CO537-2187 — Page 139

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