TNAG-0715-FCO40-911-Future-of-the-Dependent-Territories-4 — Page 52

ཅ

CONFIDENTIAL

A

рочил for ons paper

I live

United Kingdom Mission to the United Nations 845 Third Avenue New York NY 10022

PC Duff Esq

WIAD

FCO

N

M. Quay Van Owhe- please

इनक

u HK GD.

HKGD.

Endak In Sudivan

please let me see

Lonce all therephes

will our paper,

arlin: at first sight of doubt

reference

is

^

0213/11

2/11

Our reference a point herlichtin general

Date

7 November 1978

P

Dour Buff.

ANGUILLA

1。

HM Commissioner's letter to you of 11 October has prompted us to let you have our thoughts about the UN aspects of the future status of Anguilla.

2.

It is not for us to comment on the legal question of Anguilla's constitutional position at the time of its separation from St Kitts-Nevis. It may be useful, however, to decide in advance how this status, and whatever is chosen to replace it (dependency or associated statehood), should be presented to the UN.

3.

We will earn a good press here over the coming year with the accession to "full" independence of most of the associated States. In these circumstances, the fact that Anguilla retains ties with the UK should not cause us too many difficulties of presentation. You will, however, wish to bear in mind that a decision to grant Anguilla dependent status will

Yinvolve UK authorities in providing Article 73e information to the UN, and going through what would hopefully be only a ritual debate each year in the Committee of 24. Conversely, we could argue that associated statehood freed us from these obligations, as we have done for the other West Indies Associated States. The UN would probably not accept Anguilla's status as being in line with its criteria for removal from its list of dependent territories, but we could live with that, as in the case of the other West Indies Associated States.

4.

When Dick Posnett wrote from here on 26 September, he suggested that a UN visiting mission to Anguilla might be a good way of showing the Committee of 24 that their new status, whatever it might be, is the free choice of Anguillans. I am not sure that, as Dick suggests, such a visit by the UN would have the effect of prompting Anguilla to move ahead constitu- tionally. Indeed, recent experience with the Caymans suggests, if anything, the opposite. We only invite UN Missions to dependent territories. However, it is worth bearing in mind that Ambassador Salim, Chairman of the Committee of 24, has said on occasion, if we had invited a Mission to the Associated

that

CONFIDENTIAL

/ States

1