There used to be a joke during the Soviet era that there was no truth in Pravda. However, when Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov made public his government's intention to follow the declaration that was concluded with Japan in 1956, which stipulates handing over two of the Kuril Islands (Khabomai and Shikotan) to Japan, Pravda was compelled to report as true.

For historical reasons, the Chinese in Malaysia are traditionally interested in developments regarding Sino-Japan relations, of which the leitmotif is always Japan's refusal to own up to its war time aggression in China and many parts of Asia. This is true to some extent, but not at all correct to point to the failure of Japan in facing up to its militarist past, for Toiichi Murayama , prime minister in 1995, did express in no uncertain terms Japan's remorse for WWII.

Therefore, the real problem is the shifting and drifting position of Japan with regard to its war crimes, as seen in the vague stance taken by the successive governments, which causes unnecessary and at times damaging tension between Tokyo, Beijing, Pyongyang and Seoul. But this is a different issue that deserves an in-depth analysis.

As far as Russo-Japan ties are concerned, the territorial dispute over the four northern islands of Japan (Habomai, Shikotan, Kunashiri and Etorofu) has always remained the crux. As a result, the Soviet Union, and later Russia, and Japan have found signing a peace treaty an insurmountable task since the restoration of diplomatic relations in 1956.

The "2+2" solution provided under the joint declaration between both countries has failed to yield any concrete results, and the process of negotiation was strewn with further conflict as Japan and the United States forged closer security ties at the height of the Cold War. The Soviet Union moderated its stance from the mid 1980s, and finally in 2001 recognized the validity of the 1956 treaty.

Four islands issue

One may disagree with President Vladimir Putin in regard to his iron-fist on Chechnya and other republics with separatist tendencies, the fact that he is willing to forego two islands in exchange of a more stable geopolitical environment speaks volumes of the pragmatic foreign policy of Russia. Throughout the 1990s, Russia, once clad in the resplendence of the Soviet Union, was often ridiculed as a power that 'has lost its empire and yet to find a role', echoing the tormenting experience of the British in the 1950s and 60s.

To Russia's dismay, Japan turns down the overture by Moscow flatly, opting to adhere to the 'four islands in a batch' position. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi said on Nov 16 that Japan cannot be content with the return of two of the four islands, and that the government maintained the policy of concluding a peace treaty only after clarifying who owns the islands. Those who wish for peace in Northeast Asia should keep their champagne in the fridge for a while yet.

Japan is not the only country to which concessions have been proposed or made by Russia. On Oct 14 this year, Lavrov signed an agreement with his Chinese counterpart Li Zhaoxing in Beijing, which put paid to the long-running dispute over territorial integrity between the two giants. For the first time, the 2,700-mile-long Russian-China border is fixed since the dying years of the Qing Dynasty.

However, details of the border agreement are conspicuously sketchy and evasive at best, for a reason. The Malaysian-owned, Hong Kong-based and politically pro-Beijing Ya Zhou Zhou Kan, a Chinese-language international weekly, suggests the both sides will release the contents of the agreement in stages as a move to mentally prepare the general public and guard against any possible backlash in the wake of the 'concessions'.

Relinquish claims

China, especially, has reasons to be cautious. The core dispute surrounds the final and effective jurisdiction over the two uninhabited islands currently under Russian control. Zhang Qiyue, the spokeswoman of China's foreign ministry, would only go as far as to say that an agreement had been reached between Beijing and Moscow, but not allow the journalists to delve into details.

Now the Internet is already awash with speculations that the Hu Jintao administration, having secured control over the two islands, known as Da Heixiazi and Xiao Heixiazi, has traded off Chinese sovereignty by relinquishing all the territorial claims on Russian land, effectively legitimizing the unequal treaties signed with the Russians by the unscrupulous Qing mandarins. In the face of the rising clashes all over the country, it is indeed a testing time for the Hu leadership, who must contain the brimming nationalist sentiments while maintaining good neighborliness with both Russia and Japan. Little wonder that Beijing has kept the news of its apology to Tokyo for the submarine fiasco from the Chinese public.

Territory intersects power and space, and hence becomes the fulcrum of all political maneuver in world history. One inch of land conceded always amounts to national disgrace, which could escalate into a popular revolt if not handled with care. The deal with China, although made in good faith, expectedly led to protests in the Khabarovsk region, which includes some of the islands. To many a Russian, any territorial concession, no matter how minimal, invariably arouses the painful memory of losing the Soviet Empire.

The leaders of China, Japan and Russia are all walking a tightrope of territorial integrity, and the power play has just entered a momentous phase with the goodwill of Putin. However, before a peace treaty is signed between Moscow and Tokyo, and before Tokyo and Beijing can resolve the emotive war issue, Northeast Asia will continue to be shrouded in great uncertainty. Not the time to cork the Russian vodka, the Chinese maotai, or the Japanese sake yet.