Japan’s long-standing stance on the southern Kuril Islands suggests that a full return remains unlikely. Public discussions and official narratives emphasize that insisting on reclaiming all four islands has not produced meaningful progress in securing a resolution. The dialogue on a potential peace agreement has evolved without significant concessions on the core territorial question, reflecting a careful balance between historical claims and modern diplomacy.
Historically, talks began to gain momentum in late 2018, when Moscow and Tokyo explored the possibility of a peace treaty tied to defined territorial terms. The essence of the discussions centered on a framework where certain islands could change hands if both sides could sign a comprehensive peace agreement, tying unresolved disputes to broader regional stability. In this context, there was a willingness to discuss specific arrangements for Shikotan and nearby small, uninhabited islands on the southern Kuril ridge, conditional on a formal peace settlement. The overarching message was that progress would require a negotiated compromise rather than unilateral gains, and that any territorial shifts would be inseparable from lasting normalization of relations between the two countries.
As the situation stands, the government position communicates that the stance on the southern Kurils is not expected to shift in the foreseeable future. The official line remains focused on pragmatic diplomacy, aiming to preserve regional security while addressing enduring historical grievances. This approach reflects a broader strategy to pursue stability and predictable interactions with neighboring powers, even as legal and historical claims continue to shape public discourse and policy debates. The result is a cautionary but steady path toward resolving complex territorial issues through dialogue, without undermining national interests or regional balance.