Foreign Relations of the United States, 1946, The Far East, Volume VIII

892.014/6–446: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Chargé in Siam (Yost)

confidential

Washington, June 4, 1946—9 p.m.

459. 1. On May 28, Secretary General received telegram dated May 27 from President Siamese Council of Ministers. Bhakdi May 31 submitted memorandum to Secretary General⁸¹ listing considerable detail border incidents of past 6 months. Comments below are summary of Dept’s view of procedural aspects of President’s communication. The comments also apply procedural aspects memorandum submitted by Bhakdi.

(1) The President’s communication accuses France of “forcibly seizing Siamese territory”, of “concerted action against Siamese sovereignty and the preservation of peace” and of “unjustified aggression”. The communication does not, however, specifically bring the matter to the attention of the Security Council or the General Assembly and it does not meet the requirements of Article 35(2) by stating that the Siamese Government accepts in advance the obligations of pacific settlement provided in the Charter. The only request the communication contains is an appeal for the sympathy, assistance and cooperation of the Secretary General in “re-establishing a peaceful basis for the advancement of humanitarian objects”.

(2) The Secretary General has circulated the President’s telegram and Bhakdi’s memorandum to the representatives on the Security Council but he has not placed the matter on the Security Council’s agenda. Under the Charter and the Provisional Rules of Procedure of the Security Council the Secretary General is not obligated to place it on the Council’s agenda. The Dept feels that in the absence of a specific request from the Siamese Government that the Secretary General bring it to the Council’s attention and in the absence of specific acceptance by the Siamese Government of the obligations of pacific settlement provided in the Charter the matter may not properly be placed on the Council’s agenda for its consideration except under the circumstances outlined below.

(3) The matter could be placed on the Council’s agenda for its consideration in any of the following ways.

(a) The Siamese Government itself could bring the matter to the attention of the Security Council as a dispute under Article 35(2). Should it so choose, the Siamese Government should specifically request the Secretary General to bring the matter to the attention of the Security Council as a dispute to which it is a party and specifically accept, in advance, for the purposes of the dispute, the obligations of pacific settlement provided in the Charter.

(b) The Secretary General under Article 99 could bring it to the attention of the Security Council as a matter which in his opinion may threaten the maintenance of international peace and security. He has not done so and we believe it unlikely that he will do so without further representations from the Siamese Government.

(c) Any Member of the United Nations could bring it to the attention of the Security Council under Article 35(1) either as a dispute or as a situation which might lead to international friction or give rise to a dispute. This has not been done and we have no evidence that it will be done.

(4) Similarly, the matter could be brought to the attention of the General Assembly at its meeting in September either by a Member pursuant to Article 35(1) or by the Siamese Government pursuant to Article 35(2).

2. Foregoing views expressed May 28 to Bhakdi and Konthi re Bhakdi memorandum. Konthi definitely implied Siamese not anxious to place matter on agenda but only to lay publicity foundation for future.

3. This telegram for information only. For U.S. policy see telegram No. 458 of June 4.

Byrnes

81. The memorandum, presumably the letter referred to in telegram 546, May 24, from Bangkok, p. 1002, was quoted in telegram 264, May 31, from New York, not printed. The memorandum called attention to the noticeable deterioration of relations between Siam and France since the termination of the war and the prevalence of a tense situation on the Siam–Indochina borders despite the good will manifested by the Siamese Government. It concluded with the details of various incidents by the French, classified under arbitrary arrest of Siamese nationals, wanton fusilades from the French bank of the Mekong, plunder and looting, violations of Siamese territory, and arbitrary control of Mekong River traffic, search of Siamese boats and confiscation of properties belonging to Siamese nationals. (501.BC/5–3146) The United Nations Security Council printed the text of the memorandum in Document S/72, a copy of which is in depository libraries of the United Nations.