HEB 10/6
CONFIDENTIAL
Gt. Smith St.,
7 March, 1967.
24/25
I refer to your letter of 8 February to Rennie (Foreign Office) copied to Galsworthy about Exercise "Caricature".
2.
The procedures outlined in paragraph 4 are indeed those to which we are accustomed; and they have been followed in previous years without any mishap. What I think went wrong on this occasion is that Exercise "Caricature" did not figure on the 1966/67 Exercises Schedule (COS.220/65). At that sta e it was a tentative Middle Fast exercise ("idlink IX"?). I understand that after the decision to re-locate it in the Far East and re-name it, it appeared on a schedule of exercises issued by CINFE which was not circulated to other departmenta.
3.
It was formerly the Colonial Office practice to circulate the COS Schedule of Exercises to geographical departments; this provided an additional safeguard since it was not always possible to rely on the authorities in a dependent territory picking up the wider political implications. It enabled a geographical depart- ment that was doubtful about a particular exercise to air its views straightaway or ask for further information (e.g. about the narrative) that might be relevant. I might say that this happened very rarely.
4. e are arranging to resurrect this practice in the case of certain sensitive territories e.g. Hong Kong, Gibraltar and British Honduras. It would not of course have avoided our diffi- culties over "Caricature" because of the change of plan referred to in paragraph 2 above and because our objections were based on comparatively recent developments in China; but I think it will prove of value in future. It follows of course that we would wish to be kept informed of any change in the location or nature of an exercise involving a dependent territory after it has been listed in the schedule.
5. In the circumstances I suggest, subject to Foreign Office views, that there is really no need for further inter-departmental consultation. I am sending a copy of this letter to Rennie.
LAST
REF.
20
NI
RLF.
F. COOPER, ESQ., CMQ.
CONFIDENTIAL
(Sed) H. P. HALL
(H. P. Hall)
Page
97499 St.S.
NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN
Page
Registry No.
Top Secret.
Secret.
Confidential.
Restricted.
Unclassified.
DRAFT
To:-
F. Cooper Esq., C.M.G.,
A.U.S. (Fol).
Ministry of Defende.
Type 1 +
24/25
From
Telephone No. & Ext.
Department
7 March 1967
00:147
(20)
1/2 fly
(54) on 2-DEF 60/3.
se
see para. 3A of (5)7
Copied to:-
TCMG
Sir J. Repnje, KOVO.,
Foreign Office.
FOR MK. HALL's SIGNATURE
I refer to your letter of 8th February to
Rennie (Foreign Office) copied to Galsworthy about
Exercise "Caricature".
2.
The procedures outlined in paragraph 4 are
indeed those to which we are accustomed; and they
have been followed in previous years without any
mishap. What I think went wrong on this occasion
is that Exercise "Caricature" did not figure on the
1966/67 Exercises Schedule (COS.220/65). At that
stage it was a tentative Middle East exercise
("Midlink IX"?). I understand that after the
decision to re-locate it in the Far East and
re-name it, it appeared on a schedule of exercises
issued by CINFE which was not circulated to other
departments.
3.
It was formerly the Colonial Office practice
to circulate the COS Schedule of Exercises to
geographical departments; this provided an
additional safeguard, since it was not always possible
to rely on the authorities in a dependent territory
picking up the wider political implications. It
enabled a geographical department that was doubtful
about a particular exercise to air its views
straightaway or ask for further information (e.g. about the narrative) that might be relevant.
Say that this any
5 might If
past experience is any guide, this is likely to
happen very rarely.
14.
ge 9
ge 9
Page
4.
We are arranging to resurrect this
practice in the case of certain sensitive territories
e.g. Hong Kong, Gibraltar and British Honduras.
It would not of course have avoided our difficultues
over "Caricature" because of the change of plan
referred to in paragraph 2 above and because our
objections were based on comparatively recent
developments in China; but I think it will prove
of value in future. It follows of course that we
would wish to be kept informed of any change in the
location or nature of an exercise involving a dependent
territory after it has been listed in the Schedule.
5.
In the circumstances I suggest, subject
to Foreign Office views, that there is really no
need for further inter-departmental consultation.
I am sending a copy of this letter to Rennie.
(
(Sal
H. P. HALL,
NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN
Page
e 10
e 10
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.