740.0011–PW (Peace)/11–2549
Memorandum by the Assistant Legal Adviser for Political Affairs (Snow)1
Subject: Southern Kurile Islands and the Shikotan Archipelago
1. Reference is made to your memorandum of November 22, 1949,2 subject, Southern Kurile Islands, requesting a study of the legal aspects of the Japanese claim to the retention of Etorofu, Kunashiri, the Habomai Islands and Shikotan.
2. The basis of the Soviet claim to these islands is a passage in the Yalta Agreement of February 11, 1945, between the leaders of the Soviet Union, Great Britain and the United States: “The Kuril Islands shall be handed over to the Soviet Union”. While there are numerous historical enthnographic, political, economic and strategic reasons for Japanese retention of all of the islands above named, the only legal question involved is the definition of the words “Kuril Islands”, as used in the Yalta Agreement. Since all of these islands were without question part of Japan before the war, they should be retained by Japan unless they are part of the “Kuril Islands” within the meaning of the Yalta Agreement.
[Page 905]3. It is believed that there is sound basis for the legal contention that the Habomai and Shikotan are not properly part of the Kuril Islands. Seasons follow:
- a. Geographic: This group of six chief islands, although sometimes called the “Lesser Kuriles”, is also known as the “Shikotan Archipelago”, and the five smaller islands as the “Habomai Group” or the “Suisho” or “Goyomai” islands. It runs parallel to the Kuril chain, and is 35 to 40 miles distant therefrom. The Kurils are a string of volcanic islands which are rising from the sea; the Shikotan archipelago is geologically older and constitutes an extension of the Nemuro or eastern peninsula of Hokkaido. Consequently, the Kurils are rugged and often precipitous, while the Shikotan archipelago consist of low rolling hills.
- b. Historical: While Russia has at one time or another claimed or possessed most of the Kuriles including Etorofu, it has never before claimed any part of the Shikotan archipelago. Early Russian explorers or settlers apparently erected markers on Etorofu, which the Japanese threw down in 1800, when they made settlement on that island. From that time on Russian expeditons continued their research from the north only as far as Uruppu. After a near century of dispute over Etorofu, in the Russo-Japanese Treaty of Amity of 1855, the frontier between Russia and Japan was drawn between Etorofu and Uruppu. Etorofu was to belong to Japan, and Uruppu “as well as all the Kurile Islands situated to the north of this island”, were to belong to Russia. In the St. Petersburg Treaty of 1875, in exchange for all Japanese claims to Saghalien, The Emperor of Russia ceded to the Emperor of Japan “the group of islands called Kuriles, which he possesses actually, together with all the rights of sovereignty derived from their possession, so that henceforth the said group of the Kuriles shall belong to the Empire of Japan. This group comprises the 18 islands named below [“]—naming 18 islands north of Etorofu. While the language of this treaty indicates that the islands ceded to Japan were only one group of the Kuriles, the other group may well have been Etorofu and Kunashiri. Both of these treaties are evidence that Etorofu, at least, is part of the Kuriles, but neither of them gives any such indication as to the Shikotan archipelago.
- c. Political: The Habomai Islands were never included politically in the Kurile Islands, but since 1915 have been administered by the Japanese as part of Habomai Village of Nemuro County of Hokkaido. The Kurile Islands in the possession of Japan were in Chishima County, another part of the Nemuro Branch Administration. Shikotan, however, appears to have been included with the south Kuriles for the sake of convenience.
4. There seems to be no sound legal reason for claiming that Kunashiri and Etorofu are not part of the Kurile Islands. While, as indicated above, they have never been under Russian sovereignty since the Treaty of 1855, both that Treaty and the Treaty of 1875 indicate that they were considered to be part of the Kurile Islands. Mr. Fearey’s memorandum of September 1947, summarizes the reasons why the [Page 906] United States might wish to support Japan’s claim to these islands, but there seems to be no legal support for the wish.
5. Note. That Shikotan and the Habomais are economically of importance to Japan is indicated by the fact that these islands produce 40 percent of Hokkaido’s production of Kombu (edible sea-weed), which in turn accounts for 97 percent of Japan’s total production. The waters of all of these islands yield crab, salmon, trout, cod, shark, scallop and whale, as well as the Kombu mentioned above. From 1935 to 1944 inclusive, Shikotan and the Habomais averaged 92,349 metric-tons of these products annually, while Etorofu and Kunashiri averaged 118,850 metric tons. It appears, therefore, that if Shikotan and the Habomais could be preserved for Japan 45 percent of the total fishing potential of the area in question would be saved.