THE talks this week between Britain and China have been widely welcomed in Hongkong as a sign some form of agreement may be reached on electoral arrangement for 1994-95.
After a half-year of intemperate and often abusive propaganda from Beijing, the sense of relief is understandable. But let it not be so strong as to sweep away our reasonable expectations and requirements as to what course these talks should take, and what result they should achieve, if Hongkong's interests are to be well served.
We must hope these talks eventually produce some acceptable answers. But for the moment, they are producing only new questions, many disturbing in nature. Here are the most important of them.
Is Hongkong to be represented? The present situation seems to be cloudy. China insists the talks are between the British ambassador to Beijing and a Chinese vice-minister of foreign affairs, and it has accused Britain of ''pulling little tricks'' by releasing the names of Hongkong officials who will, according to Britain, attend the talks.
There may be some sort of ''agreement to disagree'' of the kind which exists as a nod and a wink between the two parties, but which rarely finds its way into written form. By agreeing to start the talks on this basis, Britain and the Governor, Mr Chris Patten, are taking the calculated risk that China will not call into question this ''agreement to disagree'' once the talks have started, and will not make fresh attacks on the British claim that Hongkong is ''represented''.
Why did China initially try to totally ban the Hongkong media from covering the talks? Yesterday's partial lifting of that ban, with the announcement that journalists will be allowed to attend photocalls in Beijing, only shows that China is still edging towards what is acceptable.