AMINA
JOTER
し
RESTRICTED
territorial integrity, by maintaining
ay
consulate on Taiwan
7. I handed Vr, P'ei my letter to Ka of 9 December about 49-51 Portland
Plses and went over it again at dinner, They still favour knoeking the
building down and want us to secure permission for them from the
Festminster City Council. They have not yet formally requested us to do
so and I shall keep trying to ride them off is.
I have agreed with IAD that "'ei should be given, a aponeered journey.
Te cas de this for new Honda of Missions
of the "peerer or less developed" countries. I have told P'ei that whan
he has taken over, he should let us know his wishes on the sert of
things he would like to see. give hin a fully-paid conducted tour to
Sectland, Oxford and Janbridge, a new tom, and such-like. I have unde
sleur
thet similar facilitiše for you would be welcome.
se
Condes tos
(8. A. L. Morgan)
J. M. I. Boyd, a#...", FASHINGTON A. X. Kaddoaks, Eng., HONG KONG
Löir 3. ToniĒJU OR
Mr. Wilford
Kiss Dens
PURD
J
RESTRICTED
Buth of
SM 259 22.m
Kr. Wilford
Miss Dear
Mr. Mary's
F.E.D.
Thank you.
Farewell Call by the Chinese Chargé d'Affaires
Mr. Ka Chia-chun is paying a farewell call on TFC
Mr. Royle on 21 December at 4 p.m. Subsequently he will
be calling on Mr. Wilford and myself.
2. I suggest that the meeting with Mr. Royle need only
take a few minutes and be limited to courtesies. Mr. Royle
might say that in Mr. Ma's seven years in London there have
been noticeable ups and downs in our relations.
Happily
they now seem on the up trend. I would hope that Mr. Royle
would re-affirm to Mr. Ma the concern that exists over the
continued detention of Mr. Johnston.
3. I attach a copy of the record of my latest conversation
with him as additional background.
Copy to: Sir S. Tomlinson
Enterapla
SALMungan
(J. A. L. Morgan)
17 December, 1970
Ma has hear a goot friend,
shalles
|MA221,
RESTRICTED
him wife
7
Whom int
P.J.S. DY GIR
enter
17/12
+
CONFIDENTIAL
OFFICE OF THE BRITISH
CHARGE D'AFFAIRES,
PEKING.
1 December, 1970
86 (c)
Dear Join,
Ecosy
Thank you for your letter of 13 November about your dinner party with
Ma. The discussion about a possible exchange of Ambassadors and the
resumption of relations at the level of Chargé d'Affaires en titre was
most interesting and I shall be commenting later.
2.
This letter is merely to let you know that Plei Chien- trang 24 November
and I invited him to dinner two days
Mr. P'ei Tsien-chang called on me at the Office on
later. I also invited Mr. Shen F'ing but he was unable to come at the
last moment because of influenza (genuine I think), the only other
Chinese present was Chang Yi-chün. P'ei turned out to be very agreeable
and we had quite a jolly evening. He drank very little and ate sparingly
except for the cake. He said little of substance and I think you will
find that he will take some time to develop confidence after he reaches
London. He is a native of Shantung. His wife, who is in Feking, will, he
says, follow him to London. They have three children none of whom will
come. The two eldest are in their late teens and are "working", the
other is at school. He says he can read some English but cannot speak
any. He certainly understood a certain amount.
3.
-
Since F'ei was not disposed to take the initiative he did not for
example comment on our vote in the U.N. I thought that we in turn would
stick to non-controversial subjects. I therefore talked about the
delivery of the letters, about the direct telephone link (on which we
have telegraphed to you), and also about the possibility of developing
J. A. L. Morgan, Esq.,
Far Eastern Department,
Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
CONFIDENTIAL
/cultural
12...
CONFIDENCIAL
cultural and sporting exchanges. I mentioned that previously there had
been Chinese students in the United Kingdom and English teachers in this
sountry and that we considered such exchanges valuable. P'ei assented
but gave no indication that the Chinese wished to resume them. I said
half-jokingly that we would like to see some revolutionary operas in
London. I suppose in due course the Chinese may get round to sending
opera troupes abroad and some British impresario might be interested.
F'ei told me, incidentally, that the Chinese had received an invitation
from the British Table Tennis Association to send a team to London. No
reply has apparently yet been sent.
4.
The one point of substance P'ei did raise was the Chinese desire to get
on with the new building in London. I made the appropriate response
emphasising that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office did not have the
real say in this matter. We had not even been able to put up a new
building for ourselves though this had been mooted for the last
twenty-five years!
5.
I am sending a copy of this letter to Arthur Maddocks in Hong Kong and
John Boyd in Washington.
docks
Copied to:
A. F. Maddocks, Esq.,
font font
J. D. I. Boyd, Esq.,
W: shington
Yours
Jam
(J. B. Denson)
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
Reference
FEC 3/548/10
Mr. Stow (Protocol and Conference Department)
Diplomatic Representation in London and Peking
You will be interested to see the Research Department paper at Flag A
below, setting out the history of the present level of diplomatic
representation in Peking and London. In the light of this paper, and the
earlier minuting and exchange of letters between Mr. Morgan and Mr.
Denson, we should be grateful for your comments on:-
(a) Whether the wording used on page 137 of the 1970 Diplomatic Service
List is correct: you will see that the section on China in the list of
Chargé d'Affaires describes Chargée from Mr. Lamb in 1951 to Mr. Wilson
in 1957 as Chargé d'Affaires ad interim, but Mr. Garvey and Sir Donald
Hopson as Chargé d'Affaires, while Mr. Denson' is again listed as Chargé
d'Affaires ad interim from January 1969. This practice appears to have
been followed for some years.
(b) What the implications would be in terms of protocol if we made Mr.
Denson Chargé d'Affaires en titre.
LV. Appleyard;
(L. V. Appleyard) Far Eastern Department 9 December, 1970.
Presumably No Dewan
I
was sent of Petsury slecifically o take chong of the Mission in which
case he should 6
be described as Chargé d'Affanns an titre. It would sean to be an error
that he is described in our own Deflorate Service Oversees Referee List
as Chaud d'Affence and interin. The Chinese Charge d'Affames although he
has been abant from for some time) is still listed in a
Categ
kis von above Ith Charges d'Afferies ad interum in one list. The sance
should effly & ons Chares in
Peking other worse by would have to take his place among
ons are marely acting dages d'Affarin ad interin was are in the base of
the Head of Mission.
CONFIDENTIAL
E
D
I
14/12/
CONFIDENTIAL
Post of Chargé d'Affaires at Peking
The position from 1950 to mid-1954
A Note from the Foreign Secretary was communicated to the Chinese
Minister of Foreign Affairs by H.M. Consul- General at Peking on 6
January, 1950, intimating that H.M. Government recognised the Government
of the People's Republic of China as the de jure Government of China,
and requesting, pending the appointment of an Ambassador, that Mr. J.C.
Hutchison be received as Chargé d'Affaires ad interim. The Chinese Note
in reply, dated 9 January, 1950, expressed the Chinese Government's
willingness to establish diplomatic relations and to accept Mr.
Hutchison "whom you have appointed as Chargé d'Affaires ad interim" as:
"the representative of the Government of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland sent to Peking to carry on negotiations on
the question of establishment of diplomatic relations between our two
countries".
The Note added that the Central People's Government would give all
necessary facilities for the transfer of Mr. Hutchison, his staff and
archives from Nanking to Peking.
2.
It was accepted in the Foreign Office that this reply did not explicitly
accept Mr. Hutchison as Chargé d'Affaires ad interim and did not mean
that diplomatic relations had been established (FC1022/89 of 1950). On
28 January, 1950, the Consul-General at Peking received an oral
communication from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs referring to the
Exchange of Notes expressing agreement to establish diplomatic
relations, and stating:
"Consequently Mr. Hutchison may come to Peking in the capacity of
British Chargé d'Affaires to discuss preliminary and procedural matters
relating to establishment of diplomatic relations".
The Consul-General transmitted a letter to the Chinese Foreign Minister
on 31 January acknowledging the exchanges and stating that Mr. Hutchison
had been instructed:
"to proceed immediately to Peking in the capacity
of Chargé d'Affaires to discuss with your Government as you have
suggested preliminary and procedural
matters relating to the establishment of diplomatic relations."
(Telegram No.58 in FC1022/37, 1950).
CONFIDENTIAL
/30
CONFIDENTIAL
3. On 2 March, 1950 the Chinese raised a number of points for
clarification affecting the establishment of diplomatic relations and no
progress was made. The position until 1954 was that the Chinese referred
to the British Embassy as the "Office of the Negotiating Representative"
and the Chargé
Notes were was referred to by his name and not by his rank. received,
but were not answered, replies being made orally or in the form of
statements in the press. During this period there were no Chinese
representatives in the United Kingdom. The People's Handbook of 1953
showed Great Britain in a list of countries "willing to establish
diplomatic relations and engaged in negotiations", and also gave the
dates of the announcements "with regard to establishing relations" of
both Great Britain and China (6 and 9 January, 1950, respectively).
The position from mid-1954.
4. During the Geneva Conference in 1954 the subject of diplomatic
relations was discussed by the Foreign Secretary with the Chinese
Foreign Minister. Chou En-lai said that his Government would be willing
to send to London a counter- part to Mr. Trevelyan (FC105174, Telegram
5542/6/54). Huan Hsiang told Mr. Trevelyan in Geneva that China did not
contemplate an immediate change in the formal relationship; this would
come after negotiations, and the Chinese official in London would have
the same status as Mr. Trevelyan in Peking (FC1051/17, Telegram 592, 4
June, 1954). The implications of these statements for the status of both
officials were considered in London, and it was decided to seek the
agreement of the Chinese to the inclusion of the officials in diplomatic
lists. In accordance with United Kingdom fiscal and legal procedures
full diplomatic immunity could only be accorded to persons on the
statutory diplomatic list restricted to Ambassadors, Ministers, Chargé
d'Affaires and their staffs. The Chinese representative would need to be
furnished with a formal document from the Chinese Ministry of Foreign
Affairs which inter alia described and introduced him as Chargé
d'Affaires. In Telegram No.1145 of 15 June, 1954, (FC1895/2) to Geneva
conveying these views, it was observed that there was "no special form
for the document and official may be Chargé d'Affaires for negotiating
diplomatic relations or what- ever the Chinese wish, but he must be
called Chargé d'Affaires". The Foreign Secretary obtained agreement in
Geneva from the Chinese that the Charges des Affaires and their
diplomatic staffs should be included in the diplomatic lista in Peking
and London. (F01895/2). On 17 June, 1954, China's agreement to send a
Chargé to London was made public in simultaneous announcements
/to
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
the effect that the Central People's Government of the People's Republic
of China should send "a Chargé d'Affaires to London having the same
position and duties as the British Chargé d'Affaires at Peking"
(FC1051/30). In September the Chinese sought acceptance for the
appointment of Huan Hsiang as "Chargé d'Affaires of the People's
Republic of China in London" (FC1895/25).
-
5. The agreement reached in Geneva was reflected quickly in the
treatment of the Mission in Peking diplomatic passes issued and the
Mission put on distribution lists for official documents and
invitations. On 7 July, 1954, Mr. Trevelyan reported that the Chinese
were fixing his precedence as below all Chargé d'Affaires aḍ interim of
recognised Embassies and Legations, and that the British Embasey would
be described as "The Office of the British Chargé d'Affaires" and appear
at the end of the Diplomatic List after all recognised Missions
(FC1051/34). These matters were considered in London. Protocol
Department pointed out that it was incorrect to refer to the British
Mission in Peking as an "Embassy", and that the more accurate collective
term would be "Diplomatic Mission". Protocol Department did not think
that the precedence being assigned to Mr. Trevelyan accorded with their
understanding of the situation. It seemed clear that the Chinese
Government had no immediate intention of proceeding to the appointment
of a diplomatic representative of higher rank than Chargé d'Affaires,
and that both Charges were being appointed on a more or less permanent
basis requiring accredition by letters signed by the respective Foreign
Ministers and not merely introduction by a titular Head of a Mission on
the eve of his own departure, as are Chargés d'Affaires ad interim.
Since both Chargés were effectively en titre, according to British
practice they should be placed in the Diplomatic List before Chargé
d'Affaires ad interim. Mr. Trevelyan was asked to explain London's viens
to the Chinese (FC1051/35), and shortly after this was done, Mr.
Trevelyan reported that he was being given precedence at a reception
before Chargés d'Affaires ad interim (FC1895/20). Evidently the Chinese
had accepted the British view of the status of the Chargé d'Affaires.
6. The Chinese, in Peking, do not use the term en titre. In their
formal, published Diplomatic List, Missions of one category are listed
together, e.g. Embassies, Legations and Offices of Chargés d'Affaires.
If the post of head of Mission is not filled the space beside the post
is left blank. The List does not show the category "Chargé d'Affaires ad
interim" at all, either in the description of individual officials or as
a category showing the status of diplomatic missions. (e.g. in the 1970
List, the post of UK's Chargé d'Affaires is listed, but left blank with
Mr. Denson shown below it as "Counsellor". "Ad interim is used, however,
in the normal way when referring to officials temporarily covering the
duties of posts of heada of Mission, and this practise presumably is
regarded as sufficient for indicating who is substantive and who is not.
CONFIDENTIAL
/It
1
CONFIDENTIAL
It is interesting, nevertheless, that Huan Hsiang used en titre in
London when issuing a statement from his office on 20 September, 1957,
about the "plot of having the so-called Chinese Classical Theatre
perform in Britain". He was no doubt acknowledging the practise followed
in the British Diplomatic Lists.
7. Since 1954 there has been no departure from the practices established
after agreeing to enter into formal diplomatic relations. Neither side
has referred to the Chargé d'Affaires in accredition letters as ad
interim. There has been no Chinese Chargé d'Affaires en poste in London
since the departure of Hsiung Hsiang-hui on 9(7) January, 1967. There
has been no British Chargé en poste since the departure of Sir Donald
Hopson from Peking in August, 1968. There has been some small confusion,
apparently on both sides, about the formalities required for naming
officials to act. When a substantive Chargé is leaving his post he is
required to introduce to the host government the officer who will be
acting until the post is substantively filled again. Mr. Cradock was
introduced in 1968 as Chargé ad interim by Sir Donald Hopson. In October
that year Mr. Cradock went on leave and nominated Mr. Weston as Chargé
ad interim. The Chinese pointed out that this was a departure from past
practice. This was found to be so. When an Acting Chargé à'Affaires is
leaving his post, & communication must be addressed by the Foreign
Secretary to the Foreign Minister naming the official to be the next
Chargé ad interim. This procedure has been followed carefully since
1968. The Chinese, however, seem to have bent the rules when naming the
successor to Shen P'ing as Chargé d'Affaire e ad interim. Shen P'ing had
taken over from Hsiung Hsiang-hui In 1967. In April 1969 the UK Mission
in Peking received a letter from Hsiung in which he appointed Ma
Chia-chuan as Chargé d'Affaires ad interim. When this apparent
irregularity was pointed out to Ma in London, he observed that correct
procedure had been followed as Hsiung was still the Chargé d'Affaires.
Far Eastern Section, Research Department.
26 November, 1970.
CONFI_ENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
Despatched 3/12/20/5)
Far Eastern Department,
3 December, 1970
Status of Chargée d'Affaires
You may like to see the attached paper prepared by
Research Tepartment in response to enquiries from us on the
background to the appointment of Chargés d'affaires in
Peking and London. Te have still not worked out all the
implications of the study and will be writing to you again.
In the mean time, if you have any comments no doubt you
will let us know.
J. N. Allan, Esq.,
PIZING
(L. V. Appleyard)
CONFIDENTIAL
Refe
--
hur beaut
الشام
&
Mobě a batter
свита
Status of mi thepresentation in China and Chiriere Representation in
Cordon.
tespace. The points an whole the waved like your help are
18) whether, when our first charge went
to Peaning in 1954 Imple, the bevern lif.), he
and interin ka nor entitre))
and if so, whether this was
were as change
&
recorded in inrespondence or diplomatic tochanges
wind the Chimere
Caiorentine
m 1954
13) the stattes of the thimere Changes in
( and the Chimere Head of Mission fin 1950-54)
14) in 1989, when Tichaill Stewart wear as
Listed in our buylanatic thage in Penning, he was listed in our
terrill hor (the ked Boor) as charge en titre.
här
tas I was ever agreed with the thmere- Did the
thm the acxurtedge a tange in Statues. Itts, what abour the Immère
Charge here
19) when did the thage entire revert to Charge q. I was it, as I assume,
when Hopson
que ust
8. ever in Anjurt (?) 1968 and P. Inaine took wer
?
f) when was the chimera thage, Haining Hinghui патент 19 last in this
country! 9/1/67 marecyn 19
CONFIDENTIAL
Desparched (in)
27/11
27 November, 1970
741/301/1
AR
Diplomatic Precedence
Thank you for your letter of 14 Novembar,
1A
2. As you know I share your views on this and on my return from Peking I
sent the enclosed minute to Protocol Department.
N
3. I fear the conclusion is that there is very little we can do. We are
always careful to play straight down the line on matters of protocol and
would be reluctant to breach the rules in this oase, however tempting
this might be. Te are committed under the Vienna Convention of 1961 to
placing Chargés always below Ambassadors, and Chargés d'Affaires en
titre above Chargés ad interin. In the case of Ka, he takes his place
among the chargis ad interin, strictly in terms of the length of time he
has been here. In fact, he is now number two in the Chargés' list.
As it happens I want over this with Ma at dinner on 11 November. I
pointed out that he wouldbe markedly higher placed at the Queen's
reception (4 of them attended)" on 19 November than you were åt dinner
with Chou Pa-lai, Clearly if P'ei Ch'ien-hus is să interim he will slip
to the bottom. I presume you do not expect him to take Aklung'ı place se
en titre.
5. I would have thought that the sort of breaches set out in your
paragraph 2 are of a different order and should not go without
complaint. It should really be for the Doyen to do so particularly as he
has himself been subjected to discrimination.
6. If there are any blatant cases involving yourself do not hesitate to
let me know as I am very ready to take them up with either Ma or P'ei.
It is in the Chinese long-term läterest to get used to complying with
the internationally socepted rules of protocol.
11
J. 3. Benson, Esq., 0.3.3.,
PRICING.
CONFIDENTL
*
(J. A. L. Morgan)
CONFIDENTIAL
迄
Reference
Mr. Appleyard,
Far Eastern Department.
Status of Chargés d'Affaires
It has taken longer than expected to deal with your queries of 19
November, largely because of the considerable difficulty experienced in
tracing jackets dealing with appointments of Chargés.
2. I thought it would be valuable for future reference to go into this
story in detail.
It was worth doing because we found some files
which hitherto we had not seen and which are important. FC1895/2, for
example, shows how the Chinese came to accept a formal exchange of
diplomatic envoys at Chargé level. Again FC1051/35 and FC1895/20 clear
up the question of the precedence of the special category of Chargé
d'Affaires in relation to Chargé d'Affaires ad interim. Our earlier
minutes which stated that the British Chargé in Peking was given a
position after other Chargés ad interim are not correct. That was the
position until the end of July 1954.
3. The answers to your specific questions in brief
are:-
8.
b.
c.
d.
The Chinese agreed in effect to enter into diplomatic relations in 1954
when they agreed to send a representative to London having the same
position and duties as the British Chargé d'Affaires in Peking, and also
agreed to the inclusion of these officials in the respective Diplomatic
Lists.
There had been no Chinese representatives in London prior to the making
of the 1954 agreement.
Mr. Trevelyan's position changed in June 1954 from that of a negotiating
representative without formal diplomatic rank and statue, to Chargé
d'Affaires.
The Chinese have not used the term ad interim in referring to the status
of the head of the Mission in London or Peking, except when referring to
the official temporarily acting for the head of Mission. The Missions do
not have the status of Embassy or Legation and are known as "the Offices
of the Chargés d'Affaires". The UK has accepted this position and,
therefore, that the substantive head of Mission is Chargé d'Affaires en
titre.
CONFIDENTIAL
/e.
I
8.
CONFIDENTIAL
There is no question of the British Chargé's position having "reverted"
to ad interim. It never was ad interim.
+
Areas.
F. Brewer
Far Eastern Section, Research Department. 26 November 1970.
I
CONFIDENTIAL
+
Dear John,
PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL
RECEIVED IN
REGISTY NE
and
Ma Alkleysid
Pl sex my mente of
300tda alleched
offide of the British Chargé d'Affaires
PEKING
14 November 1970
To submit with It
1 A
24.
When you were in Peking I mentioned to you that in accordance with the
Chinese rules on precedence I always found myself seated right at the
bottom on every official occasion organised by them. The explanation is
presumably that as the Office of a Chargé d'Affaires and not an Embassy,
we (and the Dutch) rate below all Embassies and hence the Chargé
d'Affaires ad interim of an Office is placed below Chargés d'Affaires of
Embassies. Some support is leant to this view in Satow (1966 impression,
page 171) where it is stated that in British practice it is customary to
rank Chargés d'affaires a.i, of Embassies above Chargés d'Affaires a.i.
of Legations to which the Office of a Chargé d'Affaires might be
equated. The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations does not seem to
cover this point and refers merely to three classes of substantive Heads
of Missions and to the procedure for aṛpointing Chargés d'Affaires r.i.
The position in Peking is probably unique since for various reasons so
many countries have not been represented by Ambassadors for some years,
and a category of "permanent" Chargés d'Affaires a.i. has grown up.
2. While the Chinese might argue that they are behaving correctly in
placing me where they do, they in fact break the rules whenever it suits
them by, for example, placing the representative of the Palestine
Liberation Crganisation, who has no real claim to diplomatic status,
immediately after the Dutch Chargé d'Affaires en titre. They also show
their favour by, for example, seating the newly arrived Chargé
d'Affaires of the People's Republic of South Yemen above the Indian
Chargé d'Affaires. This, of course, goes on all the time and applies
even to the Doyen of the Diplomatic Corps who has recently sat below the
Korean Chargé d'Affaires on an official occasion. I doubt therefore
whether the Chinese could really argue that they behave consistently on
all occasions.
3.
My treatment is probably partly at least political. At any rate my
friendly colleagues think so. The important practical question seems to
be how we treat the Chinese Chargé d'Affaires in London. If, as I
understand, he is accorded precedence according to the date of his
arrival which is the practice followed by nearly all my colleagues here
who do not accept the Chinese practice, then on the basis of reciprocity
I should receive the same treatment. For obvious reasons
J.A.L. Morgan, Esç.
Far Eastern Department
Foreign and Commonwealth Office LONDON, S.W.1
/this is...**
"
NAL AND CONFIDENTIAL-
holy f
L
PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL
this is something it would be difficult for me to raise myself. Ι wonder
if you could look into this matter and if my understanding is correct,
it might be raised with the new Chinese Charge d'Affaires when he takes
over. It could be pointed out that as a courtesy we accord him a
position rather higher than we might and that if it is not found
possible to do the same for me, we may be obliged to act strictly
according to the rules and seat him at the bottom on every occasion.
Possibly the Chinese will not care, but I am convinced reciprocity is
the only language they understand.
Yours
wis evel
John
(J.B. Densin)
BERG NAL AND CLUFID NAIAL
ke
1
RECARICA ED
о
Pardeed
13/1c Are
13 November, 1970
Hez Chinase Chargé d'affaires
Thank you for your t:legram 753 of 11 November confirming that Pei
Tsien-chang will be replacing Ha as the Chargé d'Affaires in London.
2. As it happened, the evening before your telegram come I was dining
with Ma and asked him about Pei. Ma said that he had no definite news
but that as he had now been in London soven years it could be that Pei
was to be his replacement.
3. Their careers are strikingly similər.
Ha
1918
1952-58
Born
Rangoon
Aged 34
Second Pecretary
Aged 38
First Secretary
Aged 44
Comsellor on appointment
to Tondon
:01
1927
1960-67
Aged 33
Agod 37
Aged 43
4. I am sure that it will not have escaped you notice that Fei is some
montus younger that you. now being set by reciprocity.
Clearly great store is
J. B. Denson, saq., OBD,
eking.
Couy to:
J. ". I. Boyd, Esq., fashington Chancery, Rangoon
RESTRICTE
·L. Mori
UNCLASSIFIED
1018 @
FEC 3/8/2018
이
Reference.
RECEIVED IN
REGISTRY No. 19
Protocol and Conference Department
1774
Chargé d'Affaires in Peking
In Peking the Chinese draw a distinction between Chargé d'Affaires of
Embassies and Chargé d'Affaires of missions that have not yet appointed
ambassadors. This means that our Chargé d'Affaires and the Dutch are
placed below all others in protocol order irrespective of the date they
became Chargés.
2.
Do we have good grounds in recognised diplomatic practice to complain at
this situation? Alternatively, if we wished, could we retaliate by
placing the Chinese in a similar category here?
SALMagan
(J. A. L. Morgan) Far Eastern Department
30 October, 1970
Mr. Morgan
A
you
know, in this country
wa
place the Chinese
Charges.
d'Affaire
Charge d'Affames en fired above the
ad interim ki me her move whether in accordance with recognised
diplomatic practice as beid town in Satro and in the Vienna Convention
of 1961. The Chinese are not of course, signetoess of the Vienne
Convention
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.