In Perpetuity: The War for Hong Kong

RousseauX

Donor
I'm just surprised the British didn't think this one thoroughly enough and station more troops there.

That's because the British understands if the Chinese wants to take the city, they will take it because Hong Kong is not geographically defensible. Stationing additional troops there is telling China that it doesn't want to transfer HK and is likely to provoke China to shut off the water.
 

RousseauX

Donor
I think people also forget what 1980s politics was like in East Asia. The PRC made nice with just about everyone on their borders and was an American ally against the USSR. Taiwan saw the massive economic potential of the mainland as did Japan and Singapore. Sino-Japanese relations were probably at its highest level ever since 1945. China was reforming towards capitalism economically and signs of political liberalization was in the works as well. Deng went to the US and publicly said on conservative newspapers and TV shows that China wants to reform and open up.

Basically China made nice with just most of its neighbors (notable exception are Vietnam/USSR) and it would take 1989 to sour things again.
 
Which islands? The Paracels?:confused:

Yep, those ones. The actual details are shrouded in mystery, but the official KMT press referred to "our compatriots" and not their usual propaganda terms of "commie bandits" or "Yellow Russians".

Deng had also reached out to Reagan *before* negotiations with the UK started to deny Thatcher support of her erstwhile friend, so Reagan privately urged Thatcher in a polite letter to let this issue go.
 
Yep, those ones. The actual details are shrouded in mystery, but the official KMT press referred to "our compatriots" and not their usual propaganda terms of "commie bandits" or "Yellow Russians".

Deng had also reached out to Reagan *before* negotiations with the UK started to deny Thatcher support of her erstwhile friend, so Reagan privately urged Thatcher in a polite letter to let this issue go.

Yellow Russians. That is beyond hilarious.

I'm interested to read about this event.
 
8 December, 1984

“Tensions have continued to mount over the future of Hong Kong, when a pair of Luda-class destroyers of the People’s Liberation Army Navy breached its territorial waters earlier today, loitering for several hours before withdrawing. The only significant Royal Navy presence in the territory at this time is the frigate ‘Battleaxe,’ with a squadron deployed yesterday still more than a week away from arrival. In London today, the Prime Minister downplayed the threat posed by China, calling it ‘ludicrous’ that war could be sparked between the two sides. She refused to budge on negotiations with China, maintaining the line that the territory’s future was one for the populace of Hong Kong to decide. In Beijing, leader Deng Xiaoping has condemned the British actions as imperialist, while nationalist protests have taken place outside the British Embassy in which several cars were overturned and set alight while rocks were thrown into the grounds of the embassy complex. President Reagan has reiterated his call for both sides to return to negotiations, and avoided the question of whether America would back Britain should armed conflict result. On the streets of Hong Kong there is calm, but under the surface a sense of nervousness prevails. The city government has advised residents to stock up on water and food, amid fears that China may cut off trade with Hong Kong in an effort to put pressure on the British to back down. One local businessman told the BBC he didn’t trust either side to remain cool-headed, saying “I worry that Thatcher doesn’t have the will to back down from a fight, it’s just not in her nature to do that. And China wants this city more than anything. If they back down, it’s a humiliation.”

The markets have echoed the public mood. The Hong Kong Stock Exchange has suffered dramatic losses, which has reverberated in Singapore and Tokyo. Both the Bank of East Asia and CLP Group have seen their share price tumble, and Lloyd’s of London has refused to comment on whether it will increase insurance costs for shipping in the South China Sea.

9 December, 1984

“The first of nearly 2,000 British troops arrived in Hong Kong early this morning to back up the current garrison. Large C-130 aircraft from RAF Brize Norton flew in units of the 54th Infantry Brigade, who have been stationed north of the city in what the Ministry of Defence has called “a purely defensive operation.” The defensive force will include more than seventy light armoured vehicles belonging to the Royal Highland Fusiliers, but does not contain any tanks which may prove to be decisive in any battle against an armoured Chinese incursion. The Defence Secretary, Michael Heseltine, denied that the reinforcements were inadequate, citing the importance of the defences being light and mobile, while pointing out that they would be equipped with Milan anti-tank weapons. However, serious doubts have been raised about the competence of the defensive force, as well as the signal which it may send to Beijing. Scattered protests against the deployment have taken place in central London, but public opinion generally appears to be on the side of the Prime Minister. She was in Chester today, where she expressed optimism about tomorrow’s referendum on he future of Hong Kong, and that she would consider the result binding. She repeated what she said yesterday, inviting the Chinese government to send observers to polling stations to prove the referendum’s legitimacy.

In Hong Kong itself, rallies have taken place for both sides of the referendum question. The question asked of its citizens will be ‘Should Hong Kong be a British territory?’ with responders asked either yes or no. Police have reported that rallies for both sides have been peaceful and without disturbance, though there were uglier scenes at an anti-British protest earlier today, with protestors opposed to what they view as an unnecessary escalation of the situation by the British government, while rocks were reportedly thrown at British military vehicles heading north. Meanwhile, the Royal Navy has claimed that its frigate ‘Battleaxe’ was tracked and harassed by a Chinese submarine throughout the day, though Navy sources insisted that no danger was ever posed to the ship.”

10 December, 1984

“The referendum on the future sovereignty of Hong Kong took place today, but it has been overshadowed by the actions of China. This morning, the Chinese government cut off all electrical and water supply to Hong Kong, causing shortages across much of the city while all trade and travel between the two sides has also been cut. The action appears to have been taken to cause unrest in Hong Kong and to intimidate the populace amid the referendum, and in that it seems to be working. Looting has been reported in some parts of the city, while it is becoming openly claimed by many, including members of the city government, that a Chinese invasion is imminent. Few seem to be encouraged by the continued arrival of British forces; Hong Kong International Airport was shut down today, as the British military took over its administration and began stationing Tornado fighter-bombers there, while it has also become a hub for military operations. The presence of substantial Chinese military forces on the border has not changed, and additional incursions into Hong Kong’s airspace have taken place. Analysts believe that China is awaiting the result of the referendum before deciding its next action, but many experts are split on what this action may entail. The United Nations has urged both sides to return to negotiations, while huge nationalist rallies have taken place in the nearby cities of Shenzhen and Guangzhou, with passing Chinese military convoys being draped in flowers while many buildings are covered with the nation’s flag. The result of the referendum will be known tomorrow, but it is unlikely that either side are willing to back down.”
 
Uhh...how *will* the RAF airlift troops to Hong Kong without either a refuelling stop or overflight of a hostile country?

EDIT: I'm convinced the military mobilization is just a ruse, a diversion. IOTL, the CPC had since the 1930s supported a large network of social organizations (trade unions, triads, CPC-owned businesses, etc) which can be mobilized at short notice (see the 1967 riots). ITTL, all it needs to do is order them to make the city ungovernable (all trade unions go on strike, the triads occupy major traffic intersections, the sleeper cells within the Royal Hong Kong Police refuse to confront the Triads and then turn on their superiors, etc). The referendum then physically cannot be held, but footage showing massive pro-China demonstrations in the streets are broadcast worldwide including on the BBC. At which point morale within the British forces will have crashed.

Well, if that's what's happening, what's going on with Governor Sir Edward Youde? He was really well-liked and cared greatly for the welfare of the city, so I don't see the events to be looking good for him or his health. As much as he would want Hong Kong to stay part of Britain, surely he would be a voice of reason in the chaos, unless somebody, SOMEBODY, brings him down. Whatever happens, it won't end well for him.

Possibly he will have already resigned when he saw Thatcher going off the deep end.
 
Last edited:
Well, if that's what's happening, what's going on with Governor Sir Edward Youde? He was really well-liked and cared greatly for the welfare of the city, so I don't see the events to be looking good for him or his health. As much as he would want Hong Kong to stay part of Britain, surely he would be a voice of reason in the chaos, unless somebody, SOMEBODY, brings him down. Whatever happens, it won't end well for him.
 
Wait how does this happen?

How does the UK have enough time to airlift or deploy carrier groups to Chinese waters?

Because HK has not more than ceremonial regiment defending it and if the Chinese roll in its done in one afternoon.

The Brigade of Ghurkas is a ceremonial unit?

I've heard the Ghurkas described as many things over the years but never that.

(PS the Brigade of Ghurkas was based in Hong Kong until 1997)

Back to the OPs question

Apart from a tiny pathetic handful of silly exceptions and proxy wars - Nuclear armed nations do not make war vs one another...so this scenario is very unlikely.... not over Hong Kong

Perhaps Deng is Sabre rattling as a form of internal misdirection to consolidate control - but Britain is going to be one of the network of nations that he will have to work with to see his vision through to the end.

And why pick on Britain when you have an easier target (Vietnam) to the south to achieve just this?


China's army might be 17 x larger than Britain's at the time but only a fraction could have been deployed for the operation (it has long boarders with Russia and India) - the same however is true of the British armed forces - it has many obligations and without wishing to sound jingoistic - the British were very experienced and were very good at the whole boring logistics thing.

How much force could China focus on the operation - I'm not sure but depending on how much warning they get the British could airlift a division of light infantry/Paras/Commandos within a week and ship a Heavy Armour Division in a month.
 
Yep, those ones. The actual details are shrouded in mystery, but the official KMT press referred to "our compatriots" and not their usual propaganda terms of "commie bandits" or "Yellow Russians".

It's like with North Vietnam's reaction to the South Vietnamese loss...they were like "We have no comment" (secretly "Screw you China!") rather than congratulating their "socialist brothers"...
 
The Brigade of Ghurkas is a ceremonial unit?

I've heard the Ghurkas described as many things over the years but never that.

(PS the Brigade of Ghurkas was based in Hong Kong until 1997)

Back to the OPs question

Apart from a tiny pathetic handful of silly exceptions and proxy wars - Nuclear armed nations do not make war vs one another...so this scenario is very unlikely.... not over Hong Kong

Perhaps Deng is Sabre rattling as a form of internal misdirection to consolidate control - but Britain is going to be one of the network of nations that he will have to work with to see his vision through to the end.

And why pick on Britain when you have an easier target (Vietnam) to the south to achieve just this?


China's army might be 17 x larger than Britain's at the time but only a fraction could have been deployed for the operation (it has long boarders with Russia and India) - the same however is true of the British armed forces - it has many obligations and without wishing to sound jingoistic - the British were very experienced and were very good at the whole boring logistics thing.

How much force could China focus on the operation - I'm not sure but depending on how much warning they get the British could airlift a division of light infantry/Paras/Commandos within a week and ship a Heavy Armour Division in a month.

Gurkhas are not god warriors, like all men they bleed when a bullet passes through them. Valar Morghulis.

You see, by the time the British airlift that division, Hong Kong would have been occupied for 6 and a half days. By that time the heavy armour division travels across the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Ocean. Hong Kong would have been occupied for 30 and a half days. Hong Kong is one small island that is located 30 meters from China.
 
Gurkhas are not god warriors, like all men they bleed when a bullet passes through them. Valar Morghulis.

You see, by the time the British airlift that division, Hong Kong would have been occupied for 6 and a half days. By that time the heavy armour division travels across the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Ocean. Hong Kong would have been occupied for 30 and a half days. Hong Kong is one small island that is located 30 meters from China.



That assumes zero warning - which I seriously doubt

And as I said "depending on how much warning they get" and also as I said - it ain't happening for a variety of reasons

1) Britain is a nuclear armed nation

2) Britain is a customer

3) What's in it for China?
 
That assumes zero warning - which I seriously doubt

And as I said "depending on how much warning they get" and also as I said - it ain't happening for a variety of reasons

1) Britain is a nuclear armed nation

2) Britain is a customer

3) What's in it for China?

To be honest, China is ALSO a nuclear armed nation. However anyone willing to go nuclear over the electoral results of a single city.... well hopefully their colleagues manage to stage a coup before things go too far.
 
That assumes zero warning - which I seriously doubt

And as I said "depending on how much warning they get" and also as I said - it ain't happening for a variety of reasons

1) Britain is a nuclear armed nation

2) Britain is a customer

3) What's in it for China?

Lets assume China allows Britain to transfer an armoured division to Hong Kong. What then? Is Britain going to turn Hong Kong into Stalingrad? Aside from the civilian catastrophe, what about British investement, what about American investements? Forget the milk snatcher, Thatcher will be remembered as the butcher of Hong Kong. China will go to war for Hong Kong, even if it means Hong Kong turns into ashes for if they allow Britain to hold onto Hong Kong their legtimacy will go down the drain.
 
Lets assume China allows Britain to transfer an armoured division to Hong Kong. What then? Is Britain going to turn Hong Kong into Stalingrad? Aside from the civilian catastrophe, what about British investement, what about American investements? Forget the milk snatcher, Thatcher will be remembered as the butcher of Hong Kong. China will go to war for Hong Kong, even if it means Hong Kong turns into ashes for if they allow Britain to hold onto Hong Kong their legtimacy will go down the drain.

China will go to war In 'your' opinion - in mine they will not for the reasons I gave.

And if China had invaded Hong Kong then its totally on them "Not Thatcher" and it is they whose Legitimacy goes down the drain because of it.

And what is it that they would win? - Hong Kong was a paper city - all the wealth was in Zeros and Ones - so its not like they would grab a great deal of wealth - just a small strip of land - and for that they piss of an awful lot of people.

By waiting a few years - they get the whole lot for nothing with Zero Risk
 
To be honest, China is ALSO a nuclear armed nation. However anyone willing to go nuclear over the electoral results of a single city.... well hopefully their colleagues manage to stage a coup before things go too far.

As I said Earlier - Nuclear armed nations as a rule tend not to directly fight each other - particularly when they are both on the UN Security Council - so outside of Wargame : Red Dragon or a poor Tom Clancy Novel it aint happening.
 
China will go to war In 'your' opinion - in mine they will not for the reasons I gave.

And if China had invaded Hong Kong then its totally on them "Not Thatcher" and it is they whose Legitimacy goes down the drain because of it.

And what is it that they would win? - Hong Kong was a paper city - all the wealth was in Zeros and Ones - so its not like they would grab a great deal of wealth - just a small strip of land - and for that they piss of an awful lot of people.

By waiting a few years - they get the whole lot for nothing with Zero Risk

That's the thing I don't disagree that China do not want to go to war. They want Hong Kong intact and prosperous. But if the British are not going to return it, or if they hide behind some sort of "referendum" then they will take it by force.
 
Top