TNAG-2910-FCO40-4185-International-support-from-Asia-regarding-the-future-of-Hong-1993 — Page 23

- 4 -

contacts how they saw their domestic debate going over the UN. Japan now had troops in Cambodia. But it was early days in their own debate about Security Council membership.

Sir Peter Parker said that the subject had come up at the last meeting 12 months ago. The Japanese were also giving much thought to a number of other subjects, including: defining the role of the multinational company; playing a pace-making role on the environment; and, thirdly, building up their international aid. Miyazawa had also sought ideas for increased intellectual exchanges. The last 2000 Group meeting had touched on a "Rhodes-type" scholarship scheme. This was well-worth pursuing. Five years ago only about 50 people in the UK were studying Japanese; now there were 1,000 and a shortage of qualified teachers. The Prime Minister said that many Japanese companies had close links with UK Universities and were putting resources into developing the product of those Universities. Sir Peter Parker agreed. And additionally 150 British schools were now studying Japanese.

The Prime Minister suggested that the Group should discuss currency movements and exchange rate instability. This was one of the major problems in international trade. Sir Hugh Cortazzi said that the instability of Sterling was now a major issue for Japanese companies considering investment. The Prime Minister said that this was exactly why he had been so keen on ERM entry. There had been a deafening silence nevertheless from business when we withdrew. Sir Hugh Cortazzi said that the Group should make it a major objective to explain to their Japanese counterparts what exactly was happening over the Single Market, for example on telecommunications. We needed to explain that there was continuing forward movement. We also needed to clarify EC policy on anti-dumping, which was a Japanese concern.

Returning to the Security Council issue, Sir Hugh Cortazzi said that he understood the British position. But a slightly less restrictive attitude which expressed a general welcome for the Japanese aspiration (on the model of the US) would gain us points in Tokyo. Everybody knew that the issue would take time to resolve. The Prime Minister said that our line was that we had no objection to reform of the UN, provided this did not affect its efficiency. We also had to consider the reality of reform. If we let in Japan, did we also let in Germany and others? Would the P5 become the P8? All this would involve very lengthy changes to the UN Charter. It was not easy. The Foreign Secretary said that the Security Council was mainly concerned with security and