CONFIDENTIAL
2.
6.
,
Finally, as background, I should add that as a result of Paul's letter to Orr of 12 January we have asked the US Consulate-General if they know anything about the case. We are still awaiting a formal reply. Their initial reaction was to doubt whether they had any information and to say that they had many similar enquiries.
7.
Now for the more important question of policy. In Hong Kong it has always been assumed that there was nothing, in practice, the Embassy could do to protect Hong Kong Chinese, even if they held Hong Kong British passports, and that the risk of attempting to exercise protection was both a possible danger to the person concerned and a confrontation about who was, or was not, a British subject. The doctrine was that those who travelled to China did so on Chinese, not British, documents (the Hui-xiang-zheng) and knew the risk they were taking.
8.
Admittedly much has changed in the past few years and the old line may no longer be appropriate. But, before we change our method of dealing with these cases, we need to consider carefully the implications. On this we need first the guidance of the Embassy. Their note of 24 December implies that we claim to exercise protection over all Hong Kong British citizens who are ethnic Chinese. It could be argued that, in suggesting that such a note should be sent, Consular Department also accepted that the Embassy had such a right. If so, there will have been a significant change in the Chinese position. This should become clearer when the Chinese reply to the Embassy note. I fear they may reply that Miss Cham's uncle is Chinese, not British. If so, do we accept such a response? the Hong Kong point of view I think my advice would then have to be that we should drop the case rather than enter an unproductive confrontation.
9.
But what if the Chinese accept, implicitly or explicitly, that the Embassy have a locus standi in the case? Would we then claim the right to protect all Hong Kong British citizens in China regardless of the documents they travel on? Many of the 2.6 million Hong Kong British citizens travel regularly to China; doubtless a good number get into trouble there for smuggling and similar offences. So far as I know we have seldom if ever been approached to help such people. But we would be if it became known that such intervention was possible and helpful.
10.
What we do in these cases also has implications of course for potential consular agreements.
/contd.....
CONFIDENTIAL