3 ms·
Ultimately, the UK had absolutely zero chance at holding HK against the Chinese, HK was a tiny colony that could be seized basically instantly, and at the time
by throwaway2048 6y ago
Ultimately, the UK had absolutely zero chance at holding HK against the Chinese, HK was a tiny colony that could be seized basically instantly, and at the time decolonialization was still a global hotbutton issue.
A few decades before negotiations began between China and the UK, India seized the Portuguese colony of Goa[1]. Nobody acted on behalf of the Portuguese. With the USA having just a few years beforehand suffered defeat in the Vietnam war, and extremely unlikely to have the public support for another land war in Asia, but this time against a vastly stronger opponent for a relatively much less important parcel of land, There is little reason to believe anyone would have, or could have seriously contested China seizing Hong Kong.
Consider as well, during the Korean war, A China still badly crippled by World War 2 almost single handedly defeated an entire coalition of western powers, including a USA at the zenith of their conventional arms power.
The declaration was an alternative to a military annexation of Hong Kong by the Chinese.
The British probably acquiesced more than they had to, and didn't guarantee enough rights for Hong Kong citizens (especially the really lame part about not giving them a path to citizenship in the UK proper), but make no mistake, the alternative to the declaration wasn't Hong Kong remaining a part of the UK, it was Chinese invasion.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Goa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Goa
- gruez 6y ago>Consider as well, during the Korean war, A China still badly crippled by World War 2 almost single handedly defeated an entire coalition of western powers, including a USA at the zenith of their conventional arms power. Isn't that because China got the drop on the western powers?
- refurb 6y agoFrom what I've read it was mostly hubris. Intelligence knew of the build up of Chinese Troops at the Yellow River. China has also shared through diplomatic channels that if UN troops got with 300 miles (? can't remember the exact number), China would stop them. China did do a good job of attacking where the UN wasn't expecting as well.
- throwaway2048 6y agoThey would certainly get the drop on a tiny landmass like HK.
- person_of_color 6y ago> got the drop on the western powers Meaning what exactly?
- gruez 6y agohttps://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/get_the_drop_on https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/get_the_drop_on
- refurb 6y agoA China still badly crippled by World War 2 almost single handedly defeated an entire coalition of western powers I think the 1.5M North Korean who died might disagree that China "almost single handedly defeated the coalition". China paid a huge price for that war that ended in a stalemate. 200,000 dead and probably the same wounded/missing. That's ~12% of the Chinese military at the time. By contrast the US lost ~1M dead/wounded in WW2 out of a peak strength of 12M. Interesting, one reason why the US strategy in Vietnam was limited was the fear of China entering the war. Based on a few accounts I've read, China had zero intention of actually engaging in combat as they were still smarting from the Korean war.
- BurningFrog 6y agoMao was happy to sacrifice any number of his troops for the sake of the war. China can always call up new soldiers from its immense population. The troops sacrificed were also mostly former Nationalist units from the civil war that ended the year before.
- khuey 6y agoChina also spent like a third of the government's budget on the war in the relevant years. It was a massive sink of manpower and materiel.