Hong Kong leased ? Not quite correct. Only the "New territories" were
leased - which is where they get there name from. Both Hong Kong Island and
the Southern end of Kowloon Peninsular (up to Boundary Road) were British in
perpituity but without the new territories (that lease came to an end) the
rest of the place was unviable. Whilst the vast majority of the HK
population had "escaped" from China they were escaping a regime and for
economic reasons. There is not much evidence that they would ever have voted
to "remain" British and for many, Britain holding a lump of South China was
an affront even though they preferred that to remaining in China under the
regime of the time. It isn't a black and white thing (yellow and white ?)
(red and white ?). The Macao experience is also relevant.
Britain could in theory have opted to remain in Southern Kowloon and The
Island but there was very obviously never any intention to do that e.g. the
new airport was built in the New Territories.
China would not have needed any military action. Turning off the water
supply and closing the "new" border at Boundary Road (and therefore shutting
off the airport and main container terminal and port) would have been quite
enough. The only shot to be fired would have been the noon day gun.
_______________________________________________
the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list administrators accept no liability for the personal views and opinions of contributors.
Leedslist mailing list
[email protected]
http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist
oh alright then :-)
