If China goes bad circa '89, what happens to Hong Kong?

RousseauX

Donor
As is always the case it depends very much on what replaces the CCP. If it is bad enough (Khmer Rouge bad) the international community might be willing to recognize the RoC as the legitimate government. If the international community continues to recognize Beijing, regardless of the landlord, as the legal successor state then the UK is very much over a barrel.

Giving up Hong Kong to a bunch of heavies isn't going to sell very well to the voters, but without international support, and big bunches of it, most especially including the U.S., Commonwealth, and most of the EU, the British simply don't have the resources to resist the change over without WMD. Can't see that happening.

If it's Khmer Rouge level bad I can't see the mainland government actually being stable enough to go for HK.

If it's something more moderate I think the UK/US might be a lot more lenient in allowing HKers to immigrate before the handover.
 

RousseauX

Donor
Could they pull some BS interpretation out of their nether regions and give Hong Kong independance?

Sure, but this is a bad proposition on the long run because it's trivial for any stable Chinese government to roll in the troops and just take it.
 

RousseauX

Donor
How will China turn Khmer Rouge? That ship did not just sail a long time ago, it was never in port! Even in the most Maoist of Maoist days they were leagues away from Khmer Rouge style of terror.

Presumably it would be a right-wing fascist regime rather than communist regime.
 
Sure, but this is a bad proposition on the long run because it's trivial for any stable Chinese government to roll in the troops and just take it.

Sure, but that makes Chinese the agressor and Britain can wash their hands over whole matter saying "well, we gave them independance but Chinese occupied them later. Oh well, what can you do." Wheres handing HK to Khmer Rougeesque China would look worse.
 
Well, back in '82, Thatcher gave Deng the logical interpretation of the lease on the New Territories that the lease only extended to NT and would be returned as appropriately whereas the Kowloon Peninsula and Hong Kong Island were permanently ceded to the UK in the Treaties of Tientsin and Nanking (the ones that ended the second and first Opium Wars, respectively). But Deng pressed really hard even though he hadn't much cared about Hong Kong anyway, because he wanted to overturn the "unequal treaties" and undo the damages caused by them so that he could cement a greater legacy than Mao, who couldn't do it.

Fast-forwarding to this discussion, if Britain tried to pull the same kind of shtick, depending on how assertive this new leader is and how orderly China is, it may work. But everyone's pointed to the legal obligations from the Sino-British Joint Declaration as precedent that Britain had to do it no matter what, so most likely not.

I was tninking that with China going Khmer Rouge then Britain would be willing to reinterpret the agreement so they don't hand HK to these maniacs. How much they would be willing and how much they would be able to actually do.... I don't know.
 
Top