TNAG-2783-FCO40-4002-UK-business-interests-in-Hong-Kong-Chinese-discrimination-ag-1993 — Page 25

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

HICC 012/4

RECEIVED BY

ENG

21 APR 1993

FM FCO

TO DESKBY 21010OZ PEKING

NUA

FA

TELNO 236

OF 201531Z APRIL 93

INFO IMMEDIATE HONG KONG, UKREP JLG HONG KONG INFO IMMEDIATE UKREP BRUSSELS

30

31

172121 HOÀN 1859

TOP COPYDHOA

YOUR TELNO 544: CHINESE DISCRIMINATION AGAINST JARDINES

1.

Q DIST?

ра

012/4

WE AGREE THAT THE DINNER FOR SIR MICHAEL PALLISER WILL PROVIDE A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO RAISE THIS ISSUE WITH MOFTEC OFFICIALS, AND ARE CONTENT FOR YOU TO MODIFY THE TIRETS IN PARA 2 OF OUR TELNO 232 AS SUGGESTED IN YOUR PARA 3.

2.

23

WE AGREE THAT WE SHOULD MENTION JARDINES BY NAME (YOUR PARA 4) WHILST EMPHASISING THAT WE WOULD BE EXTREMELY CONCERNED ABOUT SEEMING DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ANY/ANY BRITISH COMPANY. WE DO NOT OF COURSE WANT TO IDENTIFY OURSELVES TOO CLOSELY WITH JARDINES IN CASE THIS IS TAKEN AS CONFIRMATION OF THE SUSPICIONS ALREADY HELD BY THE CHINESE. WE THEREFORE THINK YOU SHOULD NOT/NOT ASK IN TERMS FOR AN EXPLANATION (WHICH IN ANY CASE WILL NOT/NOT BE FORTHCOMING).

3. WE DO NOT WISH YOU TO BECOME INVOLVED IN A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE EXACT REQUIREMENTS OF GATT MEMBERSHIP, AS WE WISH TO AVOID GIVING THE IMPRESSION THAT WE ARE SEEKING TO QUOTE INTERNATIONALISE UNQUOTE THIS ISSUE BY INTRODUCING IT AT THIS STAGE INTO CHINA'S REACCESION NEGOTIATIONS. THE LANGUAGE OF THE FOURTH TIRET (QUOTE REQUIREMENTS UNQUOTE RATHER THAN QUOTE OBLIGATIONS UNQUOTE) WAS DELIBERATELY CHOSEN TO LEAVE IT VAGUE AS TO WHETHER THIS WAS A LEGAL OR A POLITICAL POINT. (FOR YOUR INFORMATION: DTI'S VIEW IS THAT THE CHINESE ACTION IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH ARTICLE 1 OF GATT - TREATING ALL IMPORTS OF A PARTICULAR TYPE IN THE SAME MANNER IRRESPECTIVE OF THEIR COUNTRY OF ORIGIN, ARTICLE 11 - FORBIDDING THE USE OF NON-TARIFF HURDLES, AND TO SOME EXTENT ARTICLES 10 AND 13. OF COURSE AT PRESENT THESE ONLY APPLY TO TRADE IN GOODS BUT AFTER THE END OF THE URUGUAY ROUND SHOULD APPLY TO SERVICES AS WELL).

4.

M

WE ARE RE-FAXING THE EVIDENCE PROVIDED BY SIR CHARLES POWELL.

1

PAGE CONFIDENTIAL