I can’t really parse this. Why should Japan care about Crimea or Ukraine?
This also sets a precedent for other neighbors. Korea claims random islands and politicians sometimes call for extreme actions to defend them from Japan (Japan does absolutely nothing and Japanese people, for the most part, do not know of the existence of these islands). China claims random islands that Japan controls with some of the more extreme factions saying Okinawa in its entirety isn’t legitimately Japanese, so it should be independent. But also Okinawa used to be somewhat subservient to China, so eventually independence would mean being a province of China, just like Russia is claiming with eastern Ukraine (or even all of Ukraine, depending on the day).
And there’s also Taiwan, which if China sees people get burnt out with the Ukraine war and go back to normal trade in a year, gives them pretty good odds to rain down missiles then rush in and seize the land with minimum international backfire. And if Taiwan is easily claimed, there’s no reason not to pursue Okinawa and South China Sea territories. And South Sea conflicts would screw over Japan as well, since there’s loads of trade with Vietnam and other countries in the region, and Japan is heavily dependent on food imports from China and elsewhere.
Japan has a lot of reasons to care. If Russia’s strategy pays off (and it’s unfortunately seeming like it will, since people outside of the region are getting burnt out on it and Russian mothers will happily fight until their last son is getting picked apart by dogs), those same methods will be used in East Asia.
It's probably in their best interest not to signal "it's fine to forcibly annex someone else's lands".
What does Japan gain from the idea that one country cannot take another country's territory by force, if it is in fact Russia that is in control of these islands?
If anything, Japan would like them back eventually. All attempts at diplomacy have failed, so force would be the only other option.
That Japan most certainly doesn't want territorial disputes to be resolved by might and current possession status.
> If anything, Japan would like them back eventually.
Yes, and they'd prefer "Russia currently holds them, so they get to keep them" not to be precedent. Russia is attempting to set that precedent in eastern Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova currently.
If Russia „wins“ they could justify using force to free their „historic“ possession.
And if Russia „looses“ they can argue having military control does not imply ownership. And that usage of force to revert military occupation is legal.
After USA pressured Japan to sanction Russia and send military support to Ukraine, all talks about Kurils were terminated.
There are very long tensions between Japan and Russia about the Kuril Islands, that both countries have a claim on. It is very possible, that the same vague claims used on annexing Crimea today, or Donbas, would be used against Japan, and may not stop there. What is more, Japan is an ally of the United States since WW2, and seems to benefit much both militarily and economically. What is more, another raising power in Asia and growing tensions around Taiwan may have the same consequences for Asia, which may threaten japanese influence in the reqion. We are also seeing proliferation of nuclear weapons, and the threats and blackmail is rising, when deescalation is seen as a sign of weakness.
Usually, being united against common threat is the cheapest strategy, and to pay a few bucks less for oil might turn to be very expensive in the long run. If there would be no punishment for disrespecting international law, the chaos would come.
The list of "disrespecting international law" is pretty big. The list of punishment is way shorter and highly selective.
And what punishment are we talking about, voluntary economical sanctions? Those numbers of atrocities, stealing children, mass graves - I still can't understand how the international response is so mild.
This is an interesting little bit on the end of that question.
The problem with unlimited access to information is that you can find a thousand people arguing for a thousand different opposing things with all that information.
In my perspective, there is no doubt about japanese government stance on the matters in Ukraine. And any other non-totalitarian society. I am ready being convinced otherwise.
"Any reason" is a bit of a stretch — I doubt Putin has a dice with country names on it — but given how dumb it was to invade Ukraine, it's not unreasonable to assume he's dumb enough to try Japan.
One thing Japan has that Ukraine does not is a whole bunch of US military installations. (And a mutual defense treaty, but you know what they say about three useless forms of North American paper)
I don't, but I can guess where you're going from the context.
they have attacked several neighbours for no reason and have stated they wish to "reclaim" others
1. Russia hasn't stated a wish to reclaim other countries, even former parts of USSR. 2. Both military conflicts with neighbors Russia participated in: Georgia and Ukraine had very serious reasons and it was not Russia, that initiated both.
what would be better then?
RT I suppose?
Actions count more than words.
20 Feb 2022: "Russian Ambassador to the United States Anatoly Antonov denied Sunday that the Kremlin is preparing for an invasion of neighboring Ukraine..." https://www.cbsnews.com/news/russia-ukraine-ambassador-anato...
21 Feb 2022: Invasion!
I would have thought this kind of knowledge was in the table stakes for anybody with any kind of interest in the matter.
Japan was one of 15 votes on the UN Security Council to pass it.
The countries that invaded Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, etc. decided to sanction Russia, but it's their own thing.
Russia holds veto power. I guess it'll be pretty hard for UN to ignore it.
Why should Japan care about it? For obvious reasons.
For the same reason your neighbor should care if someone breaks into your home, points a gun at your family, and says half your house is theirs now. Oh and no police are coming.