“If a diplomat does not know his country, what and whom can he represent?”

Dean of the Diplomatic Academy of the MFA of Ukraine, international expert on the Asian and Pacific regions Mykola KULINYCH has a most extensive experience of working in Japan among Ukrainian diplomats. He has spent 10 years in this country and knows a lot about Japanese mentality and the history of the very complicated relations between Japan and Russia. He started the conversation at Den’s editorial office with explanation of peculiarities of settling the Northern Territories problem.

“RUSSIAN-JAPANESE RELATIONS ARE A HISTORY OF TOTAL DECEPTION”

“I was one of the first who started openly saying that Russia has no international legal, or any other grounds that would confirm that the Northern Territories, which are now controlled by the RF, are part of Russia. It was a political decision made after the World War II.

“Starting with the Treaty of Shimoda of 1855, the Treaty of Saint Petersburg 20 years later, and even the first Soviet document which established bilateral relations with Japan in 1925, ‘On the Principles of Relations between the USSR and Japan,’ all of them clearly confirmed the border, which was de facto established before the revolution, along the center of Sakhalin. It was recognized even by the Soviet Union in the last document, the Pact of Neutrality, which, by the way, was violated by the Soviet Union. The Japanese thought that it was not Japan that violated the truce with the Soviet Union. Japan did not attack the Soviet Union. The war was declared by the Soviet Union, which promised the Allies in Tehran and then in Yalta that it would unleash war.

“Besides, the mentality nuance is important here. The Japanese will never accept the loss of islands [the Kuril Islands. – Ed.]. They think that the Soviet Union fooled them.

“I ask my students when the World War II ended. The majority answers that on September 2, when the Instrument of Surrender was signed on the deck of the USS Missouri in Tokyo Bay by General MacArthur from the US side, and Ukrainian General Kuzma Derevianko representing the USSR. But they did not mention the official capitulation of Emperor Hirohito, who on August 14 ordered all Japanese army forces to surrender. This was the first time he made a speech on the radio. It was done so the Kwantung Army in Manchuria would hear him. And the wording was the following: ‘I ask all the commanders to control and see to it that everyone lays down the arms.’

“When I still was a university lecturer, it was a mystery to me how it is possible to capture an army of million soldiers. But the thing is that they surrendered due to the Emperor’s address on August 14. Japan ceased its hostilities on August 14, and the Soviet troops landed on the Kuril Islands the next day, taking advantage of the absence of resistance. The Japanese army ceased hostilities and capitulated, but the USSR fooled them by seizing this territory.

“And now the Japanese talk about this with pain. The history of Russo-Japanese relations is a history of total deception. For example, Khrushchev promised to give two islands back. A declaration was adopted in 1956, which was ratified by the presidium of the Supreme Council of the Soviet Union. But in 1960  the Soviets sign an agreement on security with Americans, and with a note signed by Gromyko, they inform that under the established political circumstances ‘we consider ourselves exempt from the implementation of this document,’ which had been ratified. Thus, the Soviet Union MFA canceled all previous agreements.

“Brezhnev was the first to start hinting on the possible transfer of islands, but he stated that the USSR needed loans. In 1973, prime minister Tanaka came to negotiate with Brezhnev. He stated that Japan would invest in the Far East, provide loans, but all the issues must be settled. Brezhnev was told that he was supposed to say something. And he stated that he was ready to settle other unresolved questions. A communique was signed. The Japanese provided the Soviet Union with loans for Nakhodka construction and said, now let’s settle our issues. And the USSR MFA answers: what territorial issues are you talking about? There are no such issues. The Japanese answer that the communique states: ‘and other unresolved issues.’ And the Russians say that something different was meant, the opening of a consulate.”

Recently Putin said that he is like Bismarck, he talks openly about everything. But everyone knows another quote by the German Chancellor: a document with Russia is not worth the paper it is written on.

“Japanese learned it very well. The whole history of their relations with Russia is on the verge of foul. The genesis of Russian politics is hypocrisy: reach an agreement, receive the money, forget everything. And after this, Tikhonov was head of the USSR Council of Ministers. I remember when Asahi interviewed him and asked how the Soviet Union planned to settle the Northern Territories dispute. He answered: ‘Such an issue does not exist in the USSR. Perhaps, you have some issues, but we don’t.’ Then Shevardnadze started saying something. Later Gorbachev talked about it. Japanese trusted him. I was in Tokyo when he came there after his resignation. He was worshipped, because he gave a chance to believe that this problem might be solved in some way. His Nobel Prize laureate lecture was attended by so many people as if he were a pop star. People were standing in the aisles. I saw him live for the first time. We did not manage to open our embassy back then yet, I worked as the ambassador’s adviser, basically the first person, a temporary confidant, because there was no ambassador yet. And I received an invitation to Gorbachev’s lecture.

“The huge hall was packed. I was sitting next to the RF embassy adviser Yefimov. Gorbachev starts: ‘Yeltsin failed everything, we wanted to build a new Soviet Union. I am visiting the CIS countries now, everyone says, let’s unite.’ The moderator tells him, they became independent. And Gorbachev replies: ‘What independence are you talking about? Let us unite again, if this Belavezha group had not ruined everything, we would have gone even farther.’

“A break is announced, Gorbachev is walking down a corridor, accompanied by a cameraman. He sees that I am obviously not Japanese, he greets me and asks who am I and where I am from. I say I’m from Ukraine. He says: ‘You see, they even come from Ukraine. What are you doing here, where are you working?’ I   say that I work as an adviser at the embassy of independent Ukraine. It was a shock for him. He was shaking my hand and suddenly tore the grip. Operators asked what happened. That was the only time I talked to Gorbachev and perhaps spoiled his mood.

“And this, as the Englishmen say, endless story repeats all the time. Let’s negotiate, then it turns out the circumstances haven’t matured, and we do not trade in sovereignty. And everything remains where it was.”

By the way, the incumbent Japanese prime minister promises to solve this question in his pre-election campaign program.

“Every prime minister, every government starts with a promise to return these territories. Of course, they understand how it can be done and are ready to carry out negotiations with anyone.   There were various combinations of using these territories jointly in economic sense, but this is a matter of principle. Japanese put the question point-blank. First you recognize this territory is ours, and then we are ready to cooperate and create an economic zone.”

That is, they learned their lesson of relations with the Russians well: first bring your recognition, and then everything else comes.

“Yes. A peace agreement will follow. No matter what the government and the political line, the Japanese emphasize this. Let’s say, the Democrats led by Hatoyama, whose grandfather made this joint declaration with Khrushchev in 1956, said: we will do everything, but we will carry out a calm dialog to bring these territories back. It is very important that there is a consensus on this matter in the Japanese society. Anyone, be it the Democrats or the Liberal Democrats, know that this is Japanese territory when they come to power. The only ones who have a special standpoint are the Japanese Communists. They demand to return these territories and southern Sakhalin. And they occasionally remind about their special standpoint, but everyone in the parliament supports measures on the fair settling of this issue.”

“UKRAINE’S EUROCENTRISM MUST COMBINE WITH EXTENSIVE ACTIVITY IN ALL DIRECTIONS”

By the way, I would like to know your opinion on the thesis of Japan’s Ambassador to Ukraine Shigeki Sumi who said in his interview to The Day that Ukraine is trying out its road to Europe, but perhaps should also look east.

“I quite share his opinion. Our fixation on Europe is absolutely justified strategically, because we are a European country, and this is our natural environment. But it should not be done at the expense of other directions. This Eurocentrism must combine with other extensive activities in all directions. We have to know the major geopolitical trends. They are not confined exclusively to Europe; conversely, I would say that the most active and accelerated economic geopolitical development is taking place in the Asian-Pacific region.”

Could you say that Ukraine’s government realizes this and acts correspondingly, and could frequent visits of our presidents to the region prove it?

“It depends on the priorities. If we only wanted to get cash, it is one thing. You can go wherever you like to ask for money. In my opinion, this is exactly what happened. But with prospects of cooperation in mind, and investments in the future, these countries are indispensable. According to forecasts, this year China will rank first in GDP. See, how rapidly the configuration is changing. In recent years Japan has been second to the US in terms of economic power, and now it is third. Japanese are very much worried that they have lost to China. For them, it is a matter of prestige, national mentality. Never in their lives were they second to China, and you see how constructive this national idea can be.

“Abe set a task to intensify efforts, otherwise Japan will lose to China in everything, politically and economically. And Abenomics, if you please, is the response to the lost ground. This happened when the Democrats were in power, and then the Liberal Democratic Party said: the Democrats are to blame, but we will do our best to pull the country out of the dip. Abenomics has provided 2 percent of the GDP growth, and it is really working.”

“No matter how much prime minister Abe’s economic policy was derided, it proved efficient. If the Japanese have something on their mind, they will implement it. They have a very different philosophy. In Japan I had everything I do not have here: predictability, responsibility, reliability, honesty, and a clear vision of the perspective. This is immanent, they will not start anything without a clear-cut plan. Of course, I am idealizing things a little. The Japanese society has many dimensions.

“When the country lay in ruin in 1945, they swore to revive Japan. We only know about the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Few know that bombings by America’s strategic aviation in April that very year took 230,000 lives. Next to the emperor’s palace survived buildings dating back to 1930, but the rest, made of bamboo, burnt down. Since then the Japanese promised to rebuild everything and make it even better.

“The Central Station, which was also laid waste in 1945, was always crowded. Alarm clocks (made in Japan) were sold by the kilo. The first thing a Japanese person needed back then was an alarm clock! All the rest could wait. It was necessary to get up at six in the morning and go to work.

“After some 20 years, in 1965, a boom begins. The Japanese are convinced that everything is doable. Thence such concentration and strategic thinking on national level.”

So, do you think Japan can regain its second place as a world economy?

“Now it is not only up to them to decide. China is a great power. But they are in for some hard times. I and my colleagues are increasingly convinced that the Chinese’s extensive development has exhausted. Firstly, China’s economy is dependent on energy. Where are they to look for partners? They won’t be looking for some Gulf country. Therefore, they chose Russia. The Chinese realize that if they do not build up some strategic things now (such as energy independence, the efficiency of this sector, large-scale production), they will lose.

“The Japanese realize that they will survive if they trade. What is Japan? It’s a rock in the ocean. If before the war they had coal, now even that is gone. Everything is exhausted. There are rice pads in the center of the city. Even in the center of a tiny city there is a water pad, which is cultivated. Only 17 percent of Japan’s territory is arable, the rest is mountains and forests. If the Japanese don’t trade, that will mean the end of their story. That is why China is Japan’s biggest trade and investment partner.

“All contemporary history will be built around Japan’s mutual compatibility and complementarity with China. Japan has everything that China needs, and vice versa.

“In fact, China now has its last years and the opportunity window to realize itself not only as an economic power, but also as a political player. The collapse of Russia’s authority helps, and the US cannot concentrate on it because of its other commitments, in the Middle East and Europe. China can make a move now. The Chinese realize it, and now they will become increasingly active.”

“OUR POLITICS CANNOT BE AGGRESSIVE EVEN IN FORM”

Russia’s foreign ministry is using an aggressive style in its work in order to get across to the foreign audience those messages which are convenient for the Kremlin. Again and again Ukraine must disprove statements made by Churkin or Lavrov. How do you think could diplomatic aggression be counteracting without losing our own face?

“Our politics cannot be aggressive even in form. In this case, why are they being aggressive? Because they have no proofs, no arguments. If you lack common sense and arguments, then you resort to falsifications and deceit. They say, ‘How can you negotiate with him? He is a fascist!’ And you think, well, do I have to prove I am not a fascist?

“Russians have deprived themselves of all the Soviet and Russian diplomacy used to be renowned for. It used to be sophisticated. If their diplomacy survived the Cold War, it had tools. Now Russian diplomacy has kept the propaganda. But it never used to have such bold-faced falsifications, deliberately and wittingly using fictitious pleas as arguments.

“Diplomats have an honest rating: we all can say whatever we like, but we know the real state of affairs, what you and your country are worth. But if you resort to something of this kind, it means that you have lost all positive tools. That is why Russians resort to such bold-faced, cynical, and damned lies, so even the West is now wondering how it could help Ukraine’s counterpropaganda.

“We have some very strong points, which are obvious a priori and are well-accepted. The Ukrainian nation has the right to choose for itself, we define it ourselves. We have made a European choice. Why should someone prevent us from moving in that direction? Surprisingly, this is a very clear logic.

“We have our own evidence base and, lofty as it might sound, the truth is on our side. We need not invent anything, all the facts play in our hands. Russians, in their turn, need to make up lies, find a ‘little boy’ to be ‘crucified in Sloviansk.’ And the more lies they make, the more obvious they become. Our information policy has to be well thought-out: we need to find and systematize the cumulative solid arguments and facts. The truth must reach not only the leaders of many countries – they are well aware of the situation – but also their voters. It is the voters that are targeted by Russian propaganda, and they prop politicians.”