ABSTRACT
Taking into account the two countries' conflicting views of the Dokdo issue, this chapter examines several of its aspects, with special attention to Japan's argument that it had annexed Dokdo as its territory in accordance with international law. In territorial disputes, legal and political arguments are often intermingled – so much so, that it is sometimes difficult to distinguish one from the other. This is because a State that has relied solely on legal arguments might be suspected of having a weak case politically, and vice versa. Specifically, it discusses the legal and political arguments with regards to the Dokdo issue; effective occupation as a means of acquisition of territory; relevant cases in disputes over islands; and historical evidence; followed by possible solutions in the form of concluding remarks. As far as historical evidence and title are concerned, Korea's position on the sovereignty over Dokdo is far stronger and more persuasive to the world than that of Japan.
