FRANCE AND SIAM

Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24895, 7 June 1946, Page 8

FRANCE AND SIAM

RECENT BORDER DISPUTE

COMMENT BY PARIS NEWSPAPER (P.A.) WELLINGTON, June 6. “While much has been published lately putting forward the viewpoint of Siam, I have not seen the French side adequately presented,” said the French Minister, M. Armand Gazel, discussing the border dispute between the Siamese and the French over the three IndoChina provinces Siam took during the Vichy regime. Mr Gazel said that though the Siamese were anxious to refer the matter to the United Nations, the French would never agree because they did not recognise the alleged annexation of the provinces.

M. Gazel has received by cablegram from Paris the following editorial comment from “Le Monde”:

“The decision of the SecretaryGeneral of UNO not to bring the Siamese protest before the council was not occasioned only by the informal nature of the protest—Siam is an exenemy State and not a member of the United Nations—but mainly because of i 3 gross exaggeration. It may even be suggested that the professed powerlessness of the Siamese authorities to prevent foreign nationals from crossing the frontier is a much more serious matter, in that it encourages troublemakers and hinders French efforts to restore peace and order to Laos. It is clear that this is only a pretext on the part of the Bangkok Government, which would like peace established on the present basis, retaining the territories snatched from Cambodia and Laos in 1941. France is opposed to this. In Saigon recently she refused to sanction pure and simple annexation by Siam, or to accept the decision of a plebiscite which would be obviously ‘cooked’ beforehand by five years of occupation.

“Siam was obviously reluctant to have a direct interview with France on the subject, and so made her protest to an international body. “In asking for restitution of the provinces of Battamlang, Bassac, and Paklay, France insists that the discussion be based on the principles of law for which the United Nations fought—the nullity of acquisitions made by force. Such an attitude cannot be attacked. The United States of America and Britain are prepared to uphold it. France is confident in the support of her allies and the triumph of her cause. She also knows that a settlement of this affair, which has been hanging fire too long, will be the best solution •of the frontier difficulties which are apparently causing such a stir in Bangkok, and which will stop immediately if no advantage is to be gained.”