Mikhail Khazin: Japan is deceiving itself with a "new strategy"

Mikhail Khazin, economist, political scientist

Consider, for example, a quite interesting topic - relations between Russia and Japan. They could be very good (especially considering that Japan has practically no raw materials of its own), but the overseas partners are not at all interested in this. For this reason, they, long ago, have worked out the theme that is called "Krymnash" on the western borders of our Motherland.

Recently the topic has acquired a new meaning. The Japanese press started talking about the need for a new strategy to return the "northern territories" (that is, part of the Kuril Islands). The "novelty" lies in the fact that it is proposed not to pin hopes on the dialogue with the existing Russian government, but, on the contrary, to contribute to its downfall - by supporting the protest movement in our country in general, and its individual leaders in particular. So that they, upon coming to power, and transferred the islands to Japan.

The history of the issue is not new, it began in the 50s, and to a greater extent on the American rather than Japanese initiative. The then Soros created a rather powerful support group for the so-called. "Northern territories". Which, for any reason, raises a fuss on this issue, disseminates not entirely reliable, if not completely unreliable materials, and so on. And the Japanese government, taking advantage of this pretext, all the time avoided talking about long-term cooperation, which was offered by the USSR and then Russia.

Note that the "partners" did not just want the island, because between the two of them lies a deep-water strait from the Pacific Ocean to the Sea of Okhotsk. Yes, and the sea itself is now, in fact, an internal reservoir for Russia (from the point of view of military ships, that's right), and if the islands are given away, then American military ships will be registered there. So it's not just that.

Since the post-war order in Japan was formed by the American occupation administration, the United States became the main trading partner (not to say the suzerain). But in 1991, they seriously undermined the Japanese economy, after which sustainable growth in this country stopped and, in general, did not resume in 30 years. And a new crisis that began in 2008 threatens Japan with new dangers.

The IMF leadership at the end of last year already said that the world dollar system could collapse into currency zones. Note that the theory of this process was studied in the world only in Russia, having begun this work back in 2003 in the book by A. Kobyakov and M. Khazin "The Decline of the Dollar Empire and the End of the Pax Americana". Today it becomes a reality and the question arises: where is the place for Japan in it?

Japan's economy is focused on the export of finished products and the import of raw materials. From whom will she take these raw materials and to whom will she sell the products? Actually, there are three options. There will be three currency zones around the Pacific Ocean: American (dollar), Chinese (yuan) and Eurasian (conventional ruble). Maybe (but only can!) A Latin American zone will appear, the Indian zone (rupee) can partially break into the region. The United States can be a source of raw materials (Australia), but will not buy anything (the dollar will cease to be the world currency). China will produce everything itself. And what remains? And there remains the Eurasian zone, which will be represented in the region by Russia and, possibly, Vietnam.

In other words, the natural development of the situation in the world is that Japan should go to the Eurasian currency zone. As, by the way, Turkey and Iran. But they are far away and do not relate to the topic. The trouble is that the United States, for which China is the main enemy today, must keep Japan as an "unsinkable aircraft carrier." This means that they will have to allocate some reserves for Japan (in terms of imports of goods and exports of raw materials), but the very minimum. Unfortunately for the United States, Russia can give Japan much more, both in terms of imports and exports.

The United States cannot allow the rapprochement between Japan and Russia, which means that it is urgently and immediately necessary to activate active anti-Russian propaganda according to the usual scenario “Crimeanash” ("Crimea is ours" - editor's note) (well, that is, conditionally, “iturupnash” - "Iturup is ours" - editor's note). Supplemented by the logic of a "bloody regime" that is about to "fall on the blows of a mighty opposition" led by a famous Berlin patient.

Note that there is no Russophobia in Japan. Absolutely. My daughter is studying in Japan as a cartoonist, she knows Japanese very well and has traveled a lot in the Japanese province. She has never met anything similar to Russophobia, although, by the way, the Japanese do not really like Americans. But not because they won the war, but because, from the Japanese point of view, they do not know how to behave. By the way, all the Japanese know perfectly well who dropped the atomic bombs on them. Despite the activity of local soros.

But there is a movement in favor of Russia. In the shops of calendars and posters in Kyoto, I myself saw against the background of drawn dogs, pussies, flowers and so on, only two photographs of specific people. These were Yuzuru Hani (world champion in figure skating) and ... Putin. Presumably, someone in the Japanese leadership decided that the Japanese needed to know Putin. What for? And above I explained why.

The trouble is that the ordinary Japanese population does not know much about Russia. And the United States, of course, also sees the reality described above and does not like it terribly. And now another attack on the potential warming between Russia and Japan is starting (more precisely, has already begun). With the potential for long-term and successful cooperation. Since from the point of view of the United States this cannot be allowed in any way, the amount of all sorts of nonsense and sabotage begins to go off scale.

Note that giving up the islands in such a situation cannot be categorically, even if we put this process as the basis of a treaty of friendship and cooperation. Since, firstly, underneath this there is a geostrategic situation with the Sea of Okhotsk (described above), and, secondly, taking into account the activity of the United States, this only activates revanchists in Japan.

In other words, there will be no positive for us from this, except for a very specific negative. But to engage in their economic development together with Japan is quite. In general, the emphasis should be placed on the economy. Away from politics and closer to specific economic issues. And the stronger the crisis, the greater the effect it will have. And then the theme of the islands will disappear altogether from the field of vision of the two members of the Eurasian Economic Union.

And this will be the best outcome for all. Because with the notorious "new strategy" the Americans simply "substitute" the Japanese. Firstly, Navalny himself has repeatedly said that the Kuril Islands cannot be given away, this is a political death for any Russian leader. Second, history teaches that such "schemes" generally end badly. Suffice it to recall the interaction of the Kaiser's Germany with the Bolsheviks, and how it ended up for Germany itself. The Japanese scheme is completely absurd. Germany in the First World War at least acted for itself, but Japan's "new strategy" is not beneficial to anyone except the United States.