Kuril Islands conflict

[kilo]

If Japan tried to take the Kuril Islands back by force do you think Russia would be able to defend/reclaim them. The Pacific surface fleet consists of 8 major surface combatants 15 submarines and 30 small missile craft compared to Japan's 44 major surface combatants. Japan has 17 submarines and 293 fighter/strike aircraft. Russia has over 800 fighters alone plus numerous bombers/attack aircraft though they probably don't have the bases or logistics to support them all in the far east. several factors will effect the outcome of the conflict.

1. How alert are the forces in the Russian Far east?

2. What role will the rest of Russia's fleet be able to play in the war?

3.Will Russia be able to reactivate reserve units in the Pacific specifically the 2 Oscar 1's and the Kirov cruiser?

4. How much of their air force will Russia be able to support in the theater of operations?

Personally I think the Pacific surface fleet has no chance they should avoid battle and survive and hide in the vastness of the North Pacific until the rest of the fleet can arrive. I think the subs have a much better chance they can sail south and hide in the trench east of the Kuril islands and attack the Japanese fleet from their. logistics for aircraft will be a huge problem but Russia will still be able to operate more aircraft then Japan and control of the sky would be contested throughout the conflict

I know Japan is unlikely to attack the Kuril Islands so please dont go off topic by discussing the politics of this. This is all theoretical.

 

[chakos]

You forget that China and Russia have a standing alliance of sorts in the SCO and China would see any Japanese military invasion as an excuse to slap down Japan once and for all. The Chinese would hold the situation at a stalemate untill more Russian units arrived and then i would see a joint amphibious invasion of the islands much like the one practiced the last time the Chinese and Russians held joint exercises.

 

[Firehorse]

Well, IMO Japan is highly unlikely to attempt retaking S.Kurils by force, as long as the Russian Federation has firm control over them. The Japanese proved to be more patient than the Argentinians were in 1982 when they invaded the Falklands- and we all know the result.
As for the hypothetical Russian responce, they may also deploy Adm. Kuznetsov and other ships/subs via the Arctic into the Far East. The main value of those islands to Japan, besides political, are fish resources. Contaminate the waters there by nukes or other means and they'll turn to another "seafood" Hiroshima. In that case, there will be no winners, even if Japan gets them back!
BTW, interesting article by Fisher-
Japanese Military Technology Advances

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Deleted

 

[Grand Danois]

No reason to hide. Ports are already defended by SAMs and other AD. We're talking about S300 and S400 sams here.

Huh? S-400 has bare entered service with the regiments in the Moscow region, and now they are on the Kuriles?

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Deleted

 

[Chrom]

I pretty much doubt fighting over Kuriles will play any significant role - it is impossible to do anything important on barrel insels. The garrison itself is very small and basicaly is small border guards regiment uncapable of any resistance. The fate of insels will be desided outside them - and here Russia will have very considerable advantage due to Japan being small and within reach of russian forces.

Even conventional cruise missile inside Tokio's skyscraper is major pain, not to tell about various high-tech factories and naval blockade.

In two words, the war is economically impossible for Japan.

 

[kilo]

I pretty much doubt fighting over Kuriles will play any significant role - it is impossible to do anything important on barrel insels. The garrison itself is very small and basicaly is small border guards regiment uncapable of any resistance. The fate of insels will be desided outside them - and here Russia will have very considerable advantage due to Japan being small and within reach of russian forces.

Even conventional cruise missile inside Tokio's skyscraper is major pain, not to tell about various high-tech factories and naval blockade.

In two words, the war is economically impossible for Japan.

I hate to bring politics into this but I think invading the Japanese mainland would be out of the question because it might bring the US/Nato into the war on the side of Japan because instead of Japan being the aggressors it rould be Russia.

Japan's 10 Oyashio subs will be crucial, they may even be a match for an Akula. If Russia is able to locate the Japanese fleet and then communicate targeting information to the Oscar's, who should lie in the trench east of The Kurils escorted by Kilo's, then they can launch a devastating missile attack from close from range (say 50 miles or closer) the key will be to have the missiles exposed as little as possible so the Japanese have litle or no time to react.

 

[Chrom]

I hate to bring politics into this but I think invading the Japanese mainland would be out of the question because it might bring the US/Nato into the war on the side of Japan because instead of Japan being the aggressors it rould be Russia.

Japan's 10 Oyashio subs will be crucial, they may even be a match for an Akula. If Russia is able to locate the Japanese fleet and then communicate targeting information to the Oscar's, who should lie in the trench east of The Kurils escorted by Kilo's, then they can launch a devastating missile attack from close from range (say 50 miles or closer) the key will be to have the missiles exposed as little as possible so the Japanese have litle or no time to react.

I hate to bring it here, but in case of such conflict NATO will be first to slap Japan in the face and force to abort any hostilities with Russia if there is a suspect to NATO involment in actual combat. Remember, it is Japan which attack Russia in your scenario. IF you want NATO involment, lets suppose it is actually Russia attack Japan islands for whatever funny reason.

Addidionally, however stupid russian leaders are, they will not sacrifice hundreds thousands soldiers and god know how much equipment fighting over useless (from military point) barrel insels when they could end the war just by bombing Japan. I dont speak about land invasion here - realistically it is not needed.

Now, some points: Due to (relatively) small size of surrounding waters and long-term infrastructure russians will always know the location of japanese fleet. All these over-horisont radars, hidden sonars, recon flights, etc - they will constantly monitor Japan fleet. I dont even take satelites into account - becouse they are not needed here. But it will be also much easer to monitor Japan fleet with satellites due to limited action area.

Of course, Japan will enjoy the same regarding russian fleet - but it will be much harder to exploit this knowledge. First, substancial amount of russian firepower is located at SSN's, SSBN's and SSK - and these are much harder to detect than surface fleet. Second, russian forces enjoys much longer ranged ASM's and cruise missiles. And third, they have strategic aviation with again, very long range cruise missiles. Basically, Japan navy wouldnt be able to even reach these insels without being in range of mainland coastal ASM batteries.

But these point are not very important - the most important as i said vulnerabilty of Japan to any atack. Japan risk everything - whereas Russia put in dunger only distant, barely inhabitant borders.

 

[swerve]

.... Basically, Japan navy wouldnt be able to even reach these insels without being in range of mainland coastal ASM batteries.
....

While I agree with most of what you have said, on this one minor point I doubt you are correct. The islands in dispute aren't the whole Kurile chain, but only the four nearest to Hokkaido. They're off the NE coast of Hokkaido (either one or two - I forget which - are visible from Hokkaido), & any anti-ship missile launched from the coast of the mainland at Japanese ships approaching them would not only have to travel several hundred kilometres, but either overfly Hokkaido or navigate around it, either travelling through narrow straits or overflying the islands themselves.

 

[Chrom]

While I agree with most of what you have said, on this one minor point I doubt you are correct. The islands in dispute aren't the whole Kurile chain, but only the four nearest to Hokkaido. They're off the NE coast of Hokkaido (either one or two - I forget which - are visible from Hokkaido), & any anti-ship missile launched from the coast of the mainland at Japanese ships approaching them would not only have to travel several hundred kilometres, but either overfly Hokkaido or navigate around it, either travelling through narrow straits or overflying the islands themselves.

Yes, formally these islands are at the very edge of mainland ASM reach - about 500-700 km (already very big risk for Japan navy). Still, it is very possible to move these mobile batteries closer to Kuriles insels - say, place them on naval transport platform for attack or other insels closer to Kuriles.

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Deleted

 

[Chrom]

Even if the Japanese could land on the islands, it will still be difficult to maintain a garrison sufficient to prevent Russkis from taking it back.

Japanese fleet will need to maintain a 24/7 perimeter around the islands in the face of constant air attacks from fencers and backfires. Air missions will face increasing numbers of Su-27s and Mig-31s. In addition to sub interdiction of resupply missions. That's assuming that the Russians don't start lobbing strategic missiles in the direction of Tokyo.

The Oyashios are very good subs. However, the Russians aren't going to just interdict ships going to the Kuriles. They're likely to start strangling oil supplies going to Japan itself. There aren't enough P3s and subs to be everywhere at all times.

There isn't enough Japanese forces to stop the Russian juggernaut unless the US intervenes. The US isn't going to intervene when there is no benefit to do so especially when the chances of losses are going to be high with no appreciable returns or achievable goals.

Chances of success are very slim at best. Even from a military perspective only, it won't happen.

Really, i just fail to see why anyone would even want to land on islands in case of more or less serious conflict. It is pointless and will not lead anywhere, just wasting resources of the side attempted such stupid move.

 

[Firehorse]

Actually, the Russians offered to return 2 islands back in exchange for a peace treaty, but Japan insists (and rightly so!) on the return of the all 4.

Japan and the Soviet Union negotiated for the conclusion of a separate peace treaty between June 1955 and October 1956. During these negotiations, Japan reportedly claimed territorial rights to Etorofu, Kunashir, Shikotan, and Habomai, and demanded the return of these islands, but the position maintained by the Soviet Union was that they would return Shikotan and Habomai, but could not return Etorofu and Kunashir. Thus, the negotiations did not reach a conclusion.
Consequently, in place of a peace treaty, the Japan-Soviet Joint Declaration was concluded which is a treaty providing for the termination of the state of war and the resumption of diplomatic relations. This treaty stipulates in Article 9 that after diplomatic relations have been established, the peace treaty negotiations shall be continued and the Soviet Union shall hand over the Habomai and Shikotan Islands to Japan after the conclusion of a peace treaty, according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan.
In principle, the issue of Habomai and Shikotan Islands has already been resolved by this Declaration. Thus, it is considered that only the question of Etorofu and Kunashir Islands remain as an issue to be resolved in the peace treaty negotiations. ..When Japan lost the islands, 17,000 Japanese were expelled, most from the southern islands of Shikotan, Iturup, the Habomais, and Kunashir, just 13 miles from Hokkaido. Ever since, Japan has pressed a claim to what it calls the Northern Territories.
Only five islands are permanently inhabited. Paramushir has an estimated 4,500 people. Kunashir has 4,000 people; Shikotan has 1,500 people; the Habomais has 300, and Iturup-- from where Japan launched the attack on Pearl Harbor has 6,000 people.
It is also important to note that perhaps thousands of Russian border troops in lonely bases throughout the Kuriles.
President Boris Yeltsin announced during his visit to Japan in 1993 that Russia would withdraw all military troops other than border troops from the Northern Territories. Foreign Minister Yevgeny Primakov explained to Foreign Minister Yukihiro Ikeda that the present number of Russian military troops in the Northern Territories is 3,500 and there are none on Shikotan Island, reportedly. ..The [civilian] population [about 15,000 in total] shrank by a third following the devastating earthquake in 1994, though some of those who left are now returning. http://www.american.edu/TED/ice/kurile.htm
In December 2006, Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Aso made a proposal to partition the territories in question, including actually splitting one of the islands—Itorofu—with Russia. (5) While the proposal never turned into an official offer, it nonetheless appears to have been perceived by the Russian side as a significant concession,.. The idea of a partition, in fact, has been in the works since 1956, and was first proposed not by Japan, but by the Soviet Union, which offered to return to Japan two of the smaller islands in question—Shikotan and Hamobai, which lie just off the coast of Hokkaido and which Japan claims are not even part of the Kuril chain—in return for a permanent peace settlement. At that point, the reward for Soviet withdrawal from the two small islands would have been Japanese acceptance of its seizure of the rest of the islands. During the Cold War, with Japan a member of the Western alliance, there was little incentive either for Japan to accept the proposal or for the USSR to offer any more concessions. ..The message coming from Moscow is that the ball is in Japan’s court as far as the territorial dispute is concerned. Russia may be able to benefit from increased bilateral ties without having to give anything, if the new Japanese government decides that trade relations with Russia are more important than national pride. The construction of a strategic partnership is unlikely however, without a permanent settlement. As Moscow turns inward for the constitutionally –scheduled presidential succession, there seems scant reason to expect controversial territorial concessions will be offered to Japan to cement relations. Finally, while the Kuril dispute is a long-standing issue in Russian foreign relations, at the moment it appears relatively low on the list of priorities in comparison to the Middle East, US ABM sites in Eastern Europe, and contentious disputes within the “Near Abroad.” Thus, unless there is considerable initiative, along with a willingness to compromise on the part of the Japanese side, a final settlement of the Kuril dispute is unlikely in the near future. http://www.bu.edu/iscip/digest/vol13/ed1309.html

During the Cold War those islands guarded the USSR Pacific Fleet access to the open ocean from its Okhotsk Sea bastion and the Sea of Japan. Now the Russians can just keep them as future bargaining chips- China now plays a bigger role in the RFE economic development. For Japan to initiate hostilities over those islands she must be desperate, and that could also involve the US as a guarantor of Japan's security. I see no possibility that the Japanese will take such risks- if they do, the US may say-"you are on your own" and may not be there when other threats emerge.

 

[Chrom]

Yes, Japan could probably recive 2 islands for ending the conflict permanently. But during last 60 years the islands in question became some kind of holy symbol for interior Japan politic and now it is almost impossibe for goverment to accept any compromise. As such i dont expect any changes in the situation in the next 20 years.

And now topic: the i dont know that much about Japan army, but suspect it significaly relies on NATO assets for some vital tasks. Without NATO involvment, it will be very hard to conduct competent operations.

 

[Waylander]

It relies on NATO assets?
Why?
Japan is not part of NATO.

They have an integrated defense plan with the US in case of a conflict which is no surprise if one looks at the US deployment figures.

But they have the numbers, technology and training to cause a serious headache even for Russia, especially when it comes to naval operations supported by land based aircrafts.

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Deleted

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Yes, Japan could probably recive 2 islands for ending the conflict permanently. But during last 60 years the islands in question became some kind of holy symbol for interior Japan politic and now it is almost impossibe for goverment to accept any compromise. As such i dont expect any changes in the situation in the next 20 years.

And now topic: the i dont know that much about Japan army, but suspect it significaly relies on NATO assets for some vital tasks. Without NATO involvment, it will be very hard to conduct competent operations.

NATO wont get involved, Japan is not a NATO member and AFAIK has no security treaties with the European powers. The only thing the Japanese have built their doctrine around (in terms of foreigin capability) are US carriers and the US nuclear umbrella. They are perfectly capable of indipendant operation, especially that close to home.

As for the conflict, the initial seizure of the islands would be the easy part, and a russian amphibious operation to retake the islands would be very diffiult considering the Japanese air threat and SSK capability. However the japanese mainland is very vulnerable to cruise missile attack. Their sea lanes are vulnerable to interdiction, however one wold think the russians would be hesitant to shink international vessels for fear on getting the americans involved. Large scale ASM attacks on the japanese mainland would have a significant impact on local infestructure, economic activity and public opinion. After enough punishmet the Japanese would probably come to the table.

 

[Schumacher]

In the unlikely event that Russia is caught unprepared by a surprise Japanese landing on the island, instead of retaking the island by expensive amphibious assault, they might just deal with the Japanese on the island with low yield tactical nukes.
I'm assuming the island is sparsely populated by Russians anyway & that they might calculate that the outcry would be limited by the fact that they're nuking their own territory & it was the Japanese who attacked first.

 

[gf0012-aust]

NATO wont get involved, Japan is not a NATO member and AFAIK has no security treaties with the European powers. The only thing the Japanese have built their doctrine around (in terms of foreigin capability) are US carriers and the US nuclear umbrella. They are perfectly capable of indipendant operation, especially that close to home.

Correct, Japan has no ties with NATO. In addition, the US is the only country where their military has direct comms with japanese assets. All other friendlies must go through a neutral link when we wargame.

So, as far as force integration is concerned, the Japanese could only directly operate with the US.

I certainly wouldn't want to be taking on the japanese navy, they're more than able to hold the russians to account.

they are the most capable conventional navy in the region, even those navies that have nuke assets would struggle - and nuclear powers are actually response limited rather than the usual assumption that nuke weapons give them ultimate carriage of authority and capability.