TNAG-1171-FCO40-1452-Future-of-Hong-Kong-1982 — Page 8

SECRET

HKK 040/1

Mr Miller

COD

K131

во

Akroyo |

BUEIVED IN RIGS

· 4 JUN 1982

DISTRIBUTION OF PEKING TELNO 306: FUTURE OF HONG KONG

1.

WM. Phollo

Please see the distribution given to the above telegram (copy attached for ease of reference).

2.

wy

Bos

This subject is a very sensitive one and we need to restrict the number of people who see material on it.

319

3.

We were therefore concerned to see that this telegram had gone to:

PCD

•

News Department

Information Department

PS/Mr Rifkind

Mr Ure

I should be grateful if you would impress on the distributors that telegrams on the Future of Hong Kong should normally only go to:

Limited'

HKGD FED

Mr Giffard

Mr Donald

PS

PS/PUS

PS/Lord Belstead

PUSD

Legal Adviser (Sir I Sinclair, Mr Burrows)

Telegrams marked PERSONAL should, as normal, be refered to the person concerned for decision on.distribution.

4 June 1982

مناك

R D Clift

Hong Kong and General Department

SECRET

HKK 040/1

BUT LOWE

Pl see munte Реги

Mr Burrows Legal Advisers

K194

287

SECRET

<

нки

040/1

14416

Enter (310)

FUTUTE OF HONG KONG: LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

6238

1. Hong Kong and Peking have now commented on the draft and annexes sent under cover of my letter of 30 April. Copies of all three papers attached to h38)

are attached.

2. As you can see from paragraph 4 of Mr McLaren's teleletter, he would be grateful for a more detailed account of your thinking on the Foreign Jurisdiction Act idea (see also paragraph 3 of Sir P Cradock's teleletter).

3. I do not think that we need offer much comment on the point Mr McLaren raises in his paragraph 3. As he implies, the signs are that the Chinese are going to make sovereignty the key issue and vaguely worded statements look less and less likely.

4. As for the options generally, I feel nonetheless that for the time being it is important to keep all of them on the drawing-board; at the same time we are also looking at other ideas (e.g. variations on the Taiwan formula). Options C and D have been looking the most attractive from our point of view but recent signs suggest that the Chinese do not envisage the continuation of British administration, even in return for a concession on sovereignty.

5. I should be grateful for your comments before I reply.

4 June 1982

R D Clift

Hong Kong and General Department

SECRET

CODE 18-77

SECRET

Reference

HKK 040/1

317

Mr Williamsch & 7.6. 2 thich be Cox week too

2 for ST

Mrift

MKK

04011

- 6 JUN1982

CALL BY THE SOVIET SECOND SECRETARY

AF14/6

1.

Please see Mr Cox's minute (attached) of 2 June, paragraph

320

6.

Mr Safronov has asked FED about Hong Kong before. He has also tried to call on me. We have no wish to encourage his interest in the future of Hong Kong.

2.

3. Mr Cox was quite right, therefore, not to be forthcoming, but I am not sure that the farth sentence of his paragraph 6 reflects the accepted line - true though it may be. We must be extremely careful at this stage not to say anything that could possibly damage confidence in Hong Kong.

4.4. Edgar

4 June 1982

cc: Mr Thomson, FED

Mrs Dean, Research Dept Mr Manning, EESD

SECRET

PP

W Morris

See (332