TNAG-0580-FCO40-713-UK-policy-on-status-of-Hong-Kong-1976 — Page 85

CONFIDENTIAL

Mr Ory FED

Muntener

Mr Bowie UND K144)

separate copies

Reference

22)

FLAG A

21

ม 21

FLAG B

FLAGS

422

X

HONG KONG AND THE UN: PQS BY MR FRANK HOOLEY MP

to Hour Krus

1. You will see from FCO Tel No 893 of 9 November that Mr Hooley MP has put down two questions (out of a total of ten) on the status of Hong Kong in the light of UN action (or inaction) on the territory's affairs in recent years.

2.

Mr Hooley, who is a hostile questioner on Hong Kong, aims, I think, to bring out the point that HMG regards itself as the sovereign authority in Hong Kong and ought, in consequence, to be able to do what it likes there, eg to introduce a representative form of government. In short, Mr Hooley would like to see the "Chinese dimension" ignored when it comes to deciding policy on Hong Kong.

3. I attach a copy of the brief prepared for the current session of the General Assembly dealing with the position of Hong Kong in UN terms, together with a copy of the document (A/AC.109/396 of 9 March 1972) referred to in the second of Mr Hooley's Questions. I have prepared draft Answers to Mr Hooley's Questions, based on the brief and, in particular, on the copy attached to it of Sir Colin Crowe's letter of 14 December 1972 to the UN Secretary General.

4.

I

In the case of the draft Answer to the first Question, I am inclined to advise that we should restrict the reply to what I have said in the first sentence only. That sentence does not, perhaps constitute a direct answer to Mr Hooley's Question but it would, think, be preferable from the point of view of offending possible Chinese susceptibilities. The possible second sentence, which I have put in square brackets is, I think, sound doctrine but, as in the case of Sir Colin Crowe's letter, it might be better to avoid a bald assertion of HMG's sovereignty over Hong Kong.

5. In the case of the draft Answer to Mr Hooley's second Question, I think it is fairly clear that there has been no discussion in the UN since 1972 of the position of Hong Kong vis-à-vis the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. That is what I would expect, given the General Assembly's endorsement, in resolution 2906 (XXVIII) of 2 November 1972, of the Special Committee's recommendation that Hong Kong should be removed from the The brief for list of territories to which the Declaration applies. the current session of the General Assembly also implies that there

I should be grateful, has been no discussion over the past four years.

If UND consider that however, if UND could confirm that this is so. it is necessary to consult the UK Mission in New York, would they please ask for a reply in`time for us to submit Answers to Mr Hooley's Questions by noon on Friday 12 November.

6. HM Embassy, Peking have been asked whether they wish to comment on

Subject the line we should take in answering Mr Hooley's Questions.

to any views they myhave, I should be grateful for any comments you may have on the draft replies I have prepared.

CODE 18 - 17

10 November 1976

b.F. Mithr

D F Milton

Hong Kong Department K 247 233 4381