:
would mean that even those countries which opposed us, such
as Panama, would be included in the general invitation; and if
we simply gave places to those who applied the resulting group
might bear little relation to the real support given to us by
their governments,
7. To invite no diplomatic representatives would avoid the
problem of possibly causing offence. The Service could be
presented as a national occasion. No other country provided
actual troops (except the Gurkhas, which are a special case,
as part of the British army). Letters could be sent to the
representatives of the countries which supported us most
strongly, explaining on this basis why they have not been
invited. Most of these countries have already been extensively
thanked already. However, it would be extremely strange not
to invite the New Zealand High Commissioner, considering the
very prompt and extremely positive support which his country
has given.
8. An alternative approach would be to invite the represen-
tatives of NATO and Commonwealth countries. This would avoid
HMG having to make any invidious judgements about the degree
of support given by individual countries. Also, it is these
countries which have been the most supportive. Other countries
such as Senegal or Jordan which had given valuable support
could be informed that the occasion was being restricted to
members of the two groups. However, NATO now includes Spain,
and the Commonwealth includes Grenada, Seychelles and Cyprus,
all of which have been distinctly unhelpful, or worse.
>
>
9. If any members of the Diplomatic Corps are invited, other
official representatives would have a comparable claim for
places. The Secretary General of the Commonwealth has been a
resolute and vigorous supporter of the UK over the entire con-
flict. If he is to be offered a place, there is a comparable
/claim
Page 60Page 61