Hong Kong people are not asked to vote yes or no by the UK and Chinese government. They WERE SOLD DOWN THE RIVER. THEY WERE SOLD LIKE CARGO ***
The Three points to be done by the UK government :
The British Government should intervene Hong Kong in accordance with the Joint Declaration and the Basic Law.
2.Under British observance, the city state of Hong Kong should choose by Universal Referendum its own whereabouts, that is to be an independent state, to be a British colony or to proceed in democratization in autonomy under British guidance. Peripheral affairs, such as whether Hong Kong should have a membership of the Commonwealth of Nations, should be decided by Universal Referendum.
3.The British Government should at least assure that a just and thorough Universal Referendum that decide the rulers and leaders of the territory is in place functionally.
We are anticipating that China’s economy power is going to blow and there will be chaos. We need help now. The CPC are getting Hong Kong under its direct control. We will lose our all soon.
I understand that this petition would be hard to get the target signatures and difficult to get the UK government involved. Hong Kong people are going to occupy peacefully Central District, Hong Kong Island.
Don’t use this site to try to get people to sign a petition. It’s against the rules and it’s annoying. (So is giant text.) You’re welcome to argue about this issue from whatever perspective you like, but the signature and the talk about the petition need to go. I was going to close this thread, but I will leave it open with an edit to the signature and your OP.
Thank you. Please change your settings so it doesn’t appear on every post you make. We ask that people not use their signatures more than once per thread.
I agree that the British government sold out Hong Kong back in 1984 but what are you asking the UK to do about it now?
The UK can ask the Chinese government to treat the residents of Hong Kong better but that pretty much leaves the situation up to the Chinese government. Or the British can attempt to take back control of Hong Kong from the Chinese, but realistically that isn’t going to happen.
In between is the option of the UK applying diplomatic and economic pressure on China on Hong Kong’s behalf. To assess this possibility, can you explain in more detail what goals you’re seeking for Hong Kong?
Well, between 1984 and 1997, many residents of Hong Kong got the heck outta there, so it’s not like those who stayed behind can claim to have been caught by surprise.
Hong Kong and later Kowloon were conquered by Britain in the 19th Century and annexed by force. In 1898 they also acquired a 99-year lease for the New Territories. None of this was honorably done, it was the grossest kind of colonialism (opium, anyone?).
Under British rule, Hong Kong did very well for itself, growing from a tiny fishing village to a large prosperous city. But everything was tainted by the way that the territory was acquired.
Britain handed the whole thing back in 1997 because without the New Territories, Hong Kong and Kowloon were not really sustainable, and also because it was the right thing to do. There was plenty of warning, as Bryan Ekers pointed out in his post.
Britain no longer has any standing with respect to Hong Kong and those territories. Intervening would not be right for anyone. Other former British colonies were able to become independent countries because they didn’t have any other country that could rightfully claim them. This is not the case in Hong Kong.
Personally, I support Hong Kong’s (or anyone’s) attempts to maintain or expand on their freedom. However, I do not believe the OP is being straightforward with us with his supposed panic about economic collapse. I suspect that what is really happening is that the creeping inroads from the central Chinese government on the historic freedoms of Hong Kong are really starting to pinch. I am sympathetic, but not sanguine about the outcome. This is pretty much what I expected when Britain announced it was giving Hong Kong back; it’s just taking longer than I thought.
Roddy
I thought they handed it back because like the lease was up… though the mind boggles at how you would evict a government, it isn’t like you could staple the eviction notice on the door, and a month later send the sheriffs around.
In retrospect, I’m mildly curious what would have happened if Hong Kong had just declared independence in 1997. Would the U.K. (and possibly the U.S.) end up feeling obliged to maintain a de facto defense, as the U.S. does for Taiwan?
Was it the right thing to do? I go back and forth on the issue. On the one hand, the way Hong Kong was acquired was awful. But the horrors that China inflicted on itself in the years since then (particularly under Mao) were way, way worse than anything the British ever did. Frankly, I think I might have erred on the side of keeping them - even if only Hong Kong and Kowloon, and negotiating an in-between step for the New Territories akin to what is in place now.
If Britain hadn’t agreed to that 99-year lease back in 1898 would the entire thing still be British-run now?
