61–70 of 296 posts
I imagine whoever got the 99 year lease is feeling pretty pleased about it - that's basically forever as far as they can tell. On the other hand, I bet the UK in 1997 would have hoped for a longer lease on Hong Kong.
Sea level rise may mean that a 99 year lease is longer than the island will be habitable.
I'm a citizen of the Republic of Mauritius and, when this news was announced today, there was a general sense of relief. Mauritius has been fighting for its sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago (with Diego Garcia being the largest island) for 56 years. Today, the Chagos Archipelago is part of Mauritius again and a treaty will (hopefully) soon be signed between the UK and Mauritius. From there, Mauritius will sign…
I imagine whoever got the 99 year lease is feeling pretty pleased about it - that's basically forever as far as they can tell. On the other hand, I bet the UK in 1997 would have hoped for a longer lease on Hong Kong.
Probably not. In 1997 they were happy to court the $$ associated with opening up this huge new market of 1b+ "middle class" consumers. Id argue they still aren't sufficiently butthurt about it. The UK has sufficient grounds to reclaim HK since china has very much failed to uphold its agreement to keep hong kong democratic for at least 50 years. I guess that's why the CPC goes on gaslighting rants about "whole process…
Hong Kong island is, I would imagine, in no way sustainable as a standalone territory, if China were to be hostile.
I imagine whoever got the 99 year lease is feeling pretty pleased about it - that's basically forever as far as they can tell. On the other hand, I bet the UK in 1997 would have hoped for a longer lease on Hong Kong.
Probably not. In 1997 they were happy to court the $$ associated with opening up this huge new market of 1b+ "middle class" consumers. Id argue they still aren't sufficiently butthurt about it. The UK has sufficient grounds to reclaim HK since china has very much failed to uphold its agreement to keep hong kong democratic for at least 50 years. I guess that's why the CPC goes on gaslighting rants about "whole process…
They could take it back whenever they wanted and we’d do nothing.
I'm a citizen of the Republic of Mauritius and, when this news was announced today, there was a general sense of relief. Mauritius has been fighting for its sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago (with Diego Garcia being the largest island) for 56 years. Today, the Chagos Archipelago is part of Mauritius again and a treaty will (hopefully) soon be signed between the UK and Mauritius. From there, Mauritius will sign…
Also, are you concerned that Diego Garcia might be a target in a war?
What does this means in terms of global politics and US having a base there? I also assume .io no longer being controlled by UK? ( Which is somewhat worrying )
> What does this means in terms of global politics and US having a base there? Absolutely nothing. The US still has a base on the island of Cuba [0], they aren’t giving up Diego Garcia. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_Naval_Base
Ah, you mean the illegal torture prison against which the Cuban government has been protesting since 1959.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> From there, Mauritius will sign a lease agreement of 99 years with the USA so that the military base there can continue to operate. Seems to be a lease with the UK (which then 'sub-leases' to the US?): * https://www.reuters.com/world/britain-agrees-chagos-island-s... Curious to know if there will be extension provisions: people think 99 years is a long time (which isn't wrong), but Hong Kong went back to China afte…
It's easier to move a single military base at the end of a lease than an entire country
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Without going into the sentiment of this, I suppose Chaos Islands are not part of the United Kingdom but rather an overseas territory, so more like "property", to put it bluntly. I guess the government can just give away a building it owns, and this is more analogous than giving away "territory". And there is no current indigenous population there either. But yeah, Jersey is also an overseas territory, can the govern…
Jersey is a Crown Dependency, not an Overseas Territory. They share a King and the UK is responsible for their defense, but domestically Crown Dependencies are more independent of Parliament than your average British overseas territory.
I vaguely remember handing over the Falkland Islands to Argentina was actually on the cards before the invasion, so perhaps surprisingly the answer is "yes".
> African nations began to speak with one voice on the issue, pushing the UK hard on the issue of decolonialisation. I wish the journalists had a little more sophistication on this. African nations began to push the UK on this because China and Russia understand that Diego Garcia is a critical port, and made investment + aid/ bribery + weapons (China / Russia respectively) conditional on forcing the issue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Jersey is a Crown Dependency, not an Overseas Territory. They share a King and the UK is responsible for their defense, but domestically Crown Dependencies are more independent of Parliament than your average British overseas territory.
Ok, fair point. Can the UK hand over Bermuda, or Cayman isles? I vaguely remember handing over the Falkland Islands to Argentina was actually on the cards before the invasion, so perhaps surprisingly the answer is "yes".
It seems like people forget that the UK ceded everything from Ireland which was a UK constituent as opposed to a UK subject as well as Canada, Australia, India and numerous other territories.
In the UK, parliament is supreme and has the final authority.