CONFIDENTIAL
3.
It follows that we cannot really expect to put across the case for a visit to Peking on the sly: we must put forward a comprehensive argument which starts off, "A lot hangs on getting our relations with China right, so the Secretary of State has decided to go to Peking. But we wanted to have a word with you first, before the news breaks
"
Press
4.
Lord Caithness is already engaged in a weekly series of one-to-one lunches, which will include Ray Whittaker (Independent), David Wallen (Scotsman), and Michael Binyon (Times). He is also planning some "brainstorming" dinners/lunches with academics and writers, to which other serious journalists would be invited. I and Departments will continue to keep in touch with our Asian contacts in the main
papers.
5.
News Department should offer the usual unattributable briefing by an Under-Secretary to the Diplomatic Correspondents and others shortly before the visit takes place. Quite a number may want to go out to Peking and Hong Kong, as they did to Hong Kong in January 1990. Their reports (and those of the critical Hong Kong press) will be influential. We shall also, with News Department, be working up written briefing material and bullpoints for interviews etc.
6. But there is no substitute to asking the Secretary of State, if he can find the time, to brief the main papers one by one. I suggest the following priority:-
(i)
The Times. Simon Jenkins is crucial, if we are to overcome the effects of Bernard Levin and Rosemarie Righter.
(ii)
The Independent. Peter Jenkins is the key. The Editor does not himself write on these issues and it is not easy to tell who below him will be tasked (? Roger Berthand).
(iii)
The Daily Mail. Sir David English.
(iv)
(v)
The Daily Telegraph. I have no personal feel for the likely attitude of Max Hastings, but their Asian expert, Simon Scott-Plummer, is very sensible.
The Financial Times. It would be worthwhile focussing on Edward Mortimer.
2
CONFIDENTIAL
/(vi)
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.