CONFIDENTIAL
布政司署 BY BAG
19
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT
LOWER ALBERT ROAD
HONG KONG
香港下亞厘畢道
*** OUR REF.: SCR 16/5701/61 V
**** Your Ref.: HKK 175/2
3 May 1977
R & R
6/5.
ཎཱ༔
1/3/5
T J DAVID ESQ
HONG KONG DEPARTMENT
F
25
2.
hew Jimity.
TTO HAHN"
R$
RE
: v
IN
11 MAY 1977
HKK 175/2
Thank you for your letter of 21 April.
We held a meeting yesterday of those primarily concerned and rapidly came to the conclusion that you cannot have your cake and eat it. (b) of your para 2 does not entirely tally with (c) and neither are compatible with your proposed reply to the German Embassy. I recognise (from the lack lustre prose of your para 3) that this is not your fault: you are merely having to trot out the hobby horses of other Departments. But may I venture to suggest that you now seize political control of the issue and say to the departments concerned that the Hong Kong Government would be glad for the visit to take place and would propose to deal with it in accordance with the operational order enclosed with my letter of 15 March: can they agree to this or not? If not, then perhaps you could explain to the Germans that you do not want the visit, because it would be you (or rather your Whitehall colleagues) who have the objections. If, however, they can agree to the operational order then we would be perfectly happy to send a Note to the German Consulate-General here (who have now sent us a formal request, although without dates) along the lines of the - draft enclosed, subject to any comments your legal
advisers may have.
3.
I fear that it is semantics which has prevented us reaching a sensible agreement about this visit. For instance, whatever the M O D may say, the visit of the N S (not US S, my fault) SAVANNAH has set a precedent for civil nuclear ship visits to Hong Kong. The SAVANNAH was not a warship, indeed it was run on very much the same lines as the "OTTO HAHN". If there were an accident, our defensive line (which we have been discussing with
CONFIDENTIAL
-/2.