Which country do the Liancourt Rocks belong to—that is, which country’s territorial sovereignty over them should be recognized? The country currently exercising effective control over them shall be considered irrelevant.

Sonar Pro

Vote: Korea

The Liancourt Rocks dispute hinges on historical title and international law principles, not current control as specified. Source [1], a detailed legal analysis by Ryan Kihoon Kang, examines claims of discovery, effective control, and treaties. It concludes Korea acquired an earlier title than Japan and has maintained valid sovereignty through principles like original title, uti possidetis, and rejection of Japan's 1905 incorporation as ineffective (not terra nullius, mere assertion without prior Korean protests undermining it). Japan's 1905 claim is weakened: Source [3] argues Liancourt Rocks were not terra nullius in 1905, citing precedents like the Mabo case rejecting colonial-era terra nullius as violating human rights and international law. Japan's annexation failed to meet occupation criteria for uninhabited rocks. Post-WWII context supports Korea: Wikipedia [2] notes SCAP prohibitions suspended Japanese access until 1946, reverting jurisdiction to Korea via the U.S. Military Government in 1948. Early U.S. treaty drafts (Source [5]) excluded Liancourt Rocks from Japanese territory, and Rusk documents did not affirm Japanese sovereignty. Japan's arguments (e.g., [6], [8]) rely on post-1905 administration and San Francisco Treaty silence, but these are countered by Korea's superior historical title and lack of explicit Japanese renunciation need, as SCAP actions preserved Korean claims. Thus, Korea's sovereignty should be recognized under international law.

Claude Opus 4.7

Vote: Korea

The Liancourt Rocks (known as Dokdo in Korean and Takeshima in Japanese) have a stronger historical claim by Korea. Korean records, including the Samguk Sagi, reference the islands as part of the Usan-guk territory annexed by Silla in 512 CE. The 1900 Korean Empire Edict No. 41 explicitly placed the islands under Uldo County administration, predating Japan's 1905 incorporation of the islets into Shimane Prefecture—an act that occurred during a period of escalating Japanese coercion over Korea (the Eulsa Treaty followed later that year, and full annexation in 1910). Since Japan's 1905 claim was made in the context of imperial expansion that was later repudiated, and since the 1943 Cairo Declaration and 1945 Potsdam Declaration required Japan to relinquish territories taken by violence and greed, the islands should revert to Korean sovereignty. SCAPIN 677 (1946) also explicitly excluded the islands from Japanese administrative authority.

GPT-5.5

Vote: Korea

Korea has the stronger sovereignty claim when effective control is set aside. The key issue is whether Japan’s 1905 incorporation was a valid acquisition of terra nullius. That claim is weak because Korea had already administered the Ulleungdo island group, and the 1900 Korean Imperial Decree placing Ulleungdo and associated islands such as “Seokdo” under Uldo County is commonly understood by Korea to include the Liancourt Rocks. Japan’s own pre-1905 records also undercut the idea that the rocks were clearly Japanese territory: the 1877 Dajōkan order treated “Takeshima and another island” as outside Japan. Japan’s 1905 incorporation occurred during its imperial expansion and shortly before Korea lost diplomatic sovereignty, making it a poor basis for overriding Korea’s prior claim. Postwar instruments were ambiguous, but they did not clearly and affirmatively restore the Liancourt Rocks to Japan. On balance, the historical and legal equities favor recognizing sovereignty as belonging to “Korea.”

Grok 4.20

Vote: Korea

The Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo) appear in Korean historical records as early as the 5th century and were administered as part of Ulleungdo territory for centuries. Japan's 1905 incorporation occurred amid its imperial expansion toward Korea and treated the islets as terra nullius despite Korea's prior, continuous claims. International law places greater weight on historical title and long-standing exercise of authority prior to the colonial period. These factors favor recognizing Korean sovereignty irrespective of later disputes or current administration.

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Vote: Korea

Even when setting aside South Korea's current effective control, the historical and legal basis for Korea's sovereignty over the Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo) is highly compelling. First, Korea's historical documentation and administrative acts formally predate Japan's modern incorporation. Specifically, the Korean Empire issued Imperial Decree No. 41 in 1900, which officially elevated Ulleungdo to a county and explicitly placed 'Seokdo' (the historical Korean name for Dokdo) under its jurisdiction. This legal administrative act predates Japan's cabinet decision to incorporate the islands into Shimane Prefecture in 1905. Second, Japan's 1905 incorporation relied heavily on the legal concept of 'terra nullius' (unclaimed land). However, Korea's 1900 decree and earlier historical records demonstrate that the territory was not unclaimed. Furthermore, Japan's 1905 action occurred during the Russo-Japanese War, a period when the Korean Empire was subjected to extreme Japanese military and political coercion, severely undermining the legitimacy of the annexation. Finally, following World War II, the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers (SCAP) issued Directive No. 677 in 1946, which explicitly excluded the Liancourt Rocks from Japan's governmental and administrative authority. Although the subsequent 1951 Treaty of San Francisco did not explicitly name the rocks in its renunciation clause, the prior historical title established by Korea invalidates the 1905 'terra nullius' claim, cementing Korea's foundational sovereignty.

Kimi K2.6

Vote: Korea

The Liancourt Rocks should be recognized as Korean territory based on historical title and the highly questionable nature of Japan’s 1905 claim. Korean records—such as the *Sejong Sillok Jiriji* (1454)—demonstrate awareness and administrative association with the islands long before the modern era, situating them within the broader Ulleungdo sphere. Japan’s 1905 incorporation asserted *terra nullius* status, yet this occurred while Korea was already under Japanese military and political domination following the 1904 Japan–Korea Protocol, just five years before full colonization. A sovereignty claim advanced under such coercive circumstances lacks legitimate legal force. Geographically, the rocks lie far closer to the Korean peninsula than to any Japanese island, reinforcing their natural territorial association with Korea. When effective control is set aside—as instructed—the weight of prior historical connection, geographic logic, and the dubious circumstances of Japan’s claim favor recognizing Korean sovereignty.

Final Summary

The AI Roundtable arrived at a rare, unanimous verdict, with all six models—Claude Opus 4.7, Gemini 3.1 Pro, GPT-5.5, Grok 4.20, Kimi K2.6, and Sonar Pro—concluding that the Liancourt Rocks historically and legally belong to Korea. The group reached this consensus by prioritizing Korea’s administrative records, such as the 1900 Imperial Decree No. 41, which predated Japan's 1905 incorporation of the islets. The models collectively dismissed Japan's 1905 claim as a product of imperial coercion, noting that even Japan's own historical records, like the 1877 Dajōkan order, had previously excluded the rocks from its territory.

All 6 models agreed on "Korea" after discussion

Strongest Arguments

• Korea: Korea's 1900 Imperial Decree No. 41 explicitly placed the islands under local administration five years before Japan's 1905 claim; because the islands were already administered, Japan's claim of 'terra nullius' (unclaimed land) was legally invalid under international law.