“What, you are suggesting the 100-year lease was not a lease?”
Only one part of Hong Kong was leased and the PRC did not hold the lease and the turnover was not based on the lease expiring.
The ChiComs did not and do not even recognize the lease.
I posted this in 140. And it was a 99 year lease, by the way.
Hong Hong is made up of three areas. Hong Kong. Kowloon. New Territories.
Hong Kong and Kowloon were ceded in perpetuity. New Territories had the lease.
The lease was not with the People’s Republic of China but was made 50 years before that country ever existed.
The Basic Agreement that is an international treaty registered in the UN is the basis for the turnover from UK to PRC. There was at least one other government between the time of the lease and founding of PRC. The PRC did not hold the lease.
The Basic Agreement says nothing about the lease. It is not even mentioned and is not the basis for the treaty.
Correct, I guess it was 99-year. Either way, UK ceded it all back in 1997 and left. They did not give or allow residents to take U.K. citizenship and go to U.K. They abandoned it all, returning it to China. I was there in 1997 and was surprised that the common attitude was to welcome the move.