GRS 250
CONFIDENTIAL
FM FCO 08181OZ MAY
CONFIDENTIAL
a
ль
proš
6L6!AVW O
Hkk 1842.
86
TO IMMEDIATE PEKING
TELEGRAM NUMBER 251 OF 8 MAY
AND TO IMMEDIATE HONG KONG (GOVERNOR AND BCARFE)
81
See (87/91)
YOUR TELS NOS 415 AND 416 AND HONG KONG TELS NOS 529, 531 AND 540: UK / PRC AIR SERVICES NEGOTIATIONS.
1. WE WOULD HAVE PREFERRED (PARA 3 OF OUR TEL NO 241) NOT TO DISCLOSE OUR HAND IN ADVANCE BUT TO HOLD BACK THE DRAFT TEXT
(WHICH AS YOU RIGHTLY SUPPOSE IS MERELY A STARTING POINT FOR DISCUSSION) UNTIL WE HAD HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THE HANDLING OF THESE MATTERS WITH THE CHINESE TEAM. WE HAVE REVIEWED
OUR TACTICS IN THE LIGHT OF YOUR ADVICE AND HAVE DECIDED ON
BALANCE TO HAND OVER THE TEXT BUT TO OMIT THE ANNEX AS YOU PROPOSED. IT WILL, HOWEVER, BE ESSENTIAL TO EXPLAIN THE OMISSION OF THE ANNEX AND A REVISED SPEAKING NOTE TO COVER THIS IS IN MIFT,
2. YOUR TELEGRAM UNDER REFERENCE PROMPTED US TO LOOK AGAIN AT THE
NOTE TO UK ROUTE 2 IN THE ANNEX. WE HAVE NOW IMPROVED THE DRAFTING.
OF THIS AND THE NOTE TO THE PRC ROUTE 1 AND THE DELEGATION WILL
BRING A REVISED VERSION OF THE ANNEX TO PEKING.
3. WE HAVE ALSO REVIEWED THE TEXT IN THE LIGHT OF AMENDMENTS
SUGGESTED IN HONG KONG TEL NO 540. THE SPECIAL DEFINITION OF QUOTE TERRITORY UNQUOTE IN ARTICLE 1(D) WAS (AS STATED IN OUR TEL NO 242) INCLUDED TO MEET POSSIBLE CHINESE SENSITIVITY, IN PARTICULAR WITH REGARD TO THE REGIONAL (NOT TRUNK ROUTE) OPERATIONS. HOWEVER, WE ARE CONTENT TO OMIT IT. IF THE CHINESE ALLOW THIS OMISSION TO STAND, THE STANDARD DEFINITION IN THE CHICAGO CONVENTION WOULD APPLY. OTHER HONG KONG SUGGESTIONS HAD
ALREADY BEEN TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.
CONFIDENTIAL
14.
'
:
Page 15Page 16
81