TNAG-0480-FCO40-545-Strength-of-garrison-in-Hong-Kong-1974 — Page 140

(190)

SECRET

Lord GR

Secretary of State

211/4/1

Many Hats. But I Que we huust be clear at the outout despite the Govern's views. And if it wont

Пач

DEFENCE REVIEW: HONG KONG

pay up then its must have an even swaller gamison. by must face These peopleca afford it,

ру

1. I have been sent a side copy of the department's submission (attached) of the proposed statement about Hong Kong and the Defence Review. I understand that the Cabinet have not taken a final decision, but that you have some doubts about the department's recommendation. 2. This is, in fact, a matter of tactics. The Governor of course accepts our aims, and is concerned merely about how to carry them through successfully in Hong Kong. I understand his worry. He has a difficult task of presentation in Hong Kong, and also a wider duty of preventing, if he can, a head-on clash between Hong Kong and HMG.

3. Pondering on the draft texts proposed by officials, it seems to me that our political requirement is to show that there will be a reduction in the burden of the Hong Kong garrison on HNG; while the Governor's fear is the likely repercussions in Hong Kong of a formal public statement at this stage that they will have to put up a bigger sum for smaller forces (i.e. "more for less").

4. I wonder whether a compromise which might meet the essential needs of both sides, would be for Ministers to leave the Cabinet Office draft, with its reference to a reduction of forces, largely as it is, but to insert the words "an appropriate contribution" instead of "a larger percentage" in the penultimate line.

5. The passage would then read :-

"We intend to keep our forces in Hong Kong, although we propose to make some reductions in them and to seek from the Hong Kong Government an appropriate contribution to their cost when the present cost-sharing agreement runs out in 1976".

SECRET

Hei

/6.