CONFIDENTIAL UK EYES A
a.
Withdrawal of Gurkha Battalions.
b.
Ending of Accompanied Service.
C.
Form of the Final Withdrawal.
5. The 1993 Review Document. As with the previous two Reviews, the 1993 Review is a stand-alone document, but it will differ from its predecessors in that it will be firmly founded upon the policy guidelines established in the paper submitted for SofS agreement at the beginning of March 1993. This paper complements the 1993 Review and should facilitate completion of the staffing process July 1993, rather than September 1993 as originally anticipated. The 1993 Review provides the policy guidance that will enable the Hong Kong Garrison Withdrawal Plan to be produced, and should provide COS endorsement of the key decisions on the following major issues:
6.
a.
b.
Withdrawal of the Second and Third Gurkha Battalions.
Withdrawal of Gurkha support and command and control infrastructure.
C.
Ending of accompanied service.
d. Projection of helicopter force levels.
e. Locally employed civilian (LEC) and locally enlisted personnel (LEP) manning projections and corrective action.
f. Public relations (PR) policy and plans for the period prior to the withdrawal.
g.
Command and control of British Forces Hong Kong (BFHk), including the future of British Garrison Brunei and British Gurkhas Nepal (BGN).
h.
Reinforcement plans, and Joint Theatre Plans (JTP) 30 and 68 in particular.
i.
j.
k.
Financial considerations.
The last 12 months of British Sovereignty over Hong Kong.
Handling of residual issues.
Staffing of the 1993 Review. HQBF have indicated that it would assist decision-making and planning in Hong Kong if the timetable for staffing of the 1993 Review could be accelerated. The MOD policy paper for Sofs will make it possible to accede to this request. The staffing process for the 1993 Review should now be completed in 7 months (the 1991 Review took 14 months). To that end a revised and curtailed staffing programme has been developed with a view to the 1993 Outline Withdrawal Plan (OWP 93) being endorsed by COS in time for the funding requirements to be taken into account prior to LTC 94 and for timely decision-making in Hong Kong. This means that the
2
CONFIDENTIAL UK EYES A