TNAG-0617-FCO40-765-Strength-and-cost-of-UK-armed-forces-stationed-in-Hong-Kong-1977 — Page 117

DRAFT

COONMITENTIALNTIAL

DRAFT LETTER FROM CDS TO CBFHK

."

HONG KONG DEFENCE COSTS AGREEMENT

I was grateful for your letter of 5 May in which you reported

generally on the first year of the DCA and enclosed copies of your

correspondence on this subject with HE The Governor. Evidently

ratters are settling doim well and it was particularly reassuring

that we are not to be faced, at least for a year or so, with the

formal review of the support elements which the Hong Kong Government

now has the right to request.

2. The contents of your letters have been brought to the attention

of those concerned in the MOD, who have been invited to set in hand

any follow-up action that may be required. I will however comment

briefly on one or two particular points:

a.

Review of teeth-arm components.

There was some surprise here at the Governor's suggestion,

reported in para of your letter, that such a review might be

desirable in early 1978. In the final stage of negotiation of

the

the DCA, Hong Kong Government, as you may know, sought to include

in the MOU a clause giving them the right or review of all aspects

of the garrison. This was unacceptable to MOD as far as the

teeth-arm element was concerned, as the force level had been

the subject of exhaustive study both locally and in Whitehall,

for and was a matter which the Chiefs of Staff bore ultimate

responsibility.

While I do not suggest that IE The Governor

is in fact seeking to gain administratively a point not conceded

at the negotiating, table, it is nonetheless difficult to

envisage the purpose of such a review unless the security

/ situation