Canberra, 8 October 1971
Secret
In order to make direct contact with Mr. Kibel, I spoke to him at his home in Melbourne at about 6 p.m. and referred to the call Sir John Bunting had had from Mr. Hamilton.2
2. Mr. Kibel said he was extremely tired, but was hoping to come to Canberra early next week. He believed that he had done all he could in Hong Kong, that the urgency of obtaining a reaction from the Chinese had been emphasised, that the list of names had now to be taken to Peking and that the earliest we could hope for a response would be Tuesday or Wednesday of next week. He thought one issue still under consideration by the Chinese might be the precise timing of the visit.
3. Mr. Kibel said that he had hammered the Chinese as far as he dared about whether Australian attitudes to China in the United Nations would affect the mission.3 The Chinese had always raised the subject of the United Nations, indicating that this was a topic of importance to them, but had always responded to the effect that the Australian stance at the United Nations would not affect the visit. In response to a specific question, he said that he did not think it likely that there would be acceptance of a mission, and then retraction because of the United Nations stance or any other factor. The Chinese would be unlikely to go as far as they had if they were intending to nip off the mission, because of their deliberate way of proceeding and the possible loss of face involved. The general mood in Hong Kong had been friendly.
4. He regarded it as vital that there be no advance publicity—and the Chinese had emphasised this. He and Mr. Bareham had impressed on the Chinese the need for speed. In response to a further specific question, he said he thought there was just a possibility that the Chinese could inform Bareham of their acceptance of the mission and at the same time release information to selected papers in Hong Kong.
5. The Chinese had been impressed by the list of names presented, particularly that of the Leader. They had been happy that there had been no firms with United States affiliations involved.
[NAA: A1838, 3107/38/18/2/1, i]