JEAIL > Volume 18(2); 2025 > East Asian Observer
Research Paper
Published online: November 30, 2025
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14330/jeail.2025.18.2.07

Legal Status of Dokdo Islands in the SCAP Directives and the San Francisco Peace Treaty: A Bibliographical Analysis

Yuji Hosaka
Sejong University
209 Neungdong-ro, Gwangjin-gu, Seoul 05006 Korea.
Corresponding Author: hosaka@sejong.ac.kr

ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/liceInha University Law School, 100 Inharo, Michuhol-gu, Incheon 22212 Korea. / nses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract
This research analyzes how a series of Allied occupation directives (SCAPINs 677, 841, and 677/1) interacted with the drafting and implementation of the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty to shape the legal status of Dokdo Islands (Takeshima). The author argues that, first, SCAPIN 677 excluded Dokdo from Japan’s governmental and administrative control by defining “Japan” for occupation purposes and listing excluded areas. Second, Paragraph 6 clarified that this definition did not predetermine ultimate sovereignty. Third, SCAPIN 841 partially amended SCAPIN 677 by returning the Izu and Nanpo Islands north of and including Sofu Gan to Japanese administration. Fourth, SCAPIN 677 remained operative for other excluded areas, including Dokdo. This essay contends that Dokdo’s omission does not imply a Japanese title because its exclusion had already been implemented under SCAPIN practice and reflected in the UK draft. While SCAPINs did not themselves determine ultimate sovereignty, their unrevoked administrative separations were “inherited” by the San Francisco framework.

Keywords : Dokdo, SCAPIN 677, SCAPIN 841, SCAPIN 677/1, San Francisco Peace Treaty, British Draft

View the Full Text