CONFIDENTIAL
Reference
Mrs Denza
Depza
HONG KONG AND THE UNITED NATIONS
SA
es
1. Before we draft a letter or a telegram to the Mission in New York, I should be grateful for your confirmation that the draft letter from Sir Donald Maitland to the Secretary-General is in the form we want it to be.
2. I have two doubts. The first relates to the exact significance of the words "suggestions made by the Secretariat for changing the order of a heading in UN documents". The second relates to the need to say anything in the letter about this issue. I have the impression from earlier papers that we need to reserve our position chiefly, if not solely, because a change in the method of listing the names of countries and territories could have implications for the status of our Dependent Territories collectively (not only Hong Kong).
3. What has happened, as I understand it, is that the Chinese have objected to the designation of Hong Kong as "Government of Hong Kong" in a UNDP document and have themselves suggested a way of altering this designation (UKMIS New York telegram No 868) and that they have objected to the way in which Hong Kong is listed in a number of United Nations documents about narcotic drugs, without making any suggestion as to how their objection might be met (UKMIS New York telegram No 887).
Do we need to cover the first as well as the second of these objections in any letter sent to the Secretary-General?
I apologise for returning to the charge on this problem (which ought to have been dealt with long ago).
3 January 1974
R.M. Evans
RM Evans
Far Eastern Department
M. Loans
Latis fuil that the shift- is
adequate to protect
legal position.
The wording perhaps, as you point out does
Concession in
хах
apply
to our
CONFIDENTIAL
regard to
OD 145177 219242 500M 4/73 GM 3643/2