1996 is way, way too late to do this. They might possibly maybe get away with it in 1956 but not much later than that.
Last edited:
1996 is way, way too late to do this. They might possibly maybe get away with it in 1956 but not much later than that.
No, there was never a time they could have gotten away with it. In 1949, with the Cold War raging, the US rejected the idea of defending Hong Kong, as this would risk "major military involvement in China and possibly global war." https://books.google.com/books?id=BGITDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA45 That was one reason the UK was so quick to recognize the PRC--it realized that it held Hong Kong on Beijing's sufferance.
Not from the still newish communist government in Beijing, they weren’t. Hong Kong is much older than anything Mao threw together.Hong Kong's water and electricity depended upon the New Territories; without them the city would die.
And the New Territories were leased.
Not from the still newish communist government in Beijing, they weren’t. Hong Kong is much older than anything Mao threw together.
The time to make Hong Kong independent was in the 1960s, same as Singapore, or before, with security guarantees from Britain and the USA.
How about Dominion status? Or, like Belize, independence granted but British forces remain to protect against invasion from the neighborhood.And then Xianggang gets invaded by Beijing, security guarantees or not. That's the paradox - independence means that it automatically becomes part of the PRC, and there's nothing the West can do about it.
If it happens in the '60s, Not even Nixon could goto China later.and there's nothing the West can do about it.
Given who London recognized, that would be pretty obvious.The lease said the New Territories had to be returned to China in 1997. It didn't say which China and there are two of them.
And what does London gain from pulling such a stupid stunt?Politics is fickle and Governments can change their minds given the right excuse. Tiananmen Square springs to mind for that.
I think the average British voter would care much more about things that actually matter to them (i.e. taxes and employment) than a stupid stunt that even Taipei wouldn't want to play a part in.Student Votes at the next election, one they were beginning to expect to lose.
Except that Xianggang itself was also impacted by the Cultural Revolution and what little localist sentiment there was happened to be pro-Beijing. Which turned out to be a problem for the British, for obvious reasons. So Dominion status or anything like that would not work. The only acceptable solution therefore (and which also solves the Kowloon Walled City problem) would be to become part of the PRC. In this case, it would definitely be pulling a Goa.How about Dominion status? Or, like Belize, independence granted but British forces remain to protect against invasion from the neighborhood.
How about Dominion status? Or, like Belize, independence granted but British forces remain to protect against invasion from the neighborhood.
The trick is Hong Kong and the NT needs to be given independence before any treaties are signed with the Communist government in Beijing. If Taiwan can remain independent, so can the entire HKG.If this 'Dominion of Hong Kong' does include the New Territories, Britain has clearly and indisputably broken its international treaty obligations and annexed sovereign Chinese territory. China takes Hong Kong.
There's actually only one since Taiwan has distanced itself from being a second China.The lease said the New Territories had to be returned to China in 1997. It didn't say which China and there are two of them.