CONFIDENTIAL
the easiest to implement and would require no negotiation with the Chinese authorities. However, this is a very short term option and does not satisfactorily address the main problem. I can see no way in which options 1 and 3 can even be contemplated without prior discussion with the Chinese authorities. As Hong Kong point out themselves, third countries would be likely to question our authority to negotiate VAAs. I am not sure that third countries would be satisfied by a provision in the joint declaration without further clarification. The Chinese authorities may well wish to segregate holders of Hong Kong travel documents from holders of their own travel documents. However, equally they may wish to include these holders together with Hong Kongers in any VAA agreement. Such a position would obviously affect thinking of third countries.
4. As you rightly point out, option 1 is unlikely to prove attractive if non-reciprocal concessions are agreed. Equally so, however, I do not consider that by not providing termination dates in option 3 will make this any more attractive than the other. I do not consider that with the understanding of third countries concerned, this agreement would implicitly survive 1997 as being a viable option. Third countries would still require some guarantee from the Chinese authorities for post-1997. A clear way out of this impasse as Hong Kong state would be for China to notify third countries concerned that after 1997 they/HKSAR Government would honour the commitments entered by Hong Kong in the VAAS. With this sort of guarantee, I consider option 3 to be the best way forward.
5 June 1990
JF Thompson
Migration and Visa Department
(CL 420 270 4031)
JT1ABA
CONFIDENTIAL