747.92/4–1246: Telegram
The Chargé in Australia (Minter) to the Secretary of State
us urgent
[Received April 13—4:58 a.m.]
51. Deptel 47, April 1 and mytel 41, April 3. I finally was able to see Evatt April 9 re Siamese treaty. He began by saying that he had heard of my representations and that he considered the interference of my Govt to be an unfriendly act to which I replied that my Govt might feel that their insistance on the clause was unfriendly to it. He was incensed with Officer and said that they were going to repudiate his action by refusing to ratify. I then recited the Dept’s views about as expressed in paragraph 4 of telegram 47 and he cooled off as far as resentment towards US was concerned and reiterated the intent as reported in my telegram 41. I asked why the clause itself could not have been modified if their intent was so innocent to which he replied that in his view the innocence was implicit in the language as it stands. [Page 964] I contended that my Govt did not think so nor did the British and French Govts (whose representatives had associated themselves with my representations on April 8 and 9 respectively). Evatt promised nothing then and because of preoccupation with visit of Fraser and Nash41 has not been persuaded to look at the question all this week.
However, his officials have not been idle and, knowing he will meet Officer at Singapore Monday morning for the showdown, have prepared a counter draft of clause 11 which they hope to have Evatt accept before they reach Singapore and which they hope the Siamese will accept as a part of the treaty instead of allowing the exchange of notes to stand. The new clause 11 reads the same through the word “navigation” and substitutes “to give the Govt of Australia reasonable notice of intention to conclude with any other govt or govts any bilateral or multilateral commodity agreements so as to give the Govt of Australia opportunity to approach those other govts should the agreements deal with commodities of which Australia is a substantial producer or consumer.” They cannot predict Evatt’s behavior but express the view that if this proposal is accepted, our objections should be substantially met.
[Here follows an account of further discussion between the Chargé and Mr. Evatt. The Chargé also included an observation that an associate of Mr. Evatt had remarked that Clause XI was aimed at the United States because it “was negotiating secret bilateral agreements with Siam to corner its production of tin, rubber and oil and that in fact the US has just about arrived at economic hegemony in Siam.”]
- New Zealand Prime Minister Peter Fraser and Minister of Finance Walter Nash.↩