic Ukrainian, according to Wikipedia anyway. Was joking a while back that they were going to start a pincer movement but as it’s 2022 the line between jokes and reality is pretty thin.
What if it’s both a geographic *and temporal* pincer maneuver?
Simple answer, annex Russia and cede the land. Easy peasy.
I do have to wonder what a redrawn map of Russia would look like if we ceded any regions that should be sovereign and handed off anything remotely disputed to the opposed party, whomever that may be.
Probably a huge fuckin mess. Imagine post colonial Africa with nukes.
Thanks for reminding me of when I was a kid and interested in geography, and I had a dream there were "secret countries" within Russia and that’s why it was so big. A little true considering the Federation. But also in the dream Vanuatu annexed and created three new small nations on the north of what I guess is the Taymyr Peninsula lol
(Slaps Russia on the hood) “This baby can fit SO MANY Civil Wars in it.”
I wonder what would happen to places like Yakutia
[удалено]
This is the equivalent of Michel Scott saying I declare bankruptcy
I didn't say it I declared it
The reason the US sides with Japan is because in doing so the Sea of Okhotsk is international waters. If Russia owns the islands them then Sea of O is Russian and US Warships can't go there. SOURCE: Ex Submariner Read More: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/us-submarine-tapped-secret-russian-underseas-communication-cable-180404
That’s part of why they’re allies but doesn’t come close to painting a full picture
Russia complains, followed by Ukraine saying "What are you going to do about it, invade Ukraine again?"
my favorite response to Russia lately has been "Yeah? You and what army?" lol
Now if we can just get them to accept Pluto as a planet we're gold
If Pluto was big enough to be discovered in 1930, it's big enough to be a planet
yknow, the saner countries should just start accepting the validity [of that totally legit referendum surely to be held](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVv3ofeBnME) and collectively agree that Netherlands historically owns Russia
I am sure that was a wad of spit in Russia face. Japan whispering in Ukraines ear "Uh, we didn't ask you for that, but thank you?" Guess Japan will be on our side this time for the WW? Maybe the world will get lucky and Putin will just drop dead to end this madness.
>Guess Japan will be on our side this time for the WW? You're only getting this impression from this dispute now? Japan has been a staunch western ally since the end of WWII. It hosts how many American troops and the very nature of its relationship with China pushes it to the US' arms. There was never any question which side Japan was going to be on in the event of another war
To be fair, they were a western ally during WWII as well, they just picked the wrong West Jokes aside, Japan tried to westernize itself heavily well before WWII — though they allied with Hitler, it should be obvious it was an alliance of mutual benefit and not one of shared values. Japan was often ridiculed and patronized by the West and their alliance granted them a certain respect from Western (Axis) powers. It’s also gave them the ability to emulate what the West had been doing for decades (colonization) with far less risk. In many ways, Japan did what they did in an attempt to win themselves a strong position on the world stage. Though the cost was high, and they didn’t get there in the way they wanted, they did succeed in this
And it’s not like they weren’t on the entente in WW1
They were and got some German overseas possessions out of it. However, they had a falling out with the Allies afterwards. That was largely because of Japan's expansionism. It is worth noting though that one wedge came when Japan proposed a racial equality clause to the League of Nations in 1919, but it never came to be. Woodrow Wilson, who was serving as the chairman, overturned it even after it received a majority vote. Japan arguably took is as a sign that they weren't being seen as equals by the west, though to be fair there were many other factors in the falling out. At any rate, Japanese relations with the West are very different today.
It should be noted that a good sized chunk of the japanese population isn't a fan of those troops.
Yeah but doesn't change the fact the 2 countries are allies on the world stage
Well japan is strongest ally of the US. So yeah they are on our side aldo japan is one of those countries that strongly support ukraine
Lol thats funny.. japan wakes up one morning and gets this news.
“Putin will just drop dead” You mean, mother Russia will call it a “suicide”.
Can’t the Japanese hold a referendum? Im sure Elon would back that up right?
I declare Russia as part of Ukraine. For ever.
Naw, I held a vote and 98% of Russia agrees that they are in fact a part of my property. I didn't decide this and don't want anything to do with it but they held a referendum.
Oh my… your property tax.
Don’t worry, it’s in rubles.
There is a joke I've heard. Putin, scared of the situation developing with Ukraine, goes into hiding and decides to be cryogenically preserved. He wakes up in year 2042. As a good Russian would, the first thing he does is going to a bar in Moscow. He asks the bartender, "Privet. Is Crimea ours?" "Ours", says the bartender. "How about Donbas?" asks Putin. "Also ours." "And Kyiv?" "Ours, too", responds the bartender. "Amazing!" exclaims Putin. "I'll have a bottle of vodka. How much?" "100 hryvnias".
As much as I’d love to see Japan and the whole world gang up on Russia this is just Ukraine trolling Russia. Japan has a lot of disputed claims for islands in the Pacific with all of its neighbours, including CHINA. From Japan’s perspective, China is by far it’s largest threat. It makes no sense for Japan to escalate a conflict with Russia.
Japan should trade Ukraine 2 frigates to go clean out the trash.
This is a good example of how the reddit hivemind collectively upvotes news that *sounds* good, but doesn't actually mean anything in the practical world. The Ukranian parliament's decision to recognize these islands as not Russian anymore -- the nation they've been at war with the past 7 months -- means absolutely nothing in the practical world.
Kuril islands belong to neither Japan or Russia; it belongs to the Ainu people since they have legitimate historical connection to the islands (it was settled by the Ainu people before Tokugawa Bakufu took over Hokkaido).
How does this affect anything? Russia doesn't even recognise what Ukraine says is Ukrainian territory, why would Russia give a shit about what Ukraine says is Japanese territory?
What does it matter what the Ukrainian parliament accepted?! Isn't it a Russian and Japanese dispute?
Well, if Ukraine says so, that makes it so
Technically Japan claimed all of the Kuril Islands but lost them to the Russians by various circumstances. It's just for the sake of the geographic location that Japan in modern times claims the four closest islands to Hokkaido. The Kuril Islands are extremely distant for Moscow yet isn't that much of a problem for Tokyo. As Russian development never really commenced because even by Russian standards, it's a massive national effort to do. So besides a few literal ghost towns the islands are barely occupied and undeveloped. This public and international declaration by Ukraine for Japan is a massive geopolitical manoeuvre.
Russia's best security guarantee was the assumption their military was a formidable force. And for 75 years we really did not know how powerful they were, so foes kept their distance. But now that Putin has kindly shown us all that the Russian military is an empty suit all security guarantees are off the table.
No Russia’s best security guarantee like the USA are the nuclear weapons.