CHINA
PAPER D
Sub-enclosure No. 2
G.H.Q., Far East Land Forces, to Ministry of Defence, London
(Information: Land Forces, Hong Kong) (S.E.A.C.O.S. 851)
19
29th April, 1948. We have considered, in conjunction with the Hong Kong Local Defence Committee, the military implications of permitting the Chinese to exercise jurisdiction in Kowloon City. We are most strongly of the opinion that if Chinese jurisdiction was required even for a small area of Kowloon Walled City we should have in our midst a place from which trouble would be organised and inspired and it was for this very reason that in 1899 the military commander found it necessary to demand that the whole city be brought under British jurisdiction. Under Chinese jurisdiction Kowloon City would become a rallying-point for Chinese nationalism and the starting-point for more active measures to return the whole colony to China. The Chinese can always organise and inspire trouble as Free Citzens of Hong Kong and they enjoy the exceptional advantage of entering and leaving the colony without formality. These privileges are liable at times to be embarrassing, but so long as we can retain full jurisdiction within our own territory we can exercise control to the extent deemed necessary. If there was any transfer of jurisdiction, duties in aid of the civil power would be much embarrassed, espionage and sedition would be much facilitated and deliberate misinterpretation and misrepresentation in press issued from the city would occur without means of effective control. Political kidnapping would be a distinct possibility. Every aircraft entering Kai Tak flies over or very near walled city and claims of rights to fly over the city might arise. Only Chinese could think up full and undesirable purposes to which jurisdiction of walled city could be put. We therefore consider it absolutely inconsistent with military requirements to accede to Chinese request.
PAPER D
Sub-enclosure No. 3
Dear Listowel,
Great George Street,
London, 8th May, 1948.
I understand that you wish to have my views and those of the Chiefs of Staff on the Chinese claim to be given jurisdiction in Kowloon City.
The Chiefs of Staff, after consulting the British Defence Co-ordination Committee, Far East, and the Hong Kong Local Defence Committee, consider that, if Chinese jurisdiction was given even for a small area of the Kowloon walled City, the organisation of anti-British activities would be facilitated. The area under Chinese jurisdiction would probably become a rallying-point for Chinese nationalism from which active measures to return the whole Colony to China would be directed.
The Chinese can always organise and inspire trouble as free citizens of Hong Kong, and they enjoy the exceptional advantage of entering and leaving the Colony without formality. These privileges are liable at times to be embarrassing, but so long as full jurisdiction can be retained over our own territory, control can be exercised as necessary.
Transfer of jurisdiction would undoubtedly be embarrassing, since it would give greater opportunities for espionage and sedition and little or no control could be exercised over the native press. Political kidnapping would be a distinct possibility.
For these reasons, the Chiefs of Staff consider, and I agree, that it would be inconsistent with military requirements to accede to the Chinese request.
I am sending a copy of this letter to the Foreign Secretary.
Yours sincerely,
The Right Honourable
The Earl of Listowel.
35538
(Signed)
A. V. ALEXANDER.
D 2