Why Dokdo's sovereignty remains legally and historically Korean

The dispute over Dokdo remains a contentious issue between Korea and Japan. While Japan continues to assert its claim, international law experts argue that such assertions lack legal grounding. Historical records and modern legal principles both support Korea’s position on the island’s sovereignty. Korea maintains that Dokdo is its territory, backed by historical evidence and effective control. The island has been under continuous Korean administration, fulfilling the criteria of sovereignty under international law. Legal experts, including Doh See-hwan, former Director General of the Office of Dokdo Research, emphasise that sovereignty depends on lawful title and actual governance—not repeated claims.

Japan’s argument relies on interpretations from a period when international law was undergoing major changes. However, scholars argue that these justifications align with past imperial policies rather than modern legal standards. The United Nations International Law Commission has even cited Japan’s 1905 Eulsa Treaty as an example of coercion in treaty-making, undermining the legitimacy of related territorial claims.

The Cairo Declaration of 1943 further weakened Japan’s stance by condemning its expansion as an act of 'violence and greed.' It stated that territories seized through such means should be returned. Despite this, Japan persists in distorting facts about Dokdo in official documents, schools, and public campaigns. Korea’s sovereignty over Dokdo is reinforced by both historical records and ongoing administrative control. Japan’s repeated claims, though persistent, fail to meet the legal standards required for territorial legitimacy. The issue remains a matter of documented reality rather than unresolved debate.