HKB 011/3
SECRET
205
Miss Marsden
Rn 20
From:
RJT McLaren
Date:
20 March 1989
Mr Wood
/207
3
FAC
Cc:
Enter +pe +ps.
Private Secretary
PS/Lord Glenarthur PS/PUS
MF Paul, HKD
Mr Burns, News Dept Mr Millington, FED
Tibet THIS IS A COPY
FAC ENQUIRY ON HONG KONG TIBET
THE ORIGINAL HAS BEEN RETAINED
IN THE DEPARTMENT UNDER
SECTION 3 (4) OF THE
PUBLIC RECORDS ACT 1958
1. I have seen Mr Millington's submission of 20 March covering a draft statement about recent developments in Tibet which the Secretary of State could use when he gives evidence to the FAC on 22 March.
2. As Mr Millington points out, the Government have received some public credit for the statements which Ministers and News Department have already made about the situation in Tibet. Like Mr Millington, I would not wish to discourage the Secretary of State from making a fuller statement at some point soon. I do, however, question whether the FAC on 22 March would be the right occasion. Whether or not the explicit comparison with Hong Kong suggested in the last paragraph of Mr Millington's draft is used, the fact that the Secretary of State had chosen the occasion of an inquiry into Hong Kong to criticise Chinese policy on Tibet would be noted and strongly resented by the Chinese. The fact also that the National People's Congress is meeting in Peking this week will increase Chinese sensitivity - the Foreign Affairs Committee of the NPC has already issued a ringing denunciation of the US Congress's attitude towards Tibet. As the Secretary of State knows
Z
there is a marked tendency among Chinese leaders and officials to examine British actions for evidence of conspiracy to thwart Chinese ambitions in Hong Kong. I fear that if the Secretary of State were to make a statement about Tibet to the FAC on 22 March, Chinese suspicions would be aroused. Their attitude to the FAC Inquiry as a whole could well be influenced adversely.
3. I therefore hope that the Secretary of State will be prepared to delay saying anything further about Tibet for the public record until a later, non-Hong Kong occasion.
4. If the Secretary of State nonetheless decides to say something about Tibet on 22 March, I suggest that the square- bracketed passage in the third paragraph be omitted: the Chinese
/are