TNAG-1346-FCO40-1776-Proposed-realignment-of-the-Shenzhen-River-1984 — Page 5

HOFO 007/30

TT F C O

TT PEKING

GRS 300

CONFIDENTIAL

HKK 095 72

RECEIVED IN REGISTRY

30 MAR 1984

DESK OFFICER

INDEX

Rox pl

TA 3013

REG-SY Action take

8)

Seel

9

TELELETTER

FROM:

FILE REF:-

DATED:-

FOLLOWING FOR:-

COPIED TO:-

R P MARGOLIS, DEPUTY POLITICAL ADVISER HONG KONG

SCR 4/1476/82

29 MARCH 1984

RJ F HOARE ESQ., HKD, F C O

T W M SMITH ESQ., HM EMBASSY, PEKING

PROPOSED REALIGNMENT OF THE SHENZHEN RIVER

1. IN MY LETTER OF 8 FEBRUARY TO WARWICK MORRIS, I PROMISED COMMENTS

ON FRED BURROWS MINUT OF 25 JANUARY WHICH YOU KINDLY COPIED TO US.

4

2. AS YOU KNOW, OUR LEGAL DEPARTMENT DO NOT ENTIRELY AGREE WITH THE

VIEW OF THE STATUS OF THE NEW TERRITORIES SET OUT IN PARA 1 OF FRED

BURROW'S MINUTE. THE CROWN SOLICITOR DREW ATTENTION TO THIS IN HIS

COMMENTS. HOWEVER, THIS QUESTION IS NOT DIRECTLY RELEVANT TO THE

PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS WITH WHICH WE ARE CONCERNED.

3. THE COURSE OF ACTION WHICH IS ASSUMED IN PARAS 3 AND 4 OF

FRED BURROW'S MINUTE IS EXACTLY THAT WHICH WE WISH TO TAKE,

WE THINK IT MOST UNLIKELY THAT ANYONE WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE WERE

DIVESTING OURSELVES OF BRITISH TERRITORY WITHOUT AN ACT OF

PARLIAMENT. AS SEEN FROM HERE NO ONE INVOLVED HAS ANY CONCEIVABLE INTEREST IN SO DOING. THE IMPLICATION OF YOUR TELNO 165 IS THAT YOU (5

DO NOT WISH US TO SEEK TO MAINTAIN FORMALLY THAT THE REAL IGNMENT

OF THE RIVER HAD NOT ALTERED THE BOUNDARY (PARA 6 OF FRED BURROW'S MINUTE REFERS). FOR THE REASONS GIVEN IN OUR TELNO 75, WE SHOULD NOT WISH TO DO SO.

0.

4. WE THEREFORE INTEND TO PROCEED WITH THE MODIFIED PLAN PROPOSED

BY THE CHINESE, DETAILS OF WHICH WERE ENCLOSED WITH MY LETTER TO

YOU OF 13 FEBRUARY.

SIGNED:

R P MARGOLIS

NNNN