314 
The 1975 negotiations have furthered bilateral fisheries relations 
in both procedural and cooperative endeavors. The discussion in early 
June between Soviet Fisheries Minister Ishkov and Japanese Agricul- 
ture-Forestry Minister Abe in Tokyo also touched upon the Law of 
the Sea Conference. Both sides reportedly expressed the need for 
bilateral cooperation at the Conference in view of their common 
interests as major fishing powers. To strengthen their fishery relations 
and to futher cooperation, both sides agreed to hold annual ministerial 
conferences and various scientific consultations.’ 
On June 7, 1975, Ishkov and Japanese Foreign Minister Miljazawa 
signed the agreement on fishing operations near Japan’s coastal waters. 
The increasing denunciation of Soviet activities by both Tokyo and 
Peking had contributed at least to a partial solution of the problem. 
Special committees are to be established in both Moscow and Tokyo 
to settle disputes. In addition, information on each other’s fishing 
operations is to be exchanged and governmental consultations are 
to be held. Ishkov emphasized the “‘new quality”’ in bilateral fishing 
relations based upon this additional area of agreement.!! 
The issue of safe fishing operations illustrates the tension inherent 
in this competitive relationship. Economic demands serve as the im- 
petus for Soviet and Japanese expansion in the scale of operations. 
The friction caused by the Soviet expansion of operations exacerbates 
the existing friction in bilateral fishing relations and thus impedes 
resolution of other sensitive bilateral issues. Yet, the issue of safe 
fishing operations refers not only to Soviet activities near Japanese 
coastal waters, but also to the Soviet treatment of Japanese fishermen 
in the disputed territorial waters. Bilateral actions in the latter area 
convey broader implications that extend beyond the fishing industry.” 
THE DISPUTED ISLANDS—PEACE TREATY NEXUS 
The conclusion of a peace treaty between the Soviet Union and 
Japan depends upon resolution of the “‘Northern Territories” dispute, 
which also affects bilateral fishing relations. In essence, the dispute 
concerns the sovereignty of four islands in the Kurile chain: Shikotan, 
the Habomai Group, Kunashiri, and Etorofu. Prior to World War 
II, Japan exercised sovereignty over these islands. Soviet forces seized 
control over this territory at the close of World War II. The Japanese 
population was repatriated and replaced by Soviet nationals, who en- 
gage chiefly in fishing. Disputes on sovereignty between the Soviet 
Union and Japan are based on different interpretations of the secret 
Yalta agreement, Cairo and Potsdam Declarations, and the San Fran- 
cisco Peace Treaty of 1951. The Soviet claim is primarily based on 
the Yalta Agreement of 1945 which stipulates: 
The former rights of Russia violated by the treacherous attack 
of Japan in 1904 shall be restored, viz: 
(a) the southern part of Sakhalin, as well as the islands adjacent 
to it, shall be returned to the Soviet Union. . . 
The Kurile Islands shall be handed back to the Soviet Union. 
10 Ibid., June 7, 1975. 
" [bid., June 7, 1975. 
12 Ibid., October 12, 1973. 
