TNAG-1169-FCO40-1449-Future-of-Hong-Kong-1982 — Page 144

Mr RD Clift HK&QD

#yout

SECRET

Hren oyol

Enter (144)

تقلة

T22A

FUTURE OF HONG KONG

1.

Fay 1715-

131

See (145)

146

I received on 22 March your minute about Sir Percy Craddock letter of 15 March, which refers to legal advice given by my predecessor. I am asked to focus on Options C and D.

2.

201

227

My understanding of the respective positions of the two sides is as follows. We maintain that, by virtue of the Treaty (206) of Nanking 1842 (ceding Hong Kong Island to the Crown), the Convention of Peking of 1860 (ceding part of the Kowloon peninsula to the Crown), and the Convention of Peking of 1898 (leasing certain territories for 99 years to the Crown), the United Kingdom has sovereignty over what I may for convenience describe as Hong Kong, and an international lease of the leased territories which expires in 1997. The present Chinese Government disagrees, maintaining that they are not bound by whatever agreements may have been made in the past by imperialist Chinese Governments. They claim sovereignty over the whole of the territory, ie Hong Kong and the leased territories, and they do not recognize that the United Kingdom has any right to be there at all, either before or after 1997.

3. Option C of the options worked out before I came on the scene is described as:-

1242

"joint or parallel statements by Chinese and HMG that treaties no longer applicable; Hong Kong Chinese territory temporarily under British administration but this would continue beyond 1997".

This would be contrary to our position on sovereignty over Hong Kong and it does not entirely coincide with that of the Chinese since it could be construed as a recognition of some kind of right vested in the UK, to administer the territory.

4. Option D reads:

"declaration by the Chinese that change would only occur with adequate warning; a possible minimum period would be 15 years".

Although expressed as a unilateral declaration I assume the idea is that it would emerge from the negotiations and that we would not challenge it. It could therefore be implied that we were renouncing, or were prepared to renounce, sovereignty over Hong Kong.

/The

SECRET