Quote Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla View Post
Oh, certainly we had the "One China" policy, which had switched from the ROC to the PRC decades ago.

If you sit and think for a minute though it's a somewhat absurd policy, it made some sense up until 1987 when the ROC was under martial law but it's not really defensible now. the PRC is an oppressive and corrupt state which repeatedly abuses its own people, and has abused Hong Kong since handover, suppressing its nascent democracy - and China is not a friendly nation. On the other hand you have the ROC, which is a multi-party democracy with universal suffrage and it IS a friendly nation.

The handover of Hong Kong to the PRC is one of the great shames of British Colonialism and we only did it because were were economically and militarily weak. Had we still had the bulk of the Empire in 1997, or had the Commonwealth evolved into a more cohesive supranational body similar to the EU then I think we would have asked to extend the lease, or held a plebiscite and told the PRC they had to abide by the outcome (which would not have favoured them).

Compare the "sod off" attitude HMC takes to Argentina and the Falklands - because we can.
One thing is for certain. The government in Taipei would not thank the UK for handing over Hong Kong to them. To satisfy our taste for being high and mighty about liberal democracies, we would have upset just about everyone in the region and anyone who has any links with the region. Even the Hong Kongers would have hated us for stirring things up unnecessarily when the practical reality was there for all to see.