Foreign Relations of the United States Diplomatic Papers, 1935, The Far East, Volume III

792.94/22

The Minister in Siam (Baker) to the Secretary of State

No. 250

Bangkok, July 18, 1935.
[Received August 9.]

Sir: I have the honor to transmit the following reply to the Department’s instruction No. 88, of May 21, 1935,⁵² concerning relations between Siam and Japan.

Since the abdication of King Prajadhipok, which occurred March 2, 1935, the press releases from Tokyo to American newspapers, especially those to the New York Times, have been frequent and persistent in asserting the existence of a close alliance between Siam and Japan and have stated in fact that a secret treaty exists between the two countries.

On May 4th Prince Varnvaidya, Adviser to the Premier, addressed a personal note to me in relation to this subject. A copy of the note, which is self-explanatory, is enclosed.⁵³

The receipt of the note from Prince Varnvaidya gave me the opportunity for a conference with the Premier, which I obtained immediately. At this conference it was suggested to me that I issue a statement as minister to the Associated Press here, based upon the authority of the Siamese Government, making a denial of the statements published in the New York Times, whereupon I suggested that a denial by Prince Damras, the Siamese Minister in Washington, under instructions from the Siamese Government, would be decidedly more effective. I called attention especially to the statement about a secret treaty, and the Premier stated that specific denial would be made to that statement. This latter course was taken. A copy of the statement as published is enclosed.⁵⁴

Immediately upon the receipt here in July of the New York Times containing the statement of Prince Damras, I delivered a copy of the statement to the Premier, who was very much pleased with the authorized published statement. This statement, since it bears the authorization of the Siamese Government, should have an excellent effect, except possibly in Japan. I have received comments upon it from both the British and French Legations.

Between May 2nd and July 6th I have had several interesting interviews with the Premier which have touched upon the foreign relations of Siam, particularly those with Japan. On June 11th the Premier informed me that he had a report from Prince Damras that the statement of the Siamese Government, as above mentioned, had been published in the New York Times. In the same interview he discussed the text of the statement and gave me an outline of the policies of the Siamese Government. Among his remarks he stated that there would be no entangling alliances with other nations; that the Government’s main objectives were to better the conditions of the Siamese people, particularly the farmers, and to improve educational facilities; that his Government was seeking to increase the national export of rice; and that it intended to maintain pleasant commercial relations with all countries. He mentioned the fact that Siam was on friendly terms with Japan and had given concerns of that nation contracts for the construction of two vessels, as they were the lowest bidders, also saying that two Japanese road engineers had been employed for road construction work for the reason that their compensation was low, and that some other Japanese had been employed for the same reason since economy had to be practiced to bring the expenses of the Government within the budget. He said further that his Government had given a contract to an English concern for two naval vessels, that it had also given a contract to an Italian concern, and that it was buying aircraft from America and expected to place additional orders. The Premier asked me at the time to furnish him with the address of the leading airport in Virginia, since the new Minister to the United States, Phya Abhibal, would inquire of the American Government whether the Siamese Government could send three military officers to the school there for instruction in aviation; I subsequently gave him the address of Langley Field, Hampton, Virginia, and also furnished him the address of the Marine Base at Quantico, Virginia. The Premier in his interview referred also to the fact that he had sent officers to the Philippine Islands, the United States, England, and France. The general tenor of his remarks indicated that Siam, while following an independent policy, was in no way aspiring to or seeking to cultivate the friendship of Japan at the expense of other nations.

The letter of Prince Varnvaidya to me clearly shows that the Siamese Government was concerned over the press releases from Tokyo to the New York Times.

While it is true that Japan is increasing her volume of cheap goods shipped to Bangkok, this may be regarded as a strictly competitive commercial development. There are only two hundred Japanese residents in Siam; their number has not noticeably increased in recent years, their pursuits are mainly commercial, and they do not exert a significant influence through relations with government circles nor offer the same problems with regard to the pursuit of occupations not related to the Japanese import trade as exist in other countries in this part of the world. In contrast, the Chinese population of pure stock in Siam is generally estimated at one million, while the Siamo-Chinese who are half or more of Chinese blood are estimated at an additional million. These Chinese and Siamo-Chinese practically control the commerce of Siam in its internal structure, owning the retail stores and being engaged in trade and transportation throughout the country, besides supplying the capital, management, and labor for a large portion of the industrial enterprises in Bangkok; they also control a large portion of the import and export trade. Their position will no doubt represent an obstacle to the increase of Japanese influence in Siam.

In March 1935 when the constitutional government accepted the abdication of King Prajadhipok, the British and French Ministers both informed me that so long as law and order prevailed in Siam and the new regime maintained a stable government, the situation would be acceptable to their Governments.

I shall continue to follow the situation carefully, as it appears that the topic of a rapprochement between Siam and Japan will receive attention in the local press and the world press for some time to come, and I shall promptly report any developments that tend to bear out the establishment of a rapprochements.⁵⁵

Respectfully,

James M. Baker

52. Not printed; see reply to the Siamese Minister on May 21, p. 178.
53. Not printed.
54. New York Times, May 25, 1935, p. 7, col. 5.
55. The Chargé in Siam in his despatch No. 439, October 30, 1936, however, reported that “the recent trend in relations of Siam and Japan reveals a distinct lack of political leaning and a commercial policy without evidence of preference on the part of the Siamese Government toward Japan.” (792.94/32)