TNAG-0504-FCO40-569-Review-of-narcotics-problem-in-Hong-Kong-1974 — Page 208

12/4/1

14

LAST

10

REF.

NEXT

REF.

Our reference:

DDA/64 3/69/23

Your reference: HKK19/2

A C Stuart Esq

SECRET

HOME OFFICE

Romney House, Marsham Street, LONDON S.W.1

Telephone: 01-799 3488, ext.

Telex: 24986

RECEIVED IN

10

Hong Kong and Indian Ocean Department Foreign and Commonwealth Office

LONDON SWI

Dear Andrew

NARCOTICS: INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION

U.N.

Diph

REGISTRY No.#1 S FEB1974

1KK19/2

1 March 1974

Thank you for your letter of 29 January and its enclosure.

12

Einta 12 Wotton 12 Hand UN

N

Dept

No action needed

1/2

!th!

I had not immediately got in touch with you about Norman Rolph's letter to me of 11 January, partly because I was waiting to see whether the Americans approach us before the Geneva meeting of the Narcotics Commission. I have as yet heard nothing from them. However as time is now growing short before the Commission meets,it is perhaps as well if we exchange views, in order to avoid hurried consultation at the last moment. I am in broad agreement with Norman Rolph's assessment of the position and concur with the line which both he and now you seem inclined to take, viz that although there is no pressing operational reason for establishing some sort of Anglo/ Hong Kong/US machinery for cooperation (since it may well duplicate what will be done by other means), political considerations might encourage us to fall in with the Americans if they wish to keep their initiative in being. I have one small reservation about this, which does not effect the general line which we propose to take. Even if the Ad Hoc Committee's proposal for annual meetings of operational law enforcement officers is accepted by the Commission and is speedily implemented (the latter may be an optimistic assumption), and the Hong Kong liaison officer in Bangkok establishes a good working relationship with the Thais, I can see a well developed system of bi- lateral cooperation between Hong Kong and the Drugs Enforcement Administration in South East Asia with clearly defined ground rules being complementary to rather than a dupli-

I think cation of the other machinery that it is proposed to or has been set up. Norman Rolph's argument that the situation has changed since last June tends in this direction, since changed patterns of trafficking require a changed response and such

The pro- changes must be made quickly. The more flexible the machinery, the better. posed UN organisation may not be best adapted to facilitating speedy responses at a bilateral level. As I say, I do not think that this consideration should change our basic line of approach, except to make us the more willing to listen to anything sensible that the Americans may have to propose.

I am taking this opportunity to send for your information a copy of self-explanatory correspondence which I have had recently with Norman Rolph about the report of the Ad Hoc Committee. Personally I do not think that the points which he draws attention to in the Ad Hoc Committee's Report are significant enough to warrant correction, and I am glad to see that he is not pressing for it. I think that we might be in some diffi- culty if he did, since some of the things which we said in the report about Hong Kong are based upon information that we gained in the Far East; not all that we said about Hong Kong came from Hong Kong sources. For obvious reasons I have not referred to that in reply to Norman Rolph, and I hope that he will be content with what I have said.

ENC

SECRET

Yours sincerely

Chris

C J TRAIN