Who would ta
40.this seems unlikely so far as the United States is
concerned, in view of her present policy towards.
China. For the reasons given later on in this paper,
the retrocession of Hong Kong to China would not be.
likely to be welcomed in business circles in America
or elsewhere.
7. It is difficult to see on what grounds à claim
for the retrocession of Hong Kông could be made. The
principle which led to the agreement to abolish
extraterritorial privileges in China in 1943 could.
scarcely be invoked, and any attempt to use the
preponderating Chinese population as an argument could
be countered by pointing out.
20
SIDOW
(i) that Hong Kong was a barren rock when
it was ceded;. Youroo.
(ii) that the Chinese populationchade come to
Hong Kong and settled there under British
administration of their own free will; and
(iii) that the fact that a large Chinese
population remains there was in itself
proof of the acceptability of the British
administration and the contentment of the
people.
8. A further strong argument which could be used
against such a claim is that its acceptance would in
effect involve the acceptance of the general principle
that territory ceded by one power to another in the
past should be returned, on the demand of the country
which ceded the territory; a principle that would
certainly have wide repercussions throughout the world./
In our own case, for example, it would give support
to the claims which have been made by foreign
countries in the past in respect of Gibraltar,
Cyprus, British Honduras and the Falkland Islands.
It would not be possible to attempt to meet such
claims