Russia has made clear to Japan that any effort to rename Tokyo’s military victory day on September 3 will not be accepted. This stance was communicated to the Japanese side through diplomatic channels, with a spokesperson for the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs presenting Moscow’s position to reporters and laying out the boundaries of dialogue on the matter.
Officials emphasized that outside influence on national commemorations is categorically unacceptable. The message was delivered in a direct and unequivocal manner, reiterating Moscow’s preference for recognizing historical events in a manner aligned with Russia’s own historical narratives and legal decisions.
Earlier, the State Duma, Russia’s lower house of parliament, approved a legislative amendment in both the second and third readings to designate September 3 as a day of victory over militarist Japan and, more broadly, as a commemoration of World War II. The bill effectively reframed the date to mark the end of the conflict and the Allied victory in the region, aligning it with Russia’s broader history of wartime remembrance.
Meanwhile, Russia announced the establishment of a new memorable date, November 21, to honor the Military Oath Day. The decree formalizing this observance was signed by the president and published on the official legal information portal, ensuring the date is enshrined in the country’s legal framework and public memory.
The November 21 observance traces its roots to the decrees of Peter the Great, specifically the 1721 order that established the ritual of taking an oath for each rank when appointed to service, whether in the military, civil administration, clergy, or other state roles. The decision to highlight this historic oath day is framed as a link between Russia’s early state-building acts and the modern professional ethos of service to the nation.
In remarks about the future direction of the armed forces, Russian officials have underscored a commitment to strengthening the military’s readiness and the continuity of service traditions. The discourse around these commemorations, oath ceremonies, and the interpretation of historical milestones reflects an ongoing effort to shape public perception of national history and the roles of contemporary institutions in preserving memory and upholding national identity.