CONFIDENTIAL
146252 MDHOAN 3701
WHOSE LETTER HAD BEEN QUOTED LAST YEAR BY THE PRIME MINISTER IN PEKING TOGETHER WITH A PRITISH JOURNALIST MR MILES, HAD BEEN IN TIANANMEN SQUARE WITH A GROUP OF OTHERS AND HAD UNFURLED A BANNER CALLING FOR DEMOCRACY AND FREE TRADE UNIONS. THEY HAD THEN APPARENTLY BEEN ARRESTED ON THE GROUNDS OF ACTIVITIES INCOMPATIBLE WITH THEIR STATUS. YOU HAD SOUGHT CONSULAR ACCESS AND INFORMATION ON THE WHEREABOUTS OF THE TWO BRITISH CITIZENS, WHICH HAD BEEN DENIED SO FAR. YOU HAD ALSO SOUGHT A MEETING WITH A VICE FOREIGN MINISTER WHICH HAD ALSO BEEN DENIED SO FAR. THIS CAUSED VERY GRAVE CONCERN BOTH TO THE GOVERNMENT AND TO THOSE OUTSIDE. HE HAD CALLED IN THE AMBASSADOR TO SEEK AN EXPLANATION.
4. MA SAID THAT HE HAD ONLY SO FAR READ REPORTS FROM THE NEWS AGENCIES. HE HAD NO INFORMATION FROM HIS AUTHORITIES. ALL THAT HE KNEW ABOUT MR PARRY WAS THAT PARRY HAD WRITTEN TO HIM SEVERAL WEEKS AGO SEEKING A TOURIST VISA FOR CHINA. HE HAD REPLIED THAT HE WAS PASSING ON THE REQUEST TO HIS CONSULAR SECTION. A TOURIST VISA WAS SUBSEQUENTLY ISSUED. HE WAS NOT IN A POSITION TO COMMENT SUBSTANTIVELY ON WHAT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE HAPPENED IN THIS INSTANCE. HIS GENERAL COMMENT HOWEVER WAS THAT CHINA WAS A SOVEREIGN AND INDEPENDENT COUNTRY WHICH WAS VERY HOSPITABLE TO THOSE WHO RESPECTED THEIR LAWS. THEY RESERVED THE RIGHT HOWEVER TO TAKE ACTION IF LAWS WERE NOT RESPECTED. IF MR PARRY HAD BEHAVED AS A TOURIST, NO PROBLEM WOULD HAVE ARISEN.
5. MA CONCLUDED BY SAYING THAT ONCE HE HAD ANY INFORMATION HE WOULD REVERT. HE ASKED US TO KEEP IN TOUCH WITH HIS EMBASSY. HE ATTACHED VERY GREAT IMPORTANCE TO BILATERAL RELATIONS AND DID NOT WANT INCIDENTS LIKE THIS TO DISRUPT PROGRESS IN THESE RELATIONS. HE HAD BEEN GRATIFIED BY THE POSITIVE REMARKS OF THE FOREIGN SECRETARY ABOUT CHINA AT THE LORD MAYOR'S BANQUET ON 29 APRIL. MR GOODLAD RE-EMPHASISED OUR REQUEST FOR THE EARLIEST POSSIBLE INFORMATION.
6. THE LATEST PRESS INFORMATION, FROM AN AGENCY REPORT, IS THAT THE GROUP HAVE BEEN TAKEN TO A HOTEL AND WILL BE EXPELLED BY PLANE ON 1 MAY. THE GROUP HAD, ACCORDING TO EARLIER INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO US, INTENDED IN ANY CASE TO BE IN HONG KONG ON 1 MAY TO ADDRESS A PUBLIC MEETING. HEAD OF HKD HAS SPOKEN TO POLITICAL ADVISER TO ALERT HIM TO THE POSSIBILITY OF THE GROUP ARRIVING
EHRMAN INDICATED THAT, IF THEY DID ARRIVE IN HONG KONG, NO OBSTACLES WOULD BE PUT IN THEIR WAY. IF THE CHINESE SUBSEQUENTLY COMPLAINED ABOUT ANY INFLAMMATORY PUBLIC STATEMENTS BY THE GROUP, HKG WOULD TAKE THE LINE THAT IT WAS THE CHINESE WHO
2
PAGE
CONFIDENTIAL