than shake hands. Nor do we invite each other to/for
or informal dinners in each others' houses.
3.
The D.A.'s problem is that from time to time the Defence Attaché Corps
operates as a Corps, usually to dine with a parting colleague. These
functions are often organised in rotation and in the residence of the
member of the Corps in the Chair for that occasion. Consequently
it was inevitable that a situation would arise in which our D.A. was in
the Chair and had to invite or omit his Chinese colleague, and vice
versa. The former has now arisen. On the basis of my own practice I
think he should include the Chinese, To fail to do so would, in fact,
make for great difficulty between himself and his other colleagues and
generally make for difficulties for him. Naturally as the representative
of a non-participant country, his position could be a difficult one, and
one of the reasons it is not is the social address which the Defence
Staff generally use with their colleagues. Clearly they are in no
position to sour the atmosphere by unnecessary sticky behaviour on a
point of protocol.
4.
I think we should consider this problem against the general background
not only of what our local requirements are in South Viet-Nam but what
the C.P.G.'s attitude to our Viet-Nam policy is. I could quite
understand them making things difficult for our people in Peking over
minor indications of what they allege to be a two-Chingas policy in Hong
Kong or the U.K., but I scarcely think that it would be this facet of
our policy to Viet-Nam which they would think worthwhile complaining
about.
CONFIDENTIAL
D. F. Kurray, Esq.,
8.E.A.D.,
Foreign Office, 8.W.1.
E
15..
Beater 2011
мак
CONFIDENTIAL
CV
1
5. Unless I hear from you by telegram I will assume that there is no
objection to the D.A. going ahead as proposed.
6. I am sending a copy of this letter to James Hurray.
とー
Mun
(C. M. MacLehoae)
P
CONFIDENTIAL
Written Answers
22 JANUARY 1968
Mr. Malley: The main emphasis of the work of the Diplomatic Service is
already on commercial work and requirements for political reporting have
for some time been bed as far as possible. There is no mention of
reducing staff engaged on commercial work. Immediately fol- lowing
devaluation instructions were sent to all Ambassadors and High Commis
sioners to adjust the work of their Mission in order to seize to the
full the new oppor tunitie increasing British exports. in- cluding ere
appropriate, by redeploy- ing their staff to the task of export pro-
motion from other duties. A continuing review of all establishments is
maintained by the Diplomatic Service with a view to getting priorities
right in these matters.
Mr. James Davidson asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what
were the total numbers of civil ser- vants employed by the Foreign
Service, Diplomatic Service, and Consular Ser- vice, as appropriate, at
the beginning of 1946, 1951, 1964 and at the latest avail- able date.
Mr. George Brown : 5,480, 4,926, 4,391 and, on the 1st of October 1967,
5,290 respectively. The last figure includes 2,669 staff for whom my
right hon. Friend the Commonwealth Secretary and I have been jointly
responsible since the forma- tion of the Diplomatic Service on 1st
January, 1965. These consist of staff working in joint Foreign
Office/Common- wealth Office departments including the Diplomatic
Service Administration Office and staff in training and transit.
CHINA
47. Mr. Alexander W. Lyon asked the Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs whether he will make a statement on progress towards the
normalisation of diplomatic relations with China.
Mr. George Brown: Since my reply to my hon. Friend the Member for South-
ampton, Test (Mr. R. C. Mitchell) on 20th November, there has been some
improve- ment in the situation of our Mission in Peking but unhappily
much less than I would have liked. Exit visas have been granted to a
First Secretary, and his wife (both of whom were ill) and their family:
and the additional movement restrictions placed on members of our
Mission have
10 B 44
Written AusWERS
6
been relaxed following a relaxation of restrictions on the Chinese
Mission in London. The situation nevertheless re- mains highly
unsatisfactory. For in- stance, several members of the Mission and their
families wish to leave China for health and other reasons but despite
re- peated requests exist visas are still being withheld. I shall of
course continue to do everything possible to achieve an
improvement.-[Vol. 754, c. 223.]
50. Mr. W. Teeling asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs
whether he is aware that certain Commonwealth nations recognise and
trade with the Chinese National Government: what criteria Her Majesty's
Government re- quire for a recognition of the Government in Formosa; and
if he will accord recog- nition in order to obtain the trade benefits
involved.
Mr. William Rodgers: We are well aware that some members of the Com-
monwealth differ from us in recognising the Nationalist authorities in
Taiwan who claim to represent China. We do not accept this claim and
there can there- nition to the Nationalist authorities. But fore be no
question of granting recog-
in the same way as some Commonwealth with mainland China, this country
trades countries nonetheless trade successfully
with Taiwan.
64. Mr. Hector Hughes asked the Sec- retary of State for Foreign Affairs
what steps he has taken during the last six months to achieve friendly
relations with the Chinese Republic and to get a seat for China in the
Councils of the United Nations.
Mr. William Rodgers: My hon. and learned Friend will be aware of Chinese
actions against members of the British Mission and other British
subjects in
China during the last six months. Despite
this disgraceful behaviour, we have con- tinued to make it clear to the
Chinese that we wish to return to normal working relations as quickly as
possible. We have also continued to press for the seat- ing of China in
the United Nations. As hon. Members will know, the British
representative voted accordingly but the Resolution was defeated in the
General Assembly of the United Nations. Mean- while we are awaiting some
indication that the Chinese are also prepared to work to improve their
relations with us.
22/1168 6W 757
ポ
33
FCN 1/6
T
1
REC
25 17
58
FCN3/6
Is this day.
Ela
p
32
Parliamentary Office
amentary
Мы посведем
FCN 3/6
You told me that Mr. Rodgers wished to delete the
sentence in Sir William Teeling's question about our not
recognising Taiwan because Sir William Teeling's position was
well known and it was clear that the question was directed
mainly towards trade. Une reason why I thought it wise to
include a restatement of our well known position was that in
the course of a press conference in Tokyo (Tokyo Telegram No. 38)
the Secretary of State said that "the question of overcoming
the problem of Taiwan is very minor". So far as the Chinese
are concerned it is of major importance.
meeting in Warsaw the Chinese led off by stating that the main
impediment to an improvement in Chinese relations with the
United States was Taiwan. It is important that we avoid giving
any impression that we support a two Chinas policy or a one China
and one Taiwan policy. For this reason I should prefer the
reply to stand as drafted.
At the last Sino/American
Im Denson
(J.B. Denson)
17 January, 1968.
T.
Grubdo
The Theilgen
You may wish to show us to it. Rushe..
limi
If this port can be made in 6 hus of type, bot 11 an enged, of has ajo.
LTR.
དེས་རིང་མཔོ་ཅན་
Thine
1711
Mr. Wilkingon
Parliamentary Office
CONFIDENTIAL
31
FCN3/6
Sir William Teeling is once again pursuing his campaign
in favour of the Nationalists.
2.
The purpose of the question is presumably to emphasise
that we are losing valuable trade by not recognising the
Nationalists. By referring to the "Government in Formosa",
Sir William Teeling evades the issue as he knows full well
that the "Government in Formosa" purports to represent China.
Since we recognise Peking, there could be no question of
recognition unless the Nationalists abandoned their pretensions
to being the Government of China. If they did so we might be
in a considerable difficulty as a good case could be made on
common sense grounds for recognising a Republic of Taiwan. To
do so would put our relations with Peking at risk. At present
there is no indication that the Nationalists are likely to
change their position. Our official view is that the question
of sovereignty over Taiwan is undetermined. It would be
unwise to be drawn in the reply or in supplementaries on the
hypothetical question of our attitude to an independent
Taiwan.
3. Commonwealth countries are divided on the recognition
of China. Of those countries which are members of the United
Nations, 8 including the United Kingdom recognise Peking,
/11
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
- 2 -
Flag A
Flag B
11 recognise Taiwan, 7 recognise neither and one (Nigeria)
recognises both. A list of the positions of individual
countries is attached. Some Commonwealth countries, notably
Canada and Australia which recognise Taiwan, also trade
extensively (in grain) with Peking. Since this trade is to
China's benefit, she does not let recognition of the
Nationalists affect it. In our own case, there is no direct
evidence that trade with Taiwan adversely affects trade with
the Kainland. But I think this would not be the case if,
for example, we sent strategic items to Taiwan and certainly
if, having recognised Peking, we accorded any form of official
recognition to the Nationalists over and above the present
accreditation of a Consul to the Taiwan provincial authorities.
Our trade with China is vastly greater than that with Taiwan
£67.25 million both ways as against £3.8 million in 1966.
4. Though the question refers throughout to "Formosa", the
draft reply uses "Taiwan" in accordance with a recent circular
in which it was laid down that we should adopt the more usual
international usage favoured both by the Nationalists them-
selves and by China.
5. I submit a draft reply and notes for supplementaries in
which the Board of Trade concur.
John Jenson
(J. B. Denson) 16 January, 1968
CONFIDENTIAL
VAWilkri
Jan. 16.
FCN 3/6
W31
50.
NOTES FOR SUPPLEMENTARIES
Criteria for Recognition
Our major criteria for according recognition to a
government, namely that it exercises control over the
country, cannot be applied in this case, as the Nationalist
authorities claim to be the Government not of Taiwan but
of China.
2.
3.
५.
Volume of Trade with Taiwan and Ching
Our trade with Taiwan amounted to £3.8 million both ways
in 1966, the last year for which full figures are available.
The comparable figure for China was £67.25 million.
Trade and Politics
I have seen no evidence to suggest that trade is directly
dependent on political recognition. British traders, in common
with those of other countries, trade with both China and
Taiwan.
Restraints on Trade
Apart from strategic items, the list of which is reviewed
periodically, no restraints are placed on British trade either
with China or Taiwan.
5 Trade Delegations and Sponsored Missions
Officially sponsored missions to Taiwan would be
inappropriate since we do not recognise the "Nationalist"
/authorities.
- 2
authorities.
Individual businessmen are, however, free to
visit the island, and non-official bodies are free to
organise group visits.
Businessmen from Taiwan are free to visit Britain in
the same way as are those from elsewhere.
6. Recognition of an Independent Taiwan
The question of recognition should the authorities on
Taiwan abandon their claim to represent China and apply for
recognition as an independent state is hypothetical. There
is no indication that they are prepared to do so. Our view
remains as stated on numerous previous occasions that the
status of the Island of Taiwan is undetermined.
7. Use of "Taiwan" for "Formosa"
I have referred to "Taiwan" when the hon. Member for
Brighton Pavilion referred to "Formosa" because my Department
has now adopted this generally accepted international usage.
Both China and the "Nationalist" authorities use "Taiwan" and
it is only in Britain and a few other countries that "Formosa
the old Portuguese name for the island, is now used.
ies which are Members of the United Nations
Chinese People's
Taiwan
Neither
Both
Republic
Ceylon
Australia
Gambia
Nigeria
India
Barbados
Ghan
Kenya
Botswana
Guyana
Pakistan
Canada
Malaysia
Tanzania
Cyprus
Mauritius
Uganda
Jamaica
Singapore
United Kingdom
Lesotho
Trinidad and Tobago
Zambia
Malawi
Malta
New Zealand
Sierra Leone
DL156229 Op.363
PARLIAMENTARY QUESTION
ED IN
for ORAL answer
F.E.D.
The draft reply should reach the Parliamentary Office through your
Under-Secretary by
·30
50
Noon on Tues. 16/1.
FCN 3/6
U* Sir William Teeling (Brighton, Pavilion): To ask
the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether he is aware that
certain Commonwealth nations recognise and trade with the Chinese
National Government; what criteria Her Majesty's Government require for
a recognition of the Government in Formosa; and if he will accord
recognition in order to obtain the trade benefits involved.
22 January, 1968.
MR. WILLIAM RODGERS
We are well aware that some members of the Commonwealth
differ from us in recognising the Nationalist authorities
in Taiwan who claim to represent China. We do not accept
this claim and there can therefore be no question of
granting recognition to the Nationalist authorities. But
in the same way as some Commonwealth countries nonetheless
trade successfully with mainland China, this country trades
with Taiwari,
(19207) Dd.391413 3a 10/67 G,W.BIAI. Gạ363
PARLIAMENTARY QUESTION
for ORAL answer on..
FEI
The draft reply should reach the Parliamentary Office through your
Under-Secretary by
50
Nuno or Twee. 16/1
UP* Sir William Teeling (Brighton, Pavilion): To ask
the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether he is aware that
certain Commonwealth nations recognise and trade with the Chinese
National Government; what criteria Her Majesty's Government require for
a recognition of the Government in Formosa; and if he will accord
recognition in order to obtain the trade benefits involved.
Lilian Rodgers
We the
timis kehind
22 January, 1968.
Ian well aware that some members of the Commonwealth
differ from us in recognising the Nationalist authorities
in Taiwan, whe-
"represent -China. Her Majesty's
Government do not kecupt this club
my renognies the
Goverment of the Beạp
Republio
legitimate government
Coountry. The
ing as the only
There can therefore
be no question of granting recognition to the Nationalist
wealth & Kex
authorities. But in the same way as some Gommonwealth
countries-which recognise the Nationalist authorities
halal
nonetheless trade successfully with China, this country
Hikewise trades with Taiwan.
in The
L
There is
to beel s
Anich, I back too much of the.
Sirbelian pordion : God then
кожн
a must ansa
Kd it is
badi Had he is Mariag
на
Labored will the time
り
A
M.F.P
NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN.
Registry No.
Top Secret. Secret.
Confidential.
Restricted. Open.
Draft. Entry- Volume 14 Refer- ence and Lists
Insert Telephone No. & Ext. when appropriate.
CHINA (TAIWAN)
(a) The Republic of China.
(b) Chinese.
(c) Chinese Nationalist.
FCN3/0
w24
(d) Since Her Majesty's Government
do not recognise the claim of the
Chinese Nationalists as the
Government of China, the title
"Republic of China" should not
be used. The territory over which
the Chinese Nationalists exercise
jurisdiction is known, for
Diplomatic Service purposes, as
"Taiwan" (not "Formosa"). The
Government and the administration
should be referred to as the
"Taiwan authorities" or the
"Nationalist Chinese authorities".
The adjective applied to the
Government should be "Nationalist
Chinese", and "Taiwanese" should
be used when it is necessary
/to
to differentiate the indigenous
people from the Nationalist
Chinese.
The following changes also:
Reges: For sa tri Page (Jaywon) Forsusa
Page 61: motead of,
Formosa (Taiwan)
read:
(Formosa) see
Page 63: motead of,
Taiwan
(Taiwan) see Formosa
read:
Taiwan (Formosa)
NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN.
•
Ed (1626)
|
Reference.
Library Foreign Office)
+
F.E. Jest M. Falls (J.R.J.). Rease ser
Personnel Denartment(Operations)
"Taiwan" or "Formosa"
29
IUL LI.
my
minute
ЂР
FONEPA attach a draft replasing of page 48 of Volume
Please see Folio 22 and subsequent papers.
14 of office Procedure and have commented on the other marked passages.
Mark A. Hall.
(K. A. Hall)
fr Eastern Department 8 January 1968
I like
It has always been the practice F.D. now. to make changes in
field of
I then adopted forms in the
geographical nomenclature unless time
And stopping teams
for doing so
usine
particularly if the reams for le time-honored adopted form,
which
it in pop to change, cannot be decermind. I have been unable li
ما
discover why we have always used
Formosa", in preference i
ļ
in th
Kamped on and
past,
"Taiwan",
have the fact that
ན་
thing in reflected in time lise
This
alternatives in Volumen ! legen
means (by it was
ว
D.S.P
deliberats
choice. In making the change is ""Taiwan", therefore, we may
mawittnigly be doing something
(had. we may
Lates
regret.
:
me may
form
latine becoming, for mistance, ther
Rhydo
L
"and" Taiwan" in (and Judinara)
formed code
which earhis vistrumats, and as
and dreuments, etc,
་པའི་
the Trending
Тажику у
سائنس
ما
Pease wil Japen (1951),
refer specifically to "Formosa" and
make no motion
is true, d. less.
"Taiwan" (liham
lease of the English, From
سلام
and Spanish tanks). Then is whey like
questing consistency. If
مام سلامت
E4 (1626)
:
¡
Reference
"Taiwan" instead
Chand
Portinguese-derived "Formosa",
osa", will
it not be incongres not
had
منا
словар
incid nomenclatives
ستكمل
حيانا
y
1. "Pescadres"?
д би там
овар
myself
thank Lat,
1 I
because ̈Formoon is
hart. lorked
won krickly by the audites" there,
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.