JOYIN IDE NETAL
Mr Stewart &
6/14
D
UNCTAD Preferences
UNITED KINGDON DELEGATION TO THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES.
28 rue Joseph II, Bruxelles, 4.
RECEIVED IN
JRCHIVES No.41
6 February, 1969 11 47 EB 1300
APEB
MTUIS 393
Thank you for sending me a copy of your letter of 3 February about the Community's attitude on UCTAD preferenços,
2. IIwill see Tran again noxt week, as he cuppested, The significance of the date given, 13 February, is thật it is immediately after the next meeting of the Council Working Group (11-12 February) to discuss this question. It should be clear by then whether agreement can be reached st official level on the Commission proposals for the Community posit- ion, which were sent to the Council last week and of which you and I have been given detalls by Tran. If agreement cannot be reached in this vay, the matter may have to go to Ministers, in which case the Community will certainly overshoot the 1 Karch deadline since there is not another, Council meeting until 3-4 karch.
>
3. As to what we may hope to achieve through Tran, I am sure you are right to be very cautious in your assessment. He is only a desk officer albeit an able and helpful one and his capacity to influence Commission, let alone Community, policy must be limited. In fairness to Tran, however, although he has suggested that he could make good use of the material on Hong Kong which we have now given to him, he has never indie ated that we should rely on this alone. Indeed he has made it clear that his motives for giving us the fullest possible information about the Community's position has been to enable us to bring to bear effect- ively our diplomatic resources and to press the Commission and the membe states from the outside to take up a liberal attitude.
4. It is this last question which I think we must now consider with some urgency. You certainly set out some very cogent reasons why the Community should confine its offer, in the first instance, at least, to the 77 and allow itself to represent the subsequent inclusion of other countries such as Hong Kong as being done against their better judge- mcnt. Moreover the straightforward protectionist feeling against the inclusion of Hong Kong is clearly strong in Belgium, France und Italy. It would therefore be unwise to rate tʊo highly the chances of success if ve make a formal æproach to the Commission and the member statos at this stage.
5. But, set against this, we here would say that, on past form, there is certainly a good deal more chance of influencing the Community before a firm Community position has been taken up than after it. Once the member states have reached a compromise on a matter, after the ugual internicine strife, they stick to it. And, even if we fail to achieve the inclusion of Hong Kong at this stage, we might perhaps hope to ex- truct, on the basis of the moral obligation arising from the Group of 4 report, some kind of undertaking from the member states to work out something for Hong Kong "at a second stage.”
6. There are, of course, many other factors which will have to be wei- ghed and which cannot be assessed fram here. But if it is decided to make an approach before 1 March it should clearly be done as soon as possible. And it must be made to the member states as well as to the
R. Goldsmith Esq.
U.K. Hission,
CENEVA
EART
T
30
i
CONFIDENTIAL
/Commission
35
: