TNAG-0640-FCO40-788-Visits-of-nuclear-powered-merchant-ships-to-Hong-Kong-1988 — Page 59

CONFIDENTIAL

2

1

3. (contd)

our Environment Branch, who are concerned to avoid anti- nuclear pollution publicity) would be bound to include the point that the SAVANNAH had visited Hong Kong three times in 1967 and 1970 without accident. (It would also include the point that we had discussed the visit with the British Government.) We recognise that in M O D eyes, NUSAFE is a phrase only meant for use in connection with warships, but it so happens that the only practical way to word our operational order so as to make sense to these most concerned (namely, Marine Department and the Navy) is to refer to the Hong Kong NUSAFE orders, the contents of which have already been explained to the G K S S agent in order to familiarise him with the arrangements which we intend for the visit. All we want out of the M O D is a yes/no answer as to whether they are prepared to provide Alverstoke coverage on the understanding that a month's notice is given. HMS TAMAR signalled the M OD about this last year and received the reply that in principle the MOD could provide such coverage if we could guarantee repayment. This, as you point out, is something that we must get the Germans to agree to and is dealt with in the enclosed draft Note.

4.

If there are some substantive as opposed to semantic objections to our operational order, then perhaps it would easiest if you could send us a copy of the order issued in the case of the "OTTO HAHN's" visit to Southampton, so that we can improve on what we have proposed to the GKS S representative. Since the D o T and U KA E A experts went over the "OTTO HAHN" only last October, I presume that they would probably not want to do so again.

5.

Contrary I think to the impression I wrongly gave you in my last letter, the "OTTO HAHN's" visit would not cause us very much trouble, provided adequate notice is given, so that the dates do not clash with requests for visits by any other nuclear ships (which was the point troubling us before), and we would be happy to see it go forward on the basis we have proposed. In particular, we do not want to appear more obstructive to the Germans than our "backward" neighbours from whom the Germans are no doubt struggling to obtain clearance at the moment. Marine Department and H M S TAMAR are happy to accept advice, but at present do not see anything particularly wrong with the arrangements that they have already made!

6.

For obvious reasons, I am not copying this letter

to the recipients of yours.

Encl:

Yours

ever

Chals

(C D S Drace-Francis)

CONFIDENTIAL