Jump to content
BANGKOK
snoop1130

Britain will not walk away from Hong Kong, Johnson says

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

"If China proceeds, this would be in direct conflict with its obligations under the joint declaration, a legally binding treaty registered with the United Nations."

Johnson too occupied with his domestic problems to understand that there are no direct threat to the joint declaration. Hong Kong retain their semi-constitution and their special status. 

 

In any case, UK and USA are not desire destinations for Hong Kong who prefer to immigrate to Canada, Taiwan, Singapore and Australia. His invitation to settle in UK will be most likely to be ignored.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, animalmagic said:

By your own quote you state that China has never taken a conciliatory approach before.  However the use of informal is completely inaccurate as it was an international treaty signed by two sovereign countries and lodged with the U.N.

Whether the joint declaration deposited with the UN is still valid is much subjective. Some argue that the declaration covered only the period from the signing in 1984 until the handover in 1997 and Britain has no right to monitor the implementation of the declaration after 1997. In any case, the mini constitution is still in placed and the special status of Hong Kong is still intact. I am sure the legality of the declaration will be challenged if China abolish the special status within 50 years and if Britain still has the appetite to do so. 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Some argue that the declaration covered only the period from the signing in 1984 until the handover in 1997 and Britain has no right to monitor the implementation of the declaration after 1997.

An interesting argument.  An internationally recognized agreement between two sovereign nations detailing at length what is to happen for 50 years to a territory as it is handed over from one jurisdiction to another is only valid until that period starts!

By your argument the Basic Law is not valid after 1st July 1997.

The UN has a right to monitor implementation.

Edited by animalmagic
correction
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kingdong said:

Britain should stop trying to punch above its weight were no longer an empire,we have given all that back,just a small overcrowded set of islands who owe a lot of money,there's going to be some very tough times ahead without sticking its noses in other people's affairs.

 

Britain could have punched on this issue in 1980's,  in late Margaret T era.  There was GIGANTIC financial incentives in the balance and of course all the political ramification at the time. 

 

Turning to 2020,  one side had been on the way down and one side had surged for the past 30+ years.    Forget it,  no way to reverse the course.    

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You already walked away Boris....the territory was only leased to the British under duress for 99 years. You had to give it back to its owner, China. After 1997 you have no rights except those the Chinese gave you in 1997. They did that because HK was about 42% of total Chinese GDP. HK is now 2.5% of total GDP. Plus you won't be in office too long if you let 3 million Chinese come to Britain....your own party will turf you out.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One more thing......HK was never a democracy. It was a colony with an appointed Governor.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

Let us not forget the over 1,000 detention facilities (reputedly closer to concentration camps) in the Western China Uyghur regions. Up to one million people imprisoned, because they are "different".

 

In the decade since, the far western region has seen a growing crackdown and intensifying surveillance, ostensibly to combat extremism. The region posted jobs for 100,000 security personnel in a single recent year alone. Authorities track every vehicle in the region(paywall), collect DNA from residents, seize passports, and use technology to monitor individual routines—or deviations from them.

 

https://qz.com/1599393/how-researchers-estimate-1-million-uyghurs-are-detained-in-xinjiang/

 

 

RTS282XZ-e1559278243931.jpg

They invited the press in.

 

Let them pick their 'concentration camp' They found a lot of people learning stuff.

 

It all went quiet after that. Just American nonsense. Who pays for the World Uighur Congress?

 

There are 56 minorities in China.

Edited by Traubert
  • Sad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, animalmagic said:

An interesting argument.  An internationally recognized agreement between two sovereign nations detailing at length what is to happen for 50 years to a territory as it is handed over from one jurisdiction to another is only valid until that period starts!

By your argument the Basic Law is not valid after 1st July 1997.

The UN has a right to monitor implementation.

It is actually a bi-lateral joint declaration and therefore not in the purview of UN to monitor. 

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

And how much did China pay you for the PR campaign? Nice work. Yes, all fiction. Hundreds of agencies are just making this stuff up. 

Not one fen. Well, they dont employ Brits.

 

It's all out there and you say the US doesnt make mischief for China? The OP is about HK. Nice pic of Joshua Wong last seen at the NED awards picking up his gong.

 

Some guy was on television yesterday insinuating China was involved in the America riots.

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

The UK doesn't have much leverage in this but this is a bold move and I support it.

China needs to be taken down a peg or two. 

The new imperialists. Ironically. 

They do if they handpick the tech savvy hongkongians - but I’ve read Aus and Canada have already embarked down that route - typical Boris always late to the party 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If USA, Russia and the EU could agree only ONE time on a thing...

China could be hard hit, also for thes CV <deleted> they brought to the world.

Unfortunately won't happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

No run away would be a more accurate description.  You had a country that once ruled 25% of the world and now is sovereign over an area the size of the state of Michigan and has to import immigrants to work. 

and now throwing them out !!! 
 

Wait wait - update - but then chartering jets to fly them back in at taxpayers expense to pick the crops 😂
 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...