TNAG-1521-FCO40-2082-Commonwealth-War-Graves-Commission-in-Hong-Kong-1986 — Page 8

CODE 18-77

3

-

Reference...........

*

JOINT COMMISSION MEETINGS

10.

Mr Dalley confirmed that he had recently attended a joint Commission meeting in Denmark which had gone most satisfactorily, as had the joint Commission meeting with France in the UK earlier this year.

There are no joint Commission meetings due to take place in Britain for 2 years.

GENERAL SIKORSKY

11.

Mr Dalley confirmed that when Sir A Hockaday visited Poland and Czechoslovakia recently it was quite apparent that the Poles remained intent on persuading HMG to return the remains of General Sikorsky. A sarcophagus was prepared. The issue was likely to be controversial.

CANNOCK CHASE

12. Mr MacKay said that he had written to the leader of an extreme right wing group that has in recent years conducted a service of a political nature over the graves of German dead in Cannock Chase cemetery asking that they avoid doing so on Remembrance Sunday when the German Ambassador will be present (copigs attached). This was at the behest of the German Embassy who wished to avoid any direct contact with the group. (Mr Dalley commented incidentally that of all non Commonwealth war grave associations the best relations were with the Germans).

GRAVEYARDS IN LEBANON AND IRAN

13. Mr Dalley confirmed that a cemetery in Beirut has now been effectively eradicated. He asked about the prospect of getting a visa to visit the cemetery in Tehran; you were discouraging.

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

14. You said that we are always prepared to send urgent telexes to our posts on behalf of the Commission, but if possible, preferred to receive routine texts by post rather than telephone. You emphasised that these should be sent to room 637 and not to your PA by name. Mr Dalley expressed appreciation for our continuing willingness to undertake this task and gave the welcome news that the CWGC are considering the purchase of a telex machine of their own.

15.

You confirmed that a revision of the relevant Chapter of DSP Vol 30 about the work of the CWGC was completed, but explained that it would not issue until other related entries are also drafted and revised.

16. You put down a marker about pressures on the time available in the format of the consular course. This could perhaps at some future date affect present arrangements whereby members of the course visit CWGC headquarters at Maidenhead.

Consular

/Department's

4

partment's preference remained that the visit should continue. to be included. Mr Dalley confirmed the Commission's view that holding the film and lecture in London would be very much a second best.

21 October 1986

CC.

WED (para 2,10,12)

NENAD (para 3,8,13)

SEAD

HKD

SED

SAD SAfD

(para 4)

(para 5)

(

H

=

6)

7)

9)

N.R2

NR Jarrold Consular Department

DOGAHP

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

London SW1A 2AH

fite g

Han aaslı

RECEIVED IN

30 OCT 1986

Telephone 01-

233 8768

14

Mr P R Matthew CBE

Deputy Director General

Commonwealth War Graves Commission

2 Marlow Road

Maidenhead

Berkshire SL6 7DX

FAY

Your reference

EXT 4/16

Our reference

Date

10 October 1986

Dear Mr. Matthew,

HONG KONG:

FUTURE CWGC ARRANGEMENTS

come

Thank you for your letter of 18 August to Jonathan Powell on this subject and your earlier letter of 21 May to him. I have now taken over his desk in the department. In his letter to you of 11 February, Jonathan warned

warned that it might take some

to time back to you. This has indeed proved the case and I apologise that it should have taken us so long. We are nevertheless grateful to you for having kept us abreast of development of your own thinking in the meantime.

that

are

war

We are inclined to share your view (your letter of 21 May)

the because

Deeds of

the under Appropriation

which

cemeteries

currently held is a form of title otherwise associated with military land it would be desirable that some new

be made. provision should

It seems to us that this would be principally a matter for the Hong Kong Government and the CWGC to resolve. There is of course a political angle in which we would have an interest (on which I comment below) but the legal

the legal issues are primarily for the Hong Kong Government. Were you and the Hong Kong Government agree arrangements under which new legislation was introduced in Hong Kong to place the CWGC on a clearer footing that legislation should,

1997 in principle, still apply after until amended. An agreement between yourselves and the Hong Kong Government would be a slightly different matter in that you would need assurances from the Chinese in order to be confident that the agreement would persist beyond 1997.

In each

and (legislation, case

an agreement) there would remain the question of when and through what channels we should raise the matter with the Chinese. We envisage that at some stage we will discuss with the Chinese general transitional arrangements across 1997 and in particular the possibility of the retention of any land belonging, or allocated to HMG or any agency which the Chinese might treat as HMG. It would be prudent to work on the assumption that the Chinese are likely to treat land held by

to the allocated

We into this category. inclined to take the view that there is

no particular need to consider the question of war graves independently of discussion of transitional measures

of or to advance those discussions because

CWGC as falling

or

are