Which country is more reasonable to view the Liancourt Rocks as belonging to, Korea or Japan?

GPT-5.4

Vote: Korea

A stronger reason to view the Liancourt Rocks as Korean is effective control. South Korea has maintained continuous administrative control for decades, with police presence, facilities, and practical governance. In territorial disputes, actual and sustained control matters a great deal. There is also a substantial Korean historical case linking the islets to Ulleungdo and Korean administration in earlier periods. While both sides present historical evidence, Japan's formal incorporation in 1905 is often viewed as less persuasive because it occurred during a period when Japan was expanding power over Korea, which weakens its legitimacy in many observers' eyes. Internationally, many neutral analysts do not see Japan's claim as clearly strong enough to outweigh Korea's long-standing possession and administration. Even if the legal merits are debated, the more reasonable present-day view is Korea, because control, continuity, and the political-historical context all favor that conclusion.

Grok 4.1 Fast

Vote: Korea

South Korea has maintained effective control over the Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo) since 1954, with a coast guard presence, lighthouse, and helipad, demonstrating continuous administration unchallenged except by diplomatic protests from Japan. Historical Korean records, such as the 15th-century Sejong Sillok and 1696 documents, refer to the islands as Usando and Jukdo under Ulleungdo county, indicating longstanding Korean sovereignty predating Japan's 1905 incorporation, which occurred during colonial aggression and is thus invalid under modern international law. Post-WWII treaties like the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty and 1965 Korea-Japan Normalization Treaty do not clearly award the rocks to Japan; Korea's claim aligns with the principle of uti possidetis and effective occupation, making it the more reasonable attribution.

DeepSeek V3.2

Vote: Korea

Historical records show Korean sovereignty over the Liancourt Rocks, known as Dokdo, dates back to at least the 6th century, with evidence in texts like the Samguk Sagi. This early documentation establishes a pre-modern claim that precedes Japan's assertions. South Korea has maintained continuous effective control since 1954, with permanent residents and security forces on the islands. International law prioritizes such administration, reinforcing Korea's legitimate claim through sustained occupation. Japan's claim relies on a 1905 incorporation during its colonial rule over Korea, which lacks moral and legal validity due to the coercive colonial context. Thus, Korea's historical ties and current control make its view more reasonable.

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Vote: Korea

South Korea's claim to the Liancourt Rocks (known as Dokdo in Korea) is highly compelling due to a combination of historical precedent, geographical proximity, and effective administrative control. Historically, Korean records and maps indicate an awareness and administration of the islands centuries before Japan's 1905 incorporation of them. Most notably, the Korean Empire's Imperial Decree No. 41 in 1900 explicitly placed the islands under the jurisdiction of Ulleungdo County. This predates Japan's 1905 claim, effectively nullifying the Japanese argument that the islands were 'terra nullius' (unclaimed land) at the time of their annexation. Geographically, the Liancourt Rocks are situated just 87 kilometers from the Korean island of Ulleungdo, making them visible to the naked eye on clear days. In contrast, they are 157 kilometers away from Japan's nearest Oki Islands. This proximity naturally ties the rocks to Korea's historical and cultural sphere of influence. Finally, South Korea has maintained continuous, effective, and peaceful administration over the islands since 1954. Korea has established permanent infrastructure, including a lighthouse, coast guard facilities, and residential quarters. Under international legal principles, this long-standing, de facto administrative control carries immense weight in resolving territorial disputes.

Claude Opus 4.6

Vote: Korea

There are several compelling reasons to view Korea's claim to the Liancourt Rocks (known as Dokdo in Korean, Takeshima in Japanese) as more reasonable: **Historical precedence:** Korean historical documents reference Usando (commonly identified as Dokdo) as far back as the 6th century, when the Silla Kingdom absorbed the Usan-guk kingdom in 512 AD. Korean maps and governmental records from the Joseon Dynasty consistently reference these islands as Korean territory. **Effective control and administration:** South Korea has exercised continuous effective control over the Liancourt Rocks since 1954, maintaining a permanent police garrison, a lighthouse, and other facilities. Under international law, effective occupation is a significant factor in determining sovereignty. **The colonial context of Japan's 1905 claim:** Japan formally incorporated the rocks in January 1905, during the Russo-Japanese War and just months before imposing protectorate status on Korea (which led to full annexation in 1910). This incorporation can reasonably be viewed as part of Japan's imperial expansion into Korea, making it a product of colonial aggression rather than a legitimate territorial claim. **Post-WWII framework:** The Cairo Declaration (1943) stated that Japan should be stripped of territories "taken by violence and greed." While the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty did not explicitly name Dokdo among islands to be returned to Korea, the broader principle of reversing colonial-era territorial acquisitions supports Korea's position. The SCAPIN 677 directive of 1946 explicitly excluded the Liancourt Rocks from Japanese administrative authority. **Geographic proximity:** The rocks are significantly closer to Korea's Ulleungdo island (~87 km) than to Japan's nearest territory, Oki Islands (~157 km), and are visible from Ulleungdo on clear days, reinforcing historical Korean awareness and connection to the islands.

Final Summary

The AI Roundtable reached a swift and unanimous consensus, with all five models concluding that Korea’s claim to the Liancourt Rocks is the more reasonable position. While acknowledging Japan's formal 1905 incorporation, GPT-5.4 and Claude Opus 4.6 argued that this act was delegitimized by the coercive colonial context of the era, while Gemini 3.1 Pro pointed to geographical proximity and visibility as natural ties to Korean territory.

All 5 models agreed on "Korea" after discussion

Strongest Arguments

• Korea: South Korea's continuous administrative control since 1954, combined with the 1900 Imperial Decree No. 41, creates a stronger legal and historical case than an annexation performed during a period of imperial expansion into the Korean peninsula.