TNAG-2850-FCO40-4103-Air-services-agreement-between-Hong-Kong-and-the-US-1993 — Page 20

181/21

RECEN

1993

Foreign & Commonwealth

Office

3 September 1993

r

TRY

en Taken

London SW1A 2AH

Mr Rod Balme

IAD

Department of Transport

2 Marsham Street

London SW1

Dear

Rod,

071 270 3075

ра

13)

HONG KONG/US AIR SERVICES TALKS

1. As you know, Judith Ritchie copied to me the letter dated 27 August from Mr Fung in the Government Secretariat in Hong Kong. 12

2. I understand from our conversation yesterday that the US side are pressing for the retention of a Round The World route as part of the overall package, and indeed that Mrs Street of the Department of Transportation has recently spoken to you about this. As I understand Mr Fung's letter, the drafts attached to it are intended to deal with the problem of the RTW route by implication, without specifically referring to the problem. In the light of the US attitude described above, I regrettably cannot see that this is realistic. Given that the Americans are well aware of the problem, I think that we have no alternative but to deal with it specifically. Moreover, I have to say that, from a UK point of view, the drafts attached to Mr Fung's letter would be rather unsatisfactory, since the question of Hong Kong's inclusion in column (C) of US Route 2 would be open. }

3. As you know, the UK view has long been that we would be happy to see Hong Kong deleted from column (C) of US Route 2, and that whether the new Hong Kong/USA arrangements should have a RTW route is a matter for negotiation between the Hong Kong authorities and their US counterparts. For ease of reference, / I attach an aide-memoire which you and I prepared for the use of Mr Wakeling, then in Hong Kong, when he visited Washington in November 1991. As far as I know, the arguments in that aide-memoire remain valid now.

4.

I note that one of the texts attached to Mr Fung's letter is a draft of an Exchange of Notes amending Bermuda 2. Although I do not have any particular problems with the draft attached to Mr Fung's letter, I note that it is different from the text which has already been handed over to the Americans. Did the Americans criticise the previous text? Or is there some other reason for giving them a new text now? Clearly