中英協議前夕，英作家Peter Dally批評五十年保證是虛話，交出香港後被反口就無計可施。戴卓爾政府對福克蘭有承擔，對中國接收香港卻一臉無奈，退一萬步，起碼可派居英權。
Peter Dally(1984) Hong Kong Time Bomb, p.40:
The talk of a 50 year guarantee by Beijing assures no one, because it is realized that once actual power is handed over, there is little that anyone can do to prevent 'guarantees' being eroded...p.58-60:
A truly democratic Hong Kong could have the following theoretical options:1. To remain as it is with a nominal British presence. 2. To accept Beijing's nominal sovereignty. 3. To accept Taipei's nominal sovereignty. 4. To join with, and be integrated in, Communist China. 5. To join with, and be integrated in, Free China. 6. To continue independently until China is once more united.No doubt the Hong Kong Chinese would steer a very careful course in order to preserve their interests. That might not suit everyone in London, Beijing or Taipei, but it would be far preferable to the policy of trusting the Communists...In Britain, and even in Hong Kong, there has been considerable fudging and self-delusion. When the Beijing regime offers 'autonomy and freedom', much is made of these 'guarantees'. What is ignored is the small print or conditions, which are to be found in any Communist freedom. Freedom of course, but not freedom to 'slander' the People's Republic of China…There must be no 'counter-revolutionary activity' (no opposition to the Communist leaders in Beijing; no support for the ROC in Taiwan, and of course no agitation for elections which could result in either of the above two 'spiritual pollutions' contaminating the revolution)...The Communist regime should be left in no doubt that any attempt at coercion or aggression will be resisted, and that Britain will not hesitate to call upon help from any quarter. Beijing will be held responsible for the consequences of any aggressive action which attempts to take away from the people of Hong Kong their freedom, Human Rights, dignity and right to decide their own destiny within the Chinese context...In the Falklands, the people were not threatened with a totalitarian ideology which advocated world revolution by all and every means. Both Britain and the United States, however, agreed that the forceable seizure of the islands, if allowed to go effectively unchallenged, would leave the world a much more dangerous place. How much more dangerous will it be if we allow the 5½ million people under British protection, many of them British citizens living on British sovereign territory, to be swallowed up by a Communist tyranny dedicated ultimately to world revolution? …
餘論：或居英權，或兩岸解決，要不交予台灣
Britain's only excuse for its negotiations so far is that it is trying to come to terms with the most immediate threat to the people of Hong Kong. Should it however actually hand over 'British citizens' to a Communist regime against the wishes of those citizens when there are two clear alternatives? These are:1. Keep the citizens and the colony which never belonged to Communist China, as it has always been until the Chinese dispute is resolved. 2. Give the citizens the choice of joining the ROC by declaring that Hong Kong is part of the ROC.If the British Government does not do either of these, then it is honour bound to offer to all those entitled to a British passport, sanctuary in Britain, together with a quota system of their relatives, as it has done with immigrants from other Commonwealth countries…True, Britain has never encouraged the people of Hong Kong to rise above colonial status. That is no excuse, however, for imposing upon them a Communist dictatorship which is far more oppressive.
Hong Kong Time Bomb,p.42.
延伸閱讀：
— 歡迎分享，更多材料見內容導覽 —
搜尋本站資料，可用Google自訂引擎
考古陣地一覽
facebook.com/recall.hk
instagram.com/recall.hk
medium.com/recall-hk
mewe.com/join/recall-hk
odysee.com/@recall-hk
twitter.com/recallhk
mastodon.social/@recallhk
t.me/s/recallhk
#世代懺悔錄 #香港前途考古 #夕陽帝國買賣 #大英帝國 #戴卓爾政府 #撤離殖民地 #聯合聲明 #中華民國 #居英權 #HongKongTimeBomb #PeterDally #反共 #前途自決 #港獨 #福克蘭 #反革命 #精神污染
