WHERE DOES THAILAND STAND?

New Zealand Listener, Volume 5, Issue 119, 3 October 1941, Page 10

WHERE DOES THAILAND STAND?

"Will Not Voluntarily Become A Japanese Pawn’ -Says MARC. T. GREENE, in this article written for "The Listener"

SINCE he was last in New Zealand two years ago Marc T. Greene (right), well known American journalist and authority on the Far Easthe is Far Eastern correspondent for the " Baltimore Sun" and "Providence Journal" --has covered a lot of ground. In his search for news and sidelights on the vast problem of the Pacific and ‘its

new era Of power politics, Mr. Greene has had his ear to the ground in many distant places. He has not been in Japan since 1937, and he says that at the present moment there are probably not more than two American correspondents in Tokyo, one of those who have stuck to their guns in the face of mounting hostility to Americans being the "New York Times" correspondent, Otto D. Tolischus. At a time when any day may bring bad news, Mr. Greene believes that the issue of war or peace in the Pacific depends on the firmness with which Britain and the U.S, jointly proclaim their unbending resistance to further Japanese aggression, Mr, Greene believes that Britain, America and the Netherlands East Indies have already come to a complete understanding about the Far East. In Japan, as far as he can gather, the temper of the military and the

temper of the people are two very different matters. The army and navy are still clamouring for the fulfilment of Japan’s supposed destiny to rule Asia and eventually the whole world, with the navy particularly anxious for action. The civilian population, although morale is boosted by means of frequent injections of propaganda, are

sadly aware that they have a long and bitter war on their hands in China. On the long China fronts, says Mr. Greene, there is still a stalemate, and he does not believe there has been any large scale engagement for many a month. Reports of major actions, with claims of 10,000 and 20,000 men being wiped out, he dismisses as " poppycock." Regarding New Zealand’s position in relation to tension in the Pacific, Mr. Greene is reassuring. "I’ve heard far too much alarmist talk here and in Australia," he says. "You must not forget America’s vital interest in the Pacific, and that means interest in New Zealand too." The accompanying survey of events in ‘Thailand during the past few years is the first of two articles which Mr. Greene has written for The Listener." His second article will deal with ‘the present condition of the Japanese people,

ENSORSHIP of various sorts Cc and in various places has prevented many important details of the position in Thailand from reaching the outside world. The result is that considerable misunderstanding exists, and possibly something less than full justice is being done to the Thais. It is being represented that this little country is. practically a pawn of Japan, and in some quarters the charge is even made that the acceptance of the Japanese offer to mediate the boundary dispute, with such favourable results to ‘Thailand, was equivalent to joining the Axis pact. ¢ Nothing has happened so far that in any way justifies such an accusation, What is still to happen is, of course, one of the questions of the hour in the Far East, and it is by no means impossible that the general suspicion of Thailand’s attitude in respect of Japan will turn out to be justified. But all that is speculative, Let us explore briefly the situation as it is at the moment. I have recently returned from Bangkok where I was when the mediation agreement was reached in Tokyo. On -that same day I had a long talk with Nai (the Thai word equivalent to " Mister ") Direk Tainam. He is the deputy Foreign Minister; always the spokesman for the Government to foreign diplomatic representatives and correspondents. The portfolios of Foreign Minister, also of Minister of the Interior and of Minister for Defence, are held by Gen, Luang (a word somewhat equivalent to " Honorable ") Pibul Songgram, who is likewise President of the Council of Ministers, He himself rarely sees anybody. A Young Man’‘s Country Direk Tainam-the surname is a kind of Anglicizing for convenience of a long and unpronounceable Thai name-is a very keen Western-educated young man. In point of fact, most of the Thai leaders are young men, generally under. forty, It is, in effect, a young man’s country. For that very reason a certain amount of naivete, if not unsophistication, appears to characterise diplomatic dealings with foreign countries. The chances are therefore very much against the Thai leaders when they are dealing with such a combination of cleverness and lack of scruple as is the Japanese diplomacy. I came away with the firm conviction that if the Thais are being made, or are to be made in the future, a Japanese pawn, it will not be voluntarily, and that the process will be resisted so far as a small and weak country is capable of resistance. That is the assurance still given by the Thai Government, with the added promise to the world to " fight to the last" against attempts by anybody to grab any of their territory-for military bases or otherwise. Whether this promise will be fulfilled only time can tell, but I can state cate.

gorically that when I left all stories that the Japanese had already established military bases in Thailand were without the slightest foundation, Also without foundation are the rumours that Japan has "advisors" in the Thai Government, though that is not to say that the Japanese Legation in Bangkok may mot be in closer relations with that government than the usual course of diplomacy involves. Allowance must, of course, be made for such possibilities, But none of the foreign officials with whom I talked in Bangkok was of the opinion that the Thai Government was being dominated by the Japanese. Bloodless Revolution Before anyone is in a position to criticise the Thais or their recent moves he must know something of their history, also of the events of the nine years that have elapsed since the bloodless revolution — perhaps the only revolution in-

volving radical political changes in history that has been bloodless. True, some blood was shed later, in 1935, when, very much under the impulsion of certain foreign interests, reactionaries attempted to stage a counter revolution for the purpose of re-establishing the old absolutist regime. It was then that Gen. Songgram, one of the military leaders of the original revolution, having determined beyond question that the Prime Minister, the Foreign Minister, and the Defence Minister were all shaky in their allegiance to the new regime, " retired" them and at different intervals up to 1939 took over these porfolios himself, Nothing happened to the foregoing officials, two of whom still live in the country, But several other officials as well as three or™four militarists in the Teactionary group were executed, The assertion by an American writer in a well-known American review that " fifty generals and seventeen officials were

executed" is an absurd mis-statement. There are not and never have been a quarter as many "generals" in the entire Thai army. According to present Thai officials the number actually executed was seven. It is impossible to check the accuracy of that statement, but all foreigners of consequence in Thailand agree that the higher figure was ridiculous, An Unfortunate Business This attempt at counter revolution was an unfortunate business and did Siam no good in the eyes of the world. And Gen, Songgram’s assumption of the various portfolios was immediately pronounced a dictatorial move along typical totalitarian lines, no doubt incited and aided by Japan, There is no evidence that it was anything of the sort, The present Thai Government is, as a matter of fact, not at all totalitarian. What it has undertaken to do is to replace a political and social regime of medieval feudalism with a modern state along the lines of the British concept of a constitutional monarchy, likewise with a strong receptivity to American democratic ideology. Anyone can see this if he cares to look. Under the old regime more than half the country’s revenue went into the "privy purse" and out of this the vast "royal family," its entourage, retainers, satellites and servitors were supported in luxury. A very easy moral standard prevailed, and I well remember that, when I was in Siam in 1930, I was shown at least two palaces where princes of the royal family kept their favourite mistresses, Everybody in the country paid what was called a " capitation-tax"’ of five ticals annually. This, with low import and export duties, was quite enough to keep the " privy purse" full. The Boundary Controversy ' But to dwell briefly on that part of Thai history which concerns the boundary controversy: The first slice of Siam was carved away by the French in 1863, previous to which the Thai eastern boundary was within fifty miles of the Gulf of Tonkin and the northern far into what is now China. The French were not, of course, the only ones to bite chunks out of Siam; but although that is now an ancient story, and has no bearing on the present situation, it is rather startling to consult an old map and discover what Siam once was and then consider the attenuated condition to which it has been reduced to-day. Nor is it true that the Thais" said nothing about the boundary in the east until France had collapsed. The fact is that the Thais made their first claim upon France for a rectification of the boundary in 1936. It was, as you may suppose, greeted with little more than derision by France. The Thais were treated like children and perhaps they cannot justly be expected to have forgotten that. In any case, what they asked for was not so much a return of land as the restoration of navigation rights on the upper Meenam river. These rights are of vital importance to them. The position (Continued on next page)

THAILAND PUZZLE (Continued from previous page) is this: According to the convention of 1893 when the largest grab of all by France took place, and French gunboats blockaded Bangkok when Siam tried to resist, the Meenam bécame the boundary and the Thais were forced to withdraw from territories on the left bank possessed for hundreds of years. They were not only forced to withdraw but, in violation of ihternational custom adhered to everywhere in cases of a river being a boundary, they were deprived of riparian rights except where the river was free of islands. This sounds harmless enough, ‘but the actual position is that the river is full of islands along at least half of the section where it is the boundary, Here the Thais were compelled to keep to the waters between these islands and the Thai shores; and the catch in this is that such waters are not navigable, and that as soon as Thai transport ‘reached them it had to be turned over to French interests for the rest of the voyage southward. This involved not only great inconvenience to the Thais, but whatever exorbitant expense French interests chose to impose. The restoration of these riparian rights is of far more importance to the Thais than the land recovery. The latter amounts to about 70,000 square miles of the 450,000 or so that the Thais have lost to France since 1863. The regained triangle in Laos is partly teak forest and partly swampy jungle, the area in Cambodia is valuable rice land. But the restoration of the navigation rights very greatly expedites and cheapens the transport of teak from the northern forests, and teak growing is Thailand’s second industry. Help Accepted From Japan Thailand has recovered all this with the aid of the Japanese, and no one questions that it is -unfortunate that aid should come from a source at the moment so generally discredited and suspected. Yet the report is that the Thais submitted the matter of the boundary dispute to the American and British Governments last summer and asked what the attitude of those governments would be if Thailand at last undertook to recover by force what she had been unable-and was very likely to go on being unable — to do until France had ceased to be in a position to scorn her claims. Both Governments, it seems, urged Thailand to respect the status quo, the Far Eastern position being what it was. Learning this, the Japanese made their offer. I cannot find a shred of seer ak

support the charge that prior to making it the Japanese placed before the Thai Government certain "conditions" and that these were accepted. It is, naturally, impossible to discover just how far the Japanese may have gone in permitting the Thais to assume that the mediation would favour them. It is obviously impossible to say, and merely reckless to speculate, upon what the Japanese will presently demand as a " reward " for that favouring. If the Thais really believe, as they insist they do, that the Japanese will ask nothing and that they mediated

at all merely in order to " increase their prestige in south-east Asia," then the Thais are either unpleasantly evasive or very naive. Knowing them pretty well and liking them as agreeable people, I am strongly inclined to reach the latter conclusion and I think it is the fairest. " A Very Unwise Thing " Yet the fact femains that the Thais have received from Japan what is clearly the equivalent of a valuable service. It is equally- and very unpleasantlyobvious that they have thus placed themselves in Japan’s debt. Even their best

friends cannot acquit them of the charge of having done a very unwise thing, especially at this juncture. Nor is it impossible that the result will be a complete alienation of Thailand from friendly relations with the Western democracies, perhaps even a large measure of subservience to Japan. But at the moment I think the strongest accusation that can be made against the Thais is one of indis@etion, rather than of: deliberate and voluntary acquiescence in Japan’s grandiose schemes, to the detriment of the interests of old friends like America and England.