Dec. 12.
Since the Russo-Japanese Fishery Convention was concluded in 1907, following the: Treaty of Portsmouth, there has on occasion been something in the nature of a dispute between the two countries each time the agreement comes up for renewal. In recent years there have been several such cases, and the present deadlock between the two nations over a renewal of the agreement, whether for a short or a long period, is just such another example. Were it not for a number of outstanding questions between Tokyo and Moscow, it is possible that the matter would be speedily adjusted, for it is obviously in the best interests of the two countries that this should be done. The present dispute arises out of conflicting views held by the respective Governments. Moscow considers that the question of a new fisheries agreement should be made dependent upon the adjustment of all questions at present outstanding between the two countries, while Tokyo insists that each must be taken upon its merits, and separately at that. From that point of view it appears that Soviet Russia is more sincere in its desire to bring about a better state of affairs in this portion of the world, while Japan seems to be entirely without that same quality, the Jack of which on the part of other nations in her eyes constitutes so important a grievance. It is alleged that the Russian Government is holding up the conclusion of a fishery agreement because (1) Manchoukuo is withholding the final payment on the sale of Russian interests in the Chinese Eastern Railway, amounting to Yen 6,000,000, (2) that Japan has violated the terms of the 'Treaty of Portsmouth regarding the number} of Japanese soldiers to be stationed in Manchuria, and (3) Japanese interference with free navigation of La Perouse Strait between Hokkaido and Saghalien. With regard to the Second of these three' points the attitude adopted by Japan is that, since Manchoukuo's "declaration of independence," conditions have greatly changed, and that it is now by reason of a treaty between Manchoukuo and Japan that the latter is stationing troops in the former country in the numbers she has there at present. That amounts to a contention that at least in this one respect the Treaty of Portsmouth has ceased to be effect.
That is hotly contested by M. -Litvinov. The alleged new situation in Manchuria is hot recognized, and it is denied that Japan has any right to select which portions of the Treaty are applicable to her and which are not. Japan's contention that the forbidden zones in La Perouse Strait should not inter-fore with the free passage of Soviet shipping, is countered by the Russian contention that as the erection of military structures on the shores of the straits is prohibited, there should be no forbidden zones. By the Treaty of Portsmouth both nations agreed not to construct any fortifications on the Island of Saghalien or the adjacent islands, and also engaged not to take any military measures: which might impede the free navigation of the strait in question. This is, obviously, another of. those provisions of the Treaty, which proving disadvantageous of Japan, is being disregarded, by her. It will be seen, therefore, that while Tokyo is in fact ignoring two provisions of the Treaty, with regard to the fisheries question she is insisting upon the validity and applicability of the appropriate Article. That} is in keeping with the Japanese policy with regard to other diplomatic commitments, for the last sixteen months have made it quite obvious that only such portions of the various treaties which suit her purpose are to be honoured, while those which do not are to be thrown into the discard. With that point of view M. Litvinov most certainly does not. agree, and it is to be expected that until he receives satisfaction on those two points, as well as the payment with regard to the. Chinese Eastern Railway there will continue, fo be a disobliging attitude on the part of Moscow towards Japanese requirements. The Payment of the final instalment of the purchase price of the Russian interests in the Chinese Eastern Railway is a somewhat different matter. Japan claims that there are certain sums owing by the Soviet Government, and the argument seems to emerge that this matter could be settled between the Manchoukuo Government and the Kremlin, as something with which the Japanese have no concern.
The point involved is obviously the difference between Japanese and Russian views on the subject of the status of Manchoukuo. Though Japan insists upon the independence the country, Soviet Russian regards that claim as a piece of pure fiction, and that in
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.