747.92/4–446: Telegram
The Chargé in Siam (Yost) to the Secretary of State
[Received April 5—11:20 p.m.]
336. Siam-Australian agreement [signed] 2 hours before receipt Deptel 215, April 1.37 Notes outlined mytel 327, April 337a signed same time.
Before receipt Dept’s instructions we did not feel justified officially protesting but made known our strong disapprobation Article XI which led Siam insistence exchange notes designed meet our objections. Apparently Evatt personally drafted urtel even [Article eleven?] and refused to change it. Australia took position Khuang Govt committed itself to text agreement which ready to be signed when Khuang Govt fell.38 Present Govt while insisting on exchange of notes felt it could go no farther. (Though we asked Seni on several occasions during recent weeks concerning progress Australian negotiations he gave no indication of any difficulty or any substantial departure from Eastman–Wiwat letters contemplated.)
Have presented gist Deptel 215 to Foreign Minister who hoped Dept’s objections met by exchange notes which on our suggestion he will publish with text agreement. It possible to request govts concerned not to ratify agreement but feel exchange notes substantially nullifies effect offensive article. However, since interpretation Article XI outlined mytel 327 appears in notes only as “understanding of the Govt of Siam” which merely “noted” by Australian plenipotentiary we recommend Australian Govt be asked officially to accept this interpretation.
Other clauses do not vary substantially from Eastman Wiwat letters.