2015年3月17日星期二

1970.3.17英国外交部指令驻华代办向中方交涉两名船员被捕事件

197031日某英国商船的船长James Ray在上海港被逮捕,39日另一艘英国商船的二副Patrick.J. Duff在船上被捕,他们都是因为例行标图而被中共视为收集海防情报而被捕的。
在经历一连串交涉后,两人均于324日被释放,然后乘火车被带到广东罗湖口岸,于326日到达香港,其中Ray被正式驱逐,Duff则没有被禁止再来中国。
311日和19日英国驻华代办两次向中国外交部西欧司交涉,320日担任Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster George Thomson召见中国驻英临时代办马家骏(任职时间大概是1969年10月到1970年11月,后返国任中国人民外交协会副秘书长)抗议,马的翻译是姜恩柱。
317日,一名在伦敦的中国银行官员向美联社驻伦敦首席记者Gavshon讲述了中方对此事的看法:近来,中共为应付可能的苏联袭击就在上海港和天津港布置了一些防御性设施,为此中方特意要求领航员改变进港路线能避免让外轮看到这些设施。而这两名英国船员在船只进港时作的标图可以用来和以前的标图做对比,这样就能发现防御设施所在。所以半年前中方特意向所有外轮通告在进港时应完全听从领航员命令并且不得标图。
值得注意的是,这名中行官员是Gavshon的固定联系人,他说自己的故事版本来自中国驻英代办马家骏,所以英国政府认为是中共故意让他向外泄露风声的。但问题是,两艘英国商船所在的公司都声称从未接到过中方禁止在进港时标图的新规定。

下面的档案是1970317日英国外交部发给驻华代表处的电报,指令再次向中国外交部交涉,要点包括以下方面:
1.      要求中方提供两名船员的现状及被捕原因,对被捕事件表示严重关切,要求外交部协助快速处理此事并尽快释放船员。
2.     说明中方迄今为止没有正式告诉船只所属公司这两名船员被捕的原因。但据其他船员讲,中方的理由是上海港禁止外轮在被领航进港时做标图。但这种标图行为符合国际通行惯例,而且中方原先公布的规定中也未对此行为作出限制,所以这两人的行为只是无心冒犯。希望中方能提供新版的航行规定。
3.     要求中方告知这两名船员所在位置,并提供领事探望服务。

CONFIDENTIAL
CYPHER/CAT A
IMMEDIATE FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE    TO PEKING
TELEGRAM NUMBER 98                        17 MARCH 1970.(FED)

CONFIDENTIAL.
ADDRESSED TO PEKING TELEGRAM NO.98 OF 17 MARCH REPEATED FOR INFORMATION TO GOVERNOR HONG KONG AND BHC SINGAPORE.

MY TELEGRAM NO.95: DETENTION OF SHIPS' OFFICERS.
SINCE THE CHINESE HAVE STILL NOT RESPONDED TO DENSON’S APPROACH ON 11 MARCH, YOU SHOULD NOW SEEK A FURTHER INTERVIEW WITH THE FOREIGN MINISTRY AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. WE FULLY UNDERSTAND THAT YOU MAY HAVE DIFFICULTY IN OBTAINING AN INTERVIEW: WE SHOULD BE GRATEFUL HOWEVER IF YOU WOULD KEEP US INFORMED OF YOUR EFFORTS.
2. YOU SHOULD REFER FIRST TO DENSON'S DEMARCHE, AND ASK THE CHINESE WHETHER THEY ARE NOW IN A POSITION TO FURNISH MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE DETENTION OF CAPTAIN RAY OR THE SPECIFIC REGULATIONS WHICH HE IS ALLEGED TO HAVE CONTRAVENED. YOU SHOULD THEN EXFRESS GRAVE CONCERN AND DISAPPOINTMENT OVER THE SUBSEQUENT DETENTION OF SECOND OFFICER DUFF AND ASK FOR DETAILS OF HIS ALLEGED OFFENCE. YOU SHOULD REQUEST THE CO-OPERATION OF THE FOREIGN MINISTRY IN SEEKING A RAPID SETTLEMENT IN THIS MATTER AND THE IMMEDIATE RELEASE OF THE TWO MEN.
3. YOU SHOULD GO ON TO SAY THAT DESPITE URGENT REQUESTS BY TELEGRAM THE CHINESE MARITIME AUTHORITIES HAVE SO FAR GIVEN THE OWNERS OF THE SHIPS NO INFORMATION ABOUT THE REASONS FOR THE DETENTION OF THE TWO OFFICERS. HOWEVER, THE SHIPS’ CREWS HAVE TOLD THE OWNERS THAT IN EACH CASE THE LOCAL SHANGHAI AUTHORITIES OBJECTED TO THE PRACTICE OF MARKING THE SHIP'S POSITION ON THE CHARTS AS THE VESSEL PASSED ON ITS WAY UNDER PILOTAGE INTO SHANGHAI HARBOUR.
4. YOU SHOULD COMMENT THAT WE ARE PUZZLED AS TO WHY THE CHINESE AUTHORITIES SHOULD OBJECT TO THIS PROCEDURE, WHICH IS PART OF ACCEPTED INTERNATIONAL MARITIME PRACTICE. THE CAPTAIN REMAINS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SAFETY OF HIS SHIP EVEN WHEN UNDER PILOTAGE. THESE ACTIONS WERE TAKEN OPENLY AND IN FULL VIEW OF THE PILOT AND SECURITY GUARDS, WHO MADE NO COMMENT AT THE TIME. FURTHERMORE, AS FAR AS WE ARE AWARE THERE IS NO MENTION IN ANY OF THE PUBLISHED CHINESE HARBOUR RULES AVAILABLE TO INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANISATIONS OF A SPECIFIC STIPULATION FORBIDDING THIS PRACTICE. ALL THIS SUGGESTS THAT THERE HAS BEEN A GENUINE MISUNDERSTANDING AND THAT ANY BREACH OF REGULATIONS WHICH MAY HAVE OCCURRED WAS PURELY ACCIDENTAL. THE OWNERS OF THE SHIPS' COMPANY HAVE ALREADY TELEGRAPHED THE CHINESE MARITIME AUTHORITIES EXPRESSING REGRET FOR ANY SUCH INADVERTANT BREACH. IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF THE CHINESE AUTHORITIES COULD PROVIDE US WITH COPIES OF THE UP-TO-DATE REGULATIONS AT THE VARIOUS PORTS.
5. YOU SHOULD END BY ASKING THE FOREIGN MINISTRY ONCE MORE FOR THEIR CO-OPERATION IN RESOLVING THIS MATTER WITHOUT DELAY AND IN OBTAINING THE SPEEDY RELEASE OF THE OFFICERS CONCERNED. IN THE MEANTIME WE MUST ASK FOR A REPORT ON THE WHEREABOUTS AND STATE OF HEALTH OF THE OFFICERS AND IMMEDIATE CONSULAR ACCESS TO THEM.
6. IF THE FOREIGN MINISTRY COMPLAIN ABOUT THE OCEAN STEAMSHIP COMPANY'S DECISION TO DIVERT ‘‘GLENAFFRIC’’ (AND INDED TO SUSPEND SAILINGS TO CHINA) YOU SHOULD SAY THAT IN VIEW OF THE CONTINUING UNCERTAINTY ABOUT THE ERRORS ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN COMMITTED ON "ANCHISES" AND ‘‘GLENFALLOCH’’, IT WAS HARDLY SUPRISING THAT THE OWNERS SHOULD BE UNWILLING TO RUN THE RISK OF A REPETITION OF THE INCIDENTS. YOU WERE AWARE THAT ON 16 MARCH THE OWNERS HAD TRIED TO SEE THE COMMERCIAL AND SHIPPING REPRESENTATIVES IN THE CHINESS MISSION IN LONDON, BUT DISAPPOINTINGLY HAD BEEN REFUSED A MEETING.
7. IF THEY COMPLAIN THAT ‘‘GLENAFFRIC’’ LEFT CHINESE WATERS WHEN STILL IN POSSESSION OF CHINESE CUSTOMS DOCUMENTS AND CHINESE CURRENCY, YOU SHOULD SAY THAT THE OWNERS WILL BE MAKING ARRANGEMENTS T0 RETURN THEM AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
8. AT SOME APPROPRIATE JUNCTURE YOU SHOULD PRESS FOR INFORMATION ABOUT THE OTHER BRITISH SUBJECTS IN DETENTION, AND THEIR EARLY RELEASE.
9. WE SHALL BE DISCUSSING THE ADVISABILITY OF A SEPARATE APPROACH BY THE COMMERCIAL SECRETARY WITH DENSON ON HIS ARRIVAL.
STEWART.
DEPARTMENTAL DISTRIBUTION:                            COPIES TO:
F.E.D.                                SHIPPING POL.DIV. BOT,CRED
H.K.D.                                         MARINE CREV/5, "   "
M.& T.D.
P.U.S.D.
NEWS D.
CONSULAR D.
CONFIDENTIAL


出处:英国外交部档案 FCO 21/696



没有评论:

发表评论