TNAG-0480-FCO40-545-Strength-of-garrison-in-Hong-Kong-1974 — Page 110

}

CONFIDENTIAL

-2-

yesterday to the proposed reduction in the size of the Gurkha Forces.

Simons town

7. He asked how we intended to obtain continued use of the Simonstown facilities on an ad hoc basis. I said that I thought that we would work for an understanding about this in the course of the negotiations which we expected to have with the South Africans for the termination of the Agreement. He asked whether such use was precluded by the Agreement; I said it was not.

Arms Limitation

8. He asked about the "mysterious" wording of the passage on arms limitation. He wondered whether this implied that we and the Americans supported the 10PZ idea. I assured him that we did not, and drew attention to our voting record in the United Nations on the subject, of which he was aware. When he asked further about our and US views, I explained our respective positions as defined in the guidance to Indian Ocean Posts.

NATO

9.

He asked whether the reduction in our reinforcement capability and of our force declarations in the Mediterranean did not conflict with Mr Mason's assertions that the Defence Review proposals would not seriously damage NATO's capability. I drew his attention to the reinforcement capability that would remain, explained that some of the reinforcement capability hitherto had been designed originally for non-NATO purposes, and said that we thought that the proposed reduction in our support for the southern flank was reasonable in view of the contribution by the US forces there and NATO countries in the area.

10. M de Beauvais was aware of our arrangements for informing the French in Brussels of our Defence Review proposals and of Sir J Killick's meeting with M Puaux today. It was not clear whether he was asking for clarifications merely to expand the Embassy's reporting,

or on instructions.

4 December 1974

Teddy Jecka

J E Jackson

Defence Department

CONFIDENTIAL