243/1
CONFIDENTIAL
I C Orr Sea
Assistant Political Adviser
HONG KON
BRITISH VEBASSY
PEKING
1087
HKK 24
243/1
12 June 1970
2
по
фоль
навливать
8186
10%
wughizist
REFUGEE PROCESSING CENTRE IN CHINA
1.
In your letter CR 2/4821/75 of 6 June to Soutar in Washington you asked for comments on the likely Chinese reaction to a proposal that a UNHCR sponsored processing centre be set up in Guangdong to take refugees from Hong Kong who were awaiting onward despatch.
2. Although the points in paragraph II of the informal aide memoire are valid enough, I doubt whether they would be sufficient to overcome Chinese resistance to the idea. It would mean accepting UNHCR consultants on site and arrangements for vetting the intake of refugees. There is the further point that the Chinese are liable to see any moves designed to lessen the impact of the refugee problem on neighbouring countries as help and encouragement to Vietnam in pursuing her policy of exporting all ethnic Chinese. They would probably prefer to avoid. compromising their position at this stage. On the other hand, if the Chinese did agree, it is hard to see why, with 220,000 refugees of their own, they should accept only the Hong Kong group for treatment in the camp. They could in fact use it to try to lighten their own load. The 10% factor is a unilateral assumption.
3. If Mr lartling's optimism turns out to be justified (UKMIS Geneva Telno 173 of 31 May) I may be wrong. But if it does appear that the Chinese might be persuaded to consider the proposal, I agree with the point in your paragraph 8 that it should be for UNHCR to make the running, not only since they have apparently started the ball rolling (your Telno 628 of 24 May to FCO), but because, as you say, we need to reserve our stock of goodwill for persuading them to tackle the illegal immigration problem. We at least hope that the Vietnamese refugees are eventually exportable from Hong Kong, whilst the Chinese immigrants are not.
4. One final thought: is not the assumption "G" in your aide memoire a most crucial one over optimistic?
You
T JE George
CONFIDENTIAL
/Copied to:
P
Page 165Page 166