CONFIDENTIAL
4. We have never formally accepted the Chinese position and have been careful to avoid any action or statement which might be interpreted as indicating that we do not regard Hong Kong Chinese CUKCs as British citizens. But in practice we have had to compromise. Unlike several other countries including China, we accept the concept of dual nationality. We have therefore tended to accept de facto if not de jure that a person of Chinese ethnic origin, whatever his nationality status in our eyes, would be effectively a dual national while in China and that he could not expect British (or other foreign) consular protection. Furthermore, it could be argued that by agreeing that Hong Kong. Chinese CUKCs wishing to travel to China should do so on Chinese, not British, documents, we (and the Hong Kong Chinese concerned) have acquiesced in the Chinese view of their status. (As far as we know cases of Hong Kong Chinese CUKCS being able to use their British passports to enter China your para 3 are extremely rare: we should be interested to know if you or Hong Kong have evidence to the contrary.)
5.
The question now is whether circumstances have changed in any way which would make it either desirable or advisable to take a more active position on behalf of Hong Kong Chinese CUKCs who may get into trouble while visiting China. In the past there have been, I think, very few cases where such people have turned to us for assistance. It may be that in future, given the much improved relations between China and the UK and China and Hong Kong, we shall be asked to intervene more frequently. This is partly because more Hong Kong Chinese are now visiting China and partly because they or their families may judge that the improved atmosphere between our Governments would make intervention by British consular authorities more acceptable to the Chinese. Whether concern in Hong Kong about the Nationality Bill might increase the propensity of Hong Kong Chinese CUKCS to test their Britishness while in China by seeking our assistance is probably unlikely but no doubt David Wilson will comment on this possibility.
6.
Having said all this, we agree with the line taken by Iain Orr in para 3 of his letter of 10 July. We think that in future, in dealing with requests by Hong Kong Chinese CUKCs for consular assistance, we should undertake to consider whether there is any action which can be taken with the Chinese authorities; at the same time we should point out the difficulties arising from the Chinese view of their nationality status. In this connection, while accepting Iain Orr's view about an inspired press article, subject to Hong Kong's views, it would seem right to point out to Hong Kong Chinese CUKCS, if they should ask before visiting China, that they would probably be regarded there as Chinese by the Chinese authorities.
CONFIDENTIAL
17.