SECRET UK EYES A
of the review at all or at least that part of it which goes to cos.
50. Annex E paragraph 2b. The COS have already agreed (twice) that there is no military requirement for a naval presence in Hong Kong up to 1997. The third sentence needs to be amended accordingly.
51. Annex E paragraph 6d(1). Delete "land, sea and air" from the second sentence.
52. Annex E paragraph 6d(2). Delete all after "available" in the second sentence. We are not in the business of retaining capabilities specifically for non military reasons unless someone else is prepared to pay.
53. Annex E paragraph 10. Some of the proposals here have major resource implications, but no real justification has been offered. For example, I see little prospect of being able to supply a forward repair ship to replace shore based facilities in support of any patrol craft that remain. It is much more likely that the patrol craft will simply be withdrawn once the ability to support them disappears. The case for a CVS group and an LPD is also not satisfactorily made. What would be the cost? Why cannot charter shipping be used at least for the sealift task? Is it genuinely cheaper than airlift? It may not be possible to answer all these questions, but as you are asking the cos to sign up to this deployment, it seems to me that you owe them some more convincing justification.
54. Annex E paragraph 12. Delete last two sentences see paragraph 52 above.
SECRET UK EYES A