I live in Wales and have studied British history4y
Related
Why did China feel the need to warn Great Britain to stay out of its affairs with regards to Hong Kong?
It’s because the UK and China agreed
to established ‘one country, two systems’ for Hong Kong, giving the city freedoms and rights that are not enjoyed on the mainland for 50 years after the 1997 handover but China has renege on the agreement so the UK quite rightly pointed this out.
China has said of the agreement “no practical significance.” which along with it’s actions has shown it does not intend to abide by the legal agreement signed in 1984.
China is worried that the UK pointing out that it is n
Why did China feel the need to warn Great Britain to stay out of its affairs with regards to Hong Kong?
Because Britain is still linked to Hong Kong. Under the documents of the give away of Hongkong britian guarantees Hong Kongs freedom until 50 years after the hand over. China is not respecting that so under the ideal situation britian would reoccupy or help Hong Kong but China doesn't want that so they warn britian to stay out of it.
Did Britain return Hong Kong just because China promised its way of life would be protected? Would Britain have returned Hong Kong if China was a weak and powerless nation? Why does Britain keep harping China promised this China promised that?
Britain returned Hong Kong to China because there was no other choice. They made the best of a bad situation.
If China had still been weak and powerless like it was in the 19th century, I think Hong Kong would still be British — and to heck with the so-called rules-based order.
But China wasn’t.
An account of the negotiations published in the Independent describes what Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping said:
…China hoped that Britain would 'co-operate' in the transition, and it was prepared to enter into 'discussions' to that end. But it would not be bound by their results. If they failed to produce an
B.S Legal Studies & Philosophy Minor Poli CommMar 11
Related
Did Britain return Hong Kong just because China promised its way of life would be protected? Would Britain have returned Hong Kong if China was a weak and powerless nation? Why does Britain keep harping China promised this China promised that?
Because that was part of the actual written agreement. It was a treaty and treaties are supposed to be honored. China is a dishonest, the British should have known better because Communism is an illligitimate from of government. All autocracies are illligitimate. The only legitimate form of government in the world is democracy.
Did Britain return Hong Kong just because China promised its way of life would be protected? Would Britain have returned Hong Kong if China was a weak and powerless nation? Why does Britain keep harping China promised this China promised that?
Paul Rodgers obviously has a limited view. You need to look at 1979. The governor worried about the housing market in Hong Kong and the subsequent crash of the stock market.
Almost everyone believes that Hong Kong was leased. It was not. China indicated it would not renew the lease on the New Territories. Hong Kong is similar to Singapore. Singapore was able to do a deal with neighbours for vital resources. This was not possible with Hong Kong.
A treaty was drawn up and lodged with the United Nations. Neither side has broken it. Let me repeat neither side has broken the agreement.
Did Britain return Hong Kong just because China promised its way of life would be protected? Would Britain have returned Hong Kong if China was a weak and powerless nation? Why does Britain keep harping China promised this China promised that?
A2A
Did Britain return Hong Kong just because China promised its way of life would be protected?
No, not entirely. It just highlighted the realization that by only returning the New Territories (and some other outlying islands which were the only leased parts of the city state and were therefore the only parts obliged to be discussed - according to the duration of the NT lease), the rest of the territory (that was ceded in perpetuity) was all but untenable, since everything functioned (and still does) as one cohesive unit. Oh yes, that and Deng threatening to send in the tanks if it wasn’t all h
Did Britain return Hong Kong just because China promised its way of life would be protected? Would Britain have returned Hong Kong if China was a weak and powerless nation? Why does Britain keep harping China promised this China promised that?
Britain discussed raising the threat of U.S. nuclear retaliation to dissuade China from attacking its Hong Kong colony at the height of the Cold War, previously secret papers revealed on Friday.
Dismissing Hong Kong as strategically irrelevant, highly vulnerable and indefensible by conventional means, the British government nevertheless decided that it did have a vital symbolic role as the country's sole frontier with the Communist world.
"For political reasons we have no choice but to stay there at present," cabinet secretary Norman Brook wrote to Prime Minister Harold Macmillan in July 1959.
"Though at any time the Chinese could make conditions impossible by cutting off food and water supplies and strangling the trade as to make our presence virtually untenable," he added.
Hong Kong was handed back to China in 1997 after 155 years as a British colony.
Developing the argument in 1961, foreign secretary and Macmillan's successor Alec Douglas Home broached the delicate issue of both approaching the Americans to act if necessary and at the same time making the Chinese aware.
"It must be fully obvious to the Americans that Hong Kong is indefensible by conventional means and that in the event of a Chinese attack, nuclear strikes against China would be the only alternative to complete abandonment of the Colony," he wrote in a letter marked "top secret."
"In these circumstances it is perhaps not so much formal staff talks with the Americans that we need so much as an informal exchange of views involving a discussion of the use of nuclear strikes," he added.
However, he also noted the delicate balance of waving the nuclear deterrent at the Chinese while at the same time not provoking them.
"While we should encourage the Chinese to believe that an attack on Hong Kong would involve nuclear retaliation, we must avoid anything that would allow the Chinese to claim that the Colony is a military outpost of the United States," he added.
The records of the Prime Minister's office between 1957 to 1961 were among a batch of papers released by the National Archive.
"Our object is to encourage the Chinese to believe that an attack on Hong Kong would involve U.S. nuclear retaliation," wrote Minister of Defense Harold Watkinson.
留言
張貼留言