TNAG-0477-FCO40-542-Strength-of-garrison-in-Hong-Kong-1974 — Page 163

FCO40 Hong Kong Department Records 聯邦事務部香港部檔案 All

MR JACKSON

Copies to

OD)✓

Mr Crowson (HKIOD)\

Sir G Arthur

Mr Thomson

Mr Male

Mr Masefield

LAST

Mr Westbrook

REF.

44

Mr Elliott

NEXT

REF

SECRET UKEYES B

RECEIVED IN REGI

- 8 J 1974

HKK 18/9.

ри

4.55.

43

DEFENCE REVIEW

1.

Your minute of 4 July only reached me this morning but I understand that you are still open to comments. My only general comment is that I strongly agree with para 4 of your minute. In dealing with this mixed bag of "non NATO" commitments it seems to metotally unrealistic to try to decide now where further cuts might be made even in 1978/79, let alone 10 years ahead in 1983/84.

FIVE POWER DEFENCE ARRANGEMENTS

2. By the latter date, and possibly the former, it should be poible to save the money now proposed to be spent on a residual force in Simerore. But this at £0.85 m is hardly significant. The formulation in para 7 o' DSWP(P)55 is not objectionable as far as it goes, but, like the rest of the peper, it includes the military arguments and omits the political ones, eg that the US and all our Commonwealth partners want us to retain some presence in Singapore and that (in the FCO view) it will help British interests to do so.

BRUNEI

3. As the paper says (para 6) we can save no money on Brunei because we spend none there. But there is special pleading in the third sentre of this paragraph and in paragraph 4(b). For example, it is not necessarily true that the Hong Kong Garrison could not have free jungle and other training facilities in Brunei unless we maintain a battalion there. Jungle training facilities are also available at the JWS in West Malaysia.

J.K./ Fickman

J K Hickman

South West Pacific Department

5 July 1974

SECRET

UKES B

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.