2. You have said that failure to deregister
would have a very adverse effect on public morale
and would be interpreted as a sign of weakness on
the part of government. We agree that this
might well be the case if it were public know-
ledge that deregistration had been seriously
considered or earlier decided upon or there a
#
general public assumption that the school w
scho
were
would
not be allowed to reopen. But against the
background of the abandonment of violence by the
Communists and having regard to the time lag, is
there not a possibility that public opinion
might regard failure to deregister as no more than
a gesture by government to encourage a return to
normality?
3.
It would also be helpful to know whether
there are any alternative courses open to us,
e.g. whether it would be possible to cancel the
registration of present staff and management,
Premises
leaving it possible for the school to reopen
school/ to
under fresh (communist) auspices. If this
particular course were feasible, would it not in
public eyes constitute sufficient punitive action
against those who so clearly overstepped the
acceptable limits and provide some insurance
that they could not again indulge in similar
activities? It would certainly enable us to
maintain that we do not object to communist
schools as such (paragraph 5 of Peking telegram
under reference).
4. Before reaching any final view we should be grateful to receive your further observations. (8430 Dd.033946-600...
G>W<Briztd:~Gp,863
Issue.
24,
•
6.
63.
NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN