3 ms·

The record is there to be seen. No twisting is necessary, it's a matter of record. We should respect that this is a matter for the Chinese people at the end of

The record is there to be seen. No twisting is necessary, it's a matter of record. We should respect that this is a matter for the Chinese people at the end of the 50 year "one country, two systems" period they willingly signed up to. Until that point sticking to the treaty lodged at the UN seems important. After all if they couldn't abide the terms, surely they wouldn't have signed it? Or is it reasonable for countries, any countries, to break international agreements whenever they feel like it?

mytailorisrich 7y ago
The record only shows what I mentioned and to keep repeating this ignores the main point. As to the 50 year transition period, it remains to be seen how the mainland is breaching the terms or even attempting to breach the terms. But that's largely academic in practice since there is no enforcement. As mentioned it is mostly to placate the British and to allow them to save face. As the saying goes, promises only bind those who believe in them. The Chinese government does seem to make efforts to abide by the terms, though.