THIS IS A COPY

THE ORIGINAL HAS BEEN CLOSED UNDER

FOI EXEMPTION NO... 27(1)

designed to meet the concerns set out in your letter of 27 May and in

our talk of 2 July.

To deal first with the airport. Here I am addressing John Cole's

argument that publication of detailed negotiating exchanges over the

airport in 1991 might cause the Chinese to fear similar revelations

from current negotiations and thereby make them less ready to

negotiate over the airport now.

I must repeat that I do not find this argument peruasive. The

Chinese will decide whether to negotiate and whether to conclude

agreements or break off negotiations on a hard calculation of their

national interests, not on fears of future memoir writers. Nor, to

take one example, is there any evidence that the vastly more

substantial and important revelations in Kissinger's memoirs have

inhibited subsequent Sino-American negotiations. But, putting that

aside, I have revised the chapter to meet the point.

This has meant excising insider

insider detail on Sino-British

exchanges. The prelude to the 1991 negotiation could be drawn from

open sources; little change here.

of

There is no account of the detailed exchanges with

Lu Ping. Everyone knows the fact of my meeting with Li Peng and his insistence on signature by the Prime Minister in Peking. I say as much

as that but give no detail. I expound the memorandum

understanding; but that is a public document. For the rest, the

chapter is little changed; but here it concerns Hong Kong in the aftermath of the visit and not any confidential negotiations with the

other side.

As regards the penultimate chapter, I have not altered the first

four pages. I hope we can agree that they are purely historical and

explain why cooperation with China made sense. The central section of

the chapter is more sensitive. It is a much abbreviated account of the

origins of the present problem, written in a deliberately neutral

style, and avoiding that strong criticism of the Governor's

proposals which, in your letter of 27 May, you felt could weaken our

negotiating position. It concentrates on the return to bilateral

London-Peking negotiations in April and its significance. It goes on

to speculate, again in a carefully balanced way, on the future course

of the negotiations. The final section of the chapter puts the

Share This Page