SECRET UK EYES A
21. Paragraph 48. I am not wholly sympathetic with what is said here; see later comments.
22. Paragraph 49. The Appendices are there, but where is Annex B itself?
23. Paragraphs 53 and 54. I believe these are otiose or are about to be overtaken by events. Suggest deletion.
24. Paragraph 58. Delete second sentence. Amend third sentence to read:
"Nevertheless, wider political and commercial
considerations are at stake and HQBF has been willing..."
25. Paragraph 59. Already covered under the section on the concept of operations. Suggest delete.
26. Paragraph 61. Why DPR (A)? The Hong Kong garrison is a tri service organisation, so both DCPR and ACPR (Mil) will have an interest.
27. Paragraph 62. The last sentence is getting too far down into the weeds. Suggest deletion.
28. Paragraph 70. Delete last two sentences.
29. Paragraph 71c. But what is the current assumption?
30. Paragraph 76. Delete last sentence: already covered.
31. Paragraph 78. I agree with the basic thinking here, but what are the resource implications compared with the current LTC assumptions?
32. Paragraph 79. Delete first five sentences and replace with:
"As has been made clear earlier, the generally less optimistic view about the security and political situation in Hong Kong has led to the conclusion that the garrison should retain, till the end, a capacity for effective action in support of the RHKP."
Once again, what are the resource implications?
33. Paragraph 82. I must confess to being less than convinced by all this, but I accept that it is primarily a matter of military judgement.
34. Paragraph 85. The first sentence is overtaken by events. In any event it needs to distinguish more clearly the point at which one battalion goes "non-operational" and when
SECRET UK EYES A
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.