CONFIDENTIAL
HONG KONG TELEGRAM NO. 1640 TO COMMONWEALTH OFFICE
2
(h) On the question of permanent communications between both sides on the border the Chinese Representatives did not demur but indicated that this was a matter which would probably have to be referred to Peking.
2. You will appreciate that the above represents a first assessment based on the immediate de-briefing. Our Representatives also made various points in their brief based on my telegram 1614 and particularly stressed our view that frontier obstacles in British territory were our affair, that we reserved the right to take whatever action we deemed necessary in the event of misbehaviour on British territory, that the abduction of Knight (and indeed of the Ta Ku Ling villager) was illegal, and that Iu would be liable to arrest should he ever appear in British territory again. There was a great deal of discussion around these points but the Chinese undoubtedly know we feel strongly on them
3. I am by no means altogether happy about some aspects of this outcome to the discussions; but it must be recognized that our team were faced with an extremely difficult task and at least some measure of reasonable agreement has been reached; which (given our opponents) is not unremarkable. What worries me is the possibilities for further dispute on what actually was agreed. Subject to the views of Charge d'Affaires Peking I wonder if it would not be a good idea to convey our understanding of what was said to the M.F.A.
4.
In the final analysis the proof of this pudding will be in the eating after 15 December.
C.O. please pass Priority Peking No. 607 and Washington 358.
Sir D. Trench
[Repeated as requested]
DEPARTMENTAL DISTRIBUTION
C.O. Hong Kong Dept.
F.O.
F.E.. & P.D.
I. & G. Dept.
J.I.R.D.
Defence Dept.
News Dept.
F.E.D. J.I.P.G.D.
News Dept. DIS MOD
QQQQQ
CONFIDENTIAL
ADVANCE COPIES SENT
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.