1
Mr Stewart
stewart
CONFIDENTIAL
Reference HKK 345/509/1
دار پر برم
FLAGS
A B2
DOU
FLAG see on
frant
cover
© Ana
FLAG E
FLAG F
Danes
FLAG G
Ортер
HONG KONG:
PROPOSED STOP-OVER BY THE CZECHOSLOVAKIAN
MINISTER FOR TRADE
1. You mentioned that EESD are thinking of submitting to Under-Secretaries on the question of the Hong Kong Government's disinclination to allow Mr Barcak, the Czechoslovakian Minister for Trade, to spend six hours in Hong Kong before returning to Prague at the end of a visit to the Far East (Hong Kong Telno 1 to Prague and Prague Telsnos 80 and 81 to the FCO refer).
2. I would hope that we and EESD and FED, who have a close interest and are shown as the lead department for the two Prague telegrams, will be able to arrive at a consensus about what should be done. If the matter needs to be referred to Ministers, it is helpful that Lord Goronwy-Roberts is responsible for the work of the three departments primarily involved.
3.
Whatever view is arrived at within the Office, whether prior or subsequent to a submission to Ministers, I hope it will be accepted that no firm conclusion should be reached without reference back to Hong Kong and without seeking the views of Peking. (I would expect Hong Kong, in any case, to respond to Prague's two telegrams.) Any draft submission, which should ideally be agreed amongst the departments concerned,, my view, make this point.
should, in
4. On the substance of the matter, I find it difficult to decide whether the proposed stop-over in Hong Kong by the Czechoslovakian Minister for Trade is more worthy of being treated as an exception under paragraph 5(B) of the January 1974 circular, as Prague have suggested, than other instances in the past of Eastern European VIPs wanting to visit or transit Hong Kong. This is partly because there have not been many such instances during my time in the department. The most recent, which happens also to concern a Czechoslovakian, may have been that in October last year when Prague enquired whether an exception could be made under the January 1974 circular for Dr Frantisek Hrabal, who wanted to visit Hong Kong to arrange a series of concerts to be organised by the principal Czechoslovakian music organisation (Mr MacInnes' letter of 28 October to me). With the acquiescence of EESD we felt constrained to tell Prague that we did not think an exception could be made for Dr Hrabal (FCO Telno 274 of 1 November). Nothing more was heard of this case except that Hong Kong subsequently said that they were grateful for the support we had given them and that their decision to refuse a visa must stand (Hong Kong Telno 1146 of 15 November). Clearly, Mr Barcak is more important than Dr Hrabal and it is relevant that he would not be staying in Hong Kong for more than a few hours (during which, if necessary, he cald be kept under surveil- lance). My view, however, is that the considerations advanced
/ against
GODE 18 - n
CONEDENTIAL
Page 75Page 76