Redacted under FOI exemption 27(1)
1
य
SECRET UK EYES A LOCSEN
1994 remains a valid timescale for withdrawal of the second (Gurkha) bat-
talion because the HKG shares the view of HODUK and HQBFHK that a one year gap
between achievement of the Police capability and the second reduction is advi-
sable.
LTC provision
is currently based on the assumption that a second Gurkha battalion will not be
withdrawn until 1996. It is also noteworthy that when CBF Hong Kong's revised
Concept of Operations received the Governor's endorsement in Dec 88, the
Governor stated he envisaged a need for 2 resident battalions until the final
handover (rather than having the third battalion withdraw early in the final
phase as had been desired by HKG in the early days of planning (Paragraph 10a
above refers)). A decision on this issue need not be finalised at this stage.
21. Battalion Withdrawals - Timescales. Presuming that the Police have assumed
responsibility for half the border by the end of 1991, it is judged that the
withdrawal of the first (Gurkha) battalion should be planned for mid 1992; this battalion should be declared non-operational early in the year and redeployed or disbanded (4) in the second half of that year. Thereafter, the second (Gurkha)
battalion should be withdrawn in 1994. Given these circumstances, no changes
need therefore be made to the plan for withdrawal of battalions planned by
CDS 7/87.
'Disdandment' of the first battalion withdrawn may more accurately be described as 'amalgamation'. The latter term has therefore been adopted for use throughout the remainder of this paper.
14
SECRET UK EYES A LOCSEN
ROW 113 (HONG)