> Even a new treaty in 1898, which granted Hong Kong, Kowloon, and further territories in Canton to Britain for 99 years, kept the Walled City under Chinese control. A year later, in May 1899, rumors circulated that Chinese soldiers were massing again in the Walled City, so the British sent troops across the water. They expected battle—perhaps another war—but found only the Mandarin. The irate official left too, and the British took the city, though the Chinese never renounced their claim. Missionaries moved in and built churches and schools, pig farmers from the surrounding hills took plots of land within the walls. There was almost no administrative control, and the city became a slum. Yet whenever the Hong Kong government tried to clear it to turn it into a park—evicting the residents in the process—the Chinese government always stepped in. After all, this tiny rectangle of land was still officially their territory.
Answers a question I'd had for a while: what was special about this piece of land that made it effectively lawless?
my understanding was that it was in administrative limbo. Britain owned Hong Kong, and China claimed authority over just to spite them. So Britain left it alone. But China didn't care enough to actually administer it. And besides, it was disconnected from the mainland and only i tiny insignificant plot of land. So why bother setting up all the infrastructure just for a tiny slum?
If Hong Kong was British under treaty then this area is not covered by British control. If the British exercise control then they are saying the treaty is invalid.
The Chinese didn't exercise control because to do so would validate a treaty that they objected to after the fact; that the original colony was seeded in perpertuity . They didn't want to fully disown it because they claimed the whole colony back, not just New Territories.
It was clear by the 1970s that since the Chinese could just cut the water supply off to Hong Kong if they wanted to, that the compromise solution was to pretend that the 99 years New Territories lease treaty had always covered the whole colony and just agree to handover with a two systems one state solution.
Answers a question I'd had for a while: what was special about this piece of land that made it effectively lawless?