TNAG-1798-FCO40-2558-Hong-Kong-Vietnamese-refugees-repatriation--including-Opera-1988 — Page 17

RESTRICTED

TOP COPY DIST? Q DIST ?

974

121677

MDHOAN 1708

RESTRICTED

FM FCO

TO IMMEDIATE HONG KONG

TELNO 3315

OF 291426Z DECEMBER 88

INFO IMMEDIATE WASHINGTON

INFO PRIORITY UKMIS GENEVA

(971)

MED 2-3/8

опу

YOUR TELNO 4666: VIETNAMESE BOAT PEOPLE: REPORTS BY INDOCHINA RESOURCE ACTION CENTRE (IRAC) AND REFUGEES INTERNATIONAL

1.

WE ARE GENERALLY CONTENT WITH YOUR PROPOSED LINE TO TAKE IN DISCUSSION OF THE MAIN POINTS IN THE REPORTS. WE SUGGEST THAT

YOU AND OTHER RECIPIENTS MAY ALSO WISH TO DRAW ON THE TEXT OF

MR EGGAR'S STATEMENT TO THE HOUSE OF COMMONS ON 22 DECEMBER (WHICH WE ARE SENDING SEPARATELY BY FAX AS SOON AS IT IS

AVAILABLE FROM HANSARD).

2. WE HAVE THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC COMMENTS ON YOUR PROPOSED

LINE:

(A) PARA 3 SECOND SENTENCE: WE WOULD PREFER TO DELETE THE WORDS QUOTE AND PARTICULARLY UNQUOTE AND SUBSTITUTE QUOTE INCLUDING UNQUOTE. WE THINK IT MIGHT BE UNNECESSARILY ANTAGONISTIC TO SINGLE OUT THE US.

(B) PARA 3, THIRD SENTENCE: WE SUGGEST QUOTE RESTRICTIVE CRITERIA UNQUOTE INSTEAD OF QUOTE RESTRICTIVE MEASURES UNQUOTE. (C) PARA 3: WE SUGGEST THE INCLUSION OF A FURTHER POINT IN THIS PARAGRAPH, BRINGING OUT THE FACT THAT THE INTRODUCTION OF THE NEW POLICY WAS A NECESSARY STEP, BOTH AS A DETERRENT TO FURTHER DEPARTURES AND AS A MEANS OF SENDING A CLEAR MESSAGE TO VIETNAM THAT HONG KONG SHOULD NO LONGER BE SEEN AS A STAGING POST TO A FUTURE WHICH DID NOT AND COULD NOT EXIST FOR THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF BOAT PEOPLE.

(D) PARA 9, FIRST SENTENCE: WE WOULD PREFER TO DEAL WITH THE ISSUE OF REPATRIATION BY MAKING THE POINT THAT IT SHOULD BECOME INCREASINGLY CLEAR THAT THE ONLY VIABLE FUTURE FOR ALL THOSE SCREENED OUT LIES IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY, AND THAT IT MUST BE RIGHT THAT WE SHOULD WORK FOR ARRANGEMENTS TO ENABLE ALL OF THEM TO RETURN WITHOUT FEAR OF THE CONSEQUENCES.

(E) PARA 9: WE ALSO THINK IT IMPORTANT TO BRING OUT THE FACT THAT NO BOAT PEOPLE WOULD BE SENT BACK IF WE WERE NOT SATISFIED THAT THEY WOULD NOT BE ILL-TREATED OR PUNISHED ON THEIR RETURN.

(F) PARA 10: WE DO NOT FOLLOW THE LOGIC OF THIS PARAGRAPH AND SUGGEST THAT IT SHOULD BE OMITTED. THE KEY POINT IS THAT

1

PAGE

RESTRICTED