Mr Stuart
Cc:
Mr Elliott
Sir D Watson
Mr Wilford
Mr Pellew
SECRET
56
DEFENCE REVIEW STEERING COMMITTEE:
HONG KONG
The
1. Generally speaking I share the judgements expressed in your S minute of 17 July. However it is not feasible (as may be implied
in your paragraph 1) to amend the Steering Committee report. Steering Committee has already approved it and transmitted it to
Ministers.
2. In my view we should brief the Secretary of State on the points you mention as follows:-
(a) There is a relationship between the numbers of troops we keep in Hong Kong and the amount we can expect the Hong Kong Government
to contribute.
(b) There is no prospect of getting the Hong Kong Government to meet the total bill and we should not suggest this to them unless the Governor advises that it would be tactically advantageous to do so.
(c) It is conceivable that we could shave the total costs in Hong Kong by using more Ghurkas and by dispensing with the artillery and reinforcement facilities. Nevertheless there is a good deal of resistance in the MOD to each of these points and these may turn out to be bargaining counters in a triangular FCO/MOD/Hong Kong negotiation.
3. On your para 5, I was hitherto unaware that the Governor thought that Hong Kong would at the end of the day pay about the present £8 M for a reduced force. I personally believe that if that is all they are prepared to pay, we shall be in difficulties.
£8 M bought a
I guess that the political could both just about be met if
There is of course room for
lot more in 1968 than it does today. considerations here and in Hong Kong
the latter paid half the new cost. argument and negotiation as to what should be counted in the "cost".
M
J A Thomson
18 July 1974
SECRET