TNAG-1291-FCO40-1643-Relations-between-Hong-Kong-and-Macau-1985 — Page 7

CONFIDENTIAL

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

London SW1A 2AH

牛

/ Mr them (+

2. par

HKCIC 02012

RECEIVED III REGISTRY

Telephone 01-

32203584

N. 2871,

24),

Stephen Gomersall Esq British Embassy WASHINGTON

IND. Your reference

* Taken

Our reference

180

Date

23 November 1984

Dear Stephen

TAIWAN/HONG KONG

1. We have of course seen reports carried by the American Foreign Broadcast Information Service of reactions to the agreement on Hong Kong by the authorities in Taiwan. We have noted the following main elements in the Nationalists' reactions: official rejection of the agreement as invalid; allegations of insincerity on the part of Peking; and moves to attract Hong Kong investors and skilled professionals to settle in Taiwan. We have also noted a report that a remark by a member of the Legislative Yuan referring in favourable terms to Peking's concept of "one country, two systems" came under strong criticism. For its part the PRC's Beijing Review of 15 October published an article, of which I attach a copy, suggesting that certain newspapers in Taiwan had published comments indicating a sympathetic view of the Hong Kong agreement.

2. My general impression is that the Taiwan authorities, while encouraging some criticism of the agreement in Hong Kong and attempting to gain some advantage for themselves from uncertainties felt in Hong Kong, have adopted a generally cautious attitude over the agreement. It seems to me that they have certainly not gone all out to create trouble on this issue, perhaps understandably because if they did so their trade and other interests would be likely to suffer. Nevertheless, the Taiwan authorities clearly will retain considerable potential for

trouble-making.

3. It occurs to me that the Americans through their "unofficial" representation in Taiwan may well have been following Taiwan's reactions to the Hong Kong agreement closely. Any considered assessment they have reached on this subject would be very useful to departments in London. Accordingly, I should be grateful if you could approach your State Department and other contacts to ask them if there is any assessment or other useful information which they could let us have. We would of course also find it useful to have any information which the Japanese could let us have on this subject. If Andrew Bache thinks that a similar approach to the Gaimusho would be productive, I should be grateful he would put this in hand.

CONFIDENTIAL