TNAG-1401-FCO40-1873-Future-of-Hong-Kong-continued-participation-in-the-General-A-1985 — Page 53

CONFIDENTIAL

4. Mr Galsworthy HK1)

Mr Ashton Far

and retion

UNITED KINGDOM MISSION

37-39

RUE DE VERMONT

1211 GENEVA 20

TELEPHONE 34 38 00

33 23 85

水

2 May 1985

R W Renwick Esq CMG

ECD(E)

Foreign and Commonwealth Office London SW1

Dear Robin,

CHINA AND THE GATT

mv. S

retained for / w/e reading

Mi Wamen

Ꮧ

where

вехалой for actin feliau

بند

315.

For shart Waff Corcing para 3 - of teh prom Hong King

- as well

mms

1. Barry Harding has (by the same bag) replied in some detail to Tony Lane's letter of 27 March to you. I write now merely to underline two points.

2. First, I very much hope that the DTI view that we should institute a campaign to oppose Chinese-re-entry into the GATT can be reconsidered. We here are very sceptical indeed that we could hope to succeed in such an effort, although we have of course not taken soundings about it. As the DTI paper itself points out (paragraph 14), whether we succeeded or not, the fact that we had tried would leave our relationship - so good post-Hong Kong agreement bruised, if not broken. And would the price be only in political terms - with Hong Kong high in the list; what then of hopes of expanding trade openings in China?

To us, it looks obvious that our efforts should be concentrated on getting the right terms for Chinese re-entry. I shall discuss this with Alan Montgomery on his return on Monday: thereafter, unless you see objection, I would much like to talk to Arthur Dunkel about the effects for GATT principles he foresees from Chinese accession.

3. Second, the considerations in this correspondence leave me even more convinced that we should get the Hong Kong application in and acted upon very soon.

Even so, there would surely be a risk that the CPR would feel themselves double-crossed if we then try to block their application.

Yours

ever,

cc: A J Lane Esq, ITPD,

DTI

Roy Williams Esq, DTI

huve

Dame Anne Warburton