TNAG-2030-FCO40-2892-Gulf-crisis-sharing-the-financial-burden-possible-Hong-Kong-1990 — Page 41

RESTRICTED

pa

Perlen.

Marin

nolio

073667

MDHIAN 2029

RESTRICTED

FM UKMIS NEW YORK

TO DESKBY 0208OOZ FCO

TELNO 1519

OF 020325Z OCTOBER 90

INFO IMMEDIATE UKREP BRUSSELS

INFO ROUTINE OTHER EC POSTS

FROM PRIVATE SECRETARY

/? 7

HKB 020 127

ECEIVED IN

INLE.

12 OCT 1990

MY TELNO 1517: CONCLUSIONS ON FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO COUNTRIES MOST

AFFECTED BY THE GULF CRISIS

1.

MINISTERS HAD BEFORE THEM A TEXT AGREED AD REFERENDUM BY

POLITICAL DIRECTORS EARLIER IN THE DAY. DE MICHELIS SAID THAT THE

COMMISSION STOOD BY THEIR EARLIER PROPOSAL THAT HALF THE 1.5 BILLION ECU FOR EGYPT, JORDAN AND TURKEY SHOULD COME FROM MEMBER STATES AND HALF FROM THE EC BUDGET. BUT THE PRESENT TEXT, WITH A SPLIT OF TWO-THIRDS FROM MEMBER STATES AND ONE-THIRD FROM THE EC BUDGET, WAS A COMPROMISE AND ACHIEVED THE SAME RESULT. THE TEXT SHOULD BE

ADOPTED BY UNANIMITY BECAUSE THAT WAS TECHNICALLY NECESSARY AND

POLITICALLY DESIRABLE. ANDRIESSEN (COMMISSION) CONFIRMED THAT THE COMMISSION STOOD BY ITS ORIGINAL PROPOSAL.

2.

SAMARAS (GREECE) QUESTIONED THE PROVISION OF THE TEXT THAT COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE WOULD BE ''PREDOMINANTLY GIVEN IN THE FORM OF GRANTS''

IMPLYING THAT MORE SHOULD BE DONE THROUGH LOANS. DUMAS SAID THAT IT WOULD BE MEANINGLESS IF THE COMMUNITY ONLY MADE LOANS.

THIS POINT WAS RESOLVED TO EVERYONE'S SATISFACTION BY THE WORK 'PREDOMINANTLY BEING REPLACED BY 'MAINLY'.

3=

WE WE

THE SECRETARY OF STATE SAID THAT WE WERE CONTENT WITH THE COMPROMISE PROPOSAL. THIS ISSUE HAD CAUSED US GREAT DIFFICULTY.

HAD NOT BEEN HAPPY WITH THE STATISTICAL BASIS WHICH UNDERLAY IT. WOULD NOT BE CONTRIBUTING TO THE VOLUNTARY PART OF THE 1.5 BILLION ECU BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF OUR MILITARY CONTRIBUTION. THE PASSAGE IN THE TEXT WHICH REFERRED TO THE RIGOROUS APPLICATION OF THE EMBARGO WAS IMPORTANT. WE WOULD OBJECT TO LARGE SUMS OF MONEY GOING TO JORDAN IF SHE WERE NOT OBSERVING SANCTIONS. DE MICHELIS COMMENTED THAT THIS POINT HAD ALREADY BEEN AGREED.

4.

VAN DEN BROEK QUESTIONED WHETHER MINISTERS COULD TAKE A BINDING DECISION, THE IMPLEMENTATION OF WHICH DEPENDED ON THE VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS OF MEMBER STATES. ANDRIESSEN SUPPORTED HIM.

1

PAGE

RESTRICTED

DE

10