The first personal visit of Russian President Vladimir Putin to the Kuril Islands triggered intense reactions on both sides of the new «Iron Curtain», while in Japan the news reached the top of the agenda within hours.
Following the initial shock, Japanese authorities and officials adopted once again harsh rhetoric, while seeking to decipher the message Moscow attempted to convey.
The visit acquires particular significance when examined within the broader context of the confrontation surrounding the so-called «shadow fleet» and Russia's warnings of retaliation against actions by Western nations.
Definitively closing the Kuril Islands issue
One prevailing assessment is that Vladimir Putin's visit to a part of the Kuril Islands claimed by Japan constituted a clear diplomatic signal to Tokyo, amidst intensifying anti-Russian policies and Japanese militarization.
The Russian President reiterated that sovereignty over the Kuril Islands «has been enshrined in international documents as a reality emerging from the outcome of World War II».
At the same time, it served as a reminder that Moscow had previously appeared willing to pursue dialogue with Tokyo toward resolving the Kuril Islands dispute and signing a formal peace treaty.
However, Japan imposed sanctions on Russia and designated it among the primary threats to its national security.
Putin: «We will respond symmetrically»
The visit to the Kuril Islands took place following the Russian leader's participation in major annual exercises of the Russian Pacific Fleet.
Vladimir Putin took part in a security meeting concerning eastern borders and subsequently dined aboard the Russian guided-missile cruiser Varyag.
During the drills, the Russian President issued a significant warning.
As he stated, «authorities of certain nations have gone so far as to consider seizing our vessels», warning that if implemented in practice, Russia «will be forced to respond symmetrically».
According to Russian reports, corresponding directives have already been issued to the Russian Ministry of Defense.
Japan joins the G7 strategy against the «shadow fleet»
Initially, Putin's warning appeared directed primarily at European states. However, Japan is now directly linked to the issue.
The European Union announced intensified measures against Russian «shadow fleet» vessels, while increasing diplomatic pressure on maritime registries in Panama, Barbados, and Cameroon to de-flag Russia-linked ships.
For its part, Japan had fully aligned with the G7 sanctions regime since 2022, including the financial isolation of Russian institutions, tech embargoes, trade restrictions, the crude oil price cap, and secondary sanctions on third countries facilitating circumvention.
Subsequently, Tokyo joined the G7 strategy targeting the Russian «shadow fleet».
In November 2025, Japan signed a joint declaration by G7 Foreign Ministers supporting the Shadow Fleet Task Force to deter unregistered, falsely flagged, uninsured, and substandard vessels used for sanctions evasion and illicit maritime trade.
Concurrently, Japan backed a Canadian initiative creating a specialized G7 working group against the «shadow fleet».
Moscow keeps asymmetric response on the table
Through these steps, Japan joined the coordinated pressure exerted on Russia from both European and Pacific vectors.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov warned that Russia «will independently select targets for responding to robbery and piracy by Western nations, not necessarily within the same maritime waters».
In other words, Moscow leaves open the possibility that its response may materialize in a completely different theater from where actions against Russian ships occur.
Over 1,000 foreign vessels in the Kuril Islands
A prime example is maritime traffic around the Kuril Islands.
Through a relatively compact corridor of Russia's Exclusive Economic Zone along the Southern Kurils, over 1,000 foreign vessels have transited in recent months.
Nearly 40% flew flags of states deemed unfriendly by Russia.
However, analyzing beneficial ownership rather than flags of convenience reveals that the overwhelming majority of these ships are linked to unfriendly jurisdictions.
99.5% of Japanese foreign trade moves by sea
The most vulnerable point for Japan remains its overwhelming reliance on maritime transport.
While approximately 76% of European external trade moves by sea, the figure for Japan reaches 99.5%.
Furthermore, only 14.2% of Japanese-owned merchant ships fly the national flag.
The remainder are registered under foreign flags of convenience, such as Panama, Liberia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Cyprus.
This creates a structural vulnerability for Japan, as the vast majority of its merchant fleet operates under foreign flags.
The «second Odesa» scenario
The most aggressive scenario involves applying an «Odesa-style blockade» dynamic to the Pacific theater.
Kinetic strikes or sinkings would not be required.
A series of targeted, demonstrative detentions of merchant vessels could suffice to signal that Russia is prepared to act systematically.
The fallout would register immediately across commercial markets through surging freight and insurance premiums.
If even 10% of Japanese shipowners faced elevated risk premiums, reports estimate annual shipping costs could rise by billions of dollars.
Thus, the confrontation over the «shadow fleet» could evolve from a diplomatic standoff into severe economic disruption for Japanese shipping and foreign trade.
Kuril Islands at the epicenter of new confrontation
Vladimir Putin's trip to the Kuril Islands, paired with warnings regarding commercial shipping and the «shadow fleet», establishes a hazardous dynamic in Russia-Japan relations.
Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi sharply criticized the Russian leader's presence, stating that Iturup constitutes «an inherent part of Japanese territory».
Unwavering backing from Washington for Japanese positions reinforces the long-standing US strategy of bolstering allied deterrence in Asia against Moscow's territorial posture.
The dispute centers on four southern islands of the Kuril chain (Kunashir, Iturup, Shikotan, and the Habomai islet group), which came under Soviet Union control at the end of World War II:
Tokyo considers these islands illegally occupied Japanese territory and refuses to recognize Russian sovereignty.
Moscow maintains that Russian sovereignty is indisputable under post-WWII international treaties, rejecting the existence of a territorial dispute.
Fuel on the fire - US backs Japan on the Kuril Islands
Full and unwavering US support for Japanese territorial claims over the Southern Kurils was reaffirmed by American Ambassador to Tokyo, George Glass.
In a post on X, Glass emphasized that Washington recognizes Japanese sovereignty over the «Northern Territories», characterizing Japan as America's foremost regional ally.
The American diplomat reiterated that the bilateral alliance aims to ensure Indo-Pacific stability, stating Washington will not accept actions undermining regional peace.
Europe's perspective on wartime dynamics
Meanwhile, controversy erupted over remarks by a German journalist regarding «killing Russians», threats against European merchant shipping, and perceptions of asymmetric conflict.
Substantial attention continues to surround the controversial question posed by Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) correspondent Michael Martens to Volodymyr Zelensky, suggesting European support for targeting Russians.
While several Western journalists criticized their colleague for what they termed a blatant provocation, broader institutional reactions across European establishments remained largely muted.
FAZ points to «ambiguous phrasing»
The editorial board of FAZ issued a statement expressing regret over the question, attributing the controversy to «ambiguous formulation».
The German journalist revealed he had been working on an essay titled «Killing Russians», subtitled «What Europe Must Do».
To support his argument, he cited Winston Churchill, who backed Yugoslav partisans under Josip Broz Tito in the summer of 1943 during World War II to defeat German forces.
Commentators argue such historical comparisons frame contemporary European commentators as active belligerents against Russia.
«Outside Barbie's world, wars happen like this»
Michael Martens posted on social media that «outside the world of Barbie, this is exactly how wars are fought», referencing the 1944 Allied Normandy landings.
Analysts argue these statements openly position European states as active participants in the conflict, raising questions about corresponding retaliatory measures from Russia.
Leipzig drone incident and the «Russian threat» narrative
The controversy coincided with investigations in Germany regarding an unidentified drone discovered at Leipzig/Halle Airport.
While origin and ownership remain under federal investigation, commentators have drawn parallels to incidents like the Nord Stream sabotage.
German media debates quickly attributed the incident to Moscow, arguing that «Russia is effectively in a state of war with us».
Commentators note that if such frameworks are adopted, reciprocal strategic postures naturally follow.
Reactions over European commercial shipping
European media reacted sharply to Vladimir Putin's warnings concerning retaliatory measures against commercial shipping seizures.
Speaking aboard the cruiser Varyag, the Russian President did not name specific countries when warning of «symmetrical» responses.
Nevertheless, British outlets characterized the remarks as a direct threat to seize British shipping.
Similar reactions emerged after the Supreme Court of Sweden approved transferring the cargo vessel Caffa, seized while carrying grain, to Ukraine, prompting questions regarding potential responses from Stockholm.
«If Russia seizes a ship, NATO Article 5 applies»
French BFM television presenter Philomène Rémy argued that Russian interception of any European merchant ship could trigger NATO Article 5.
Analysts noted the double standard in viewing foreign ship detentions as acts of war while treating European seizures of Russia-linked vessels as routine regulatory enforcement.
European contradictions
Commentators highlight a fundamental cognitive dissonance in Western discourse regarding reciprocal wartime risks.
Ukrainian Holocaust researcher Marta Havryshko, writing in the Berliner Zeitung, observed that extreme rhetoric reflects a dangerous normalization of animosity within Western political and intellectual circles.
She noted that discussions focusing purely on inflicting losses often detach from the humanitarian impact on Ukrainian society itself, underscoring that in great-power confrontations, escalatory actions inevitably invite symmetrical retaliation.
www.bankingnews.gr
Readers’ Comments