il
In Carton Dont biely fasys fenyder 12/4
нка
CONFIDENTIAL
More Draft Tel & the Boun
our wist
سوم به
6227/2
PIR+PA
SEMRI
x maybe chave
Mr Layden
HKD
pole 27/
From: C A Munro
Western European Dept
Date: 26 February 1986
MKK 243./1
RECEIVED IN REGISTRY
VIETNAMESE REFUGEES IN HONG KONG: RESETTLEMENT IN MAR 1986
120
1.
Your minute of 21 February.
DESK OFFICER
WDEX
PA
REGISTRY
Action Taken
171
2. This was last raised at Ministerial level by Mr Eggar during State Secretary (PUS equivalent) Meyer-Landrut's visit on 8 November (copy of record attached). Meyer-Landrut's line, which was not very forthcoming, had clearly been carefully prepared. Mr Eggar took note, and said that we might come back to the Germans later. It is
clear that there is no hope of a change in the German position
through a further approach at any level below this.
3.
The next Ministerial contact is likely to be Mrs Chalker's visit
to Bonn on 7-8 April. However her interlocutors do not deal
directly with the subject, and this would not be a significantly
higher level approach than that by Mr Eggar. Indeed in German terms
Ministers of State rank below State Secretaries such as
Meyer-Landrut. The best opportunity would be the Secretary of
State's next round of informal talks with Herr Genscher. He would
have to convince Genscher of the need for a gesture of political
goodwill, stressing the symbolic worth of acceptance of even a a small
additional number of refugees.
4. The Secretary of State was briefed to raise the question with
Herr Genscher at informal talks after the Anglo-German summit on
27 November, but did not in the event do so. Clearly any submission
or briefing will have to argue the case forcefully that it is worth him expending a significant amount of bilateral credit with the
Germans on the question.
5.
Genscher has invited the Secretary of State for informal talks
on 11-12 April, but it is not yet clear whether the Secretary of State can manage those dates. I will keep you informed of progress.
If Genscher replied positively on political grounds, we would need
CONFIDENTIAL