892.014/8–2646
Memorandum of Conversation, by the Chief of the Division of Southeast Asian Affairs (Moffat)
| Participants: | Prince Wan Waithayakon, Head of Siamese Delegation to UN on Franco-Siamese Dispute; |
| Kuang Aphaiwong, Opposition Leader; | |
| Prince Kridakara; | |
| Luang Dithakar Bhakdi, Chargé d’Affaires, Siamese Legation; | |
| Mr. Kenneth P. Landon, SEA | |
| Mr. Abbot Low Moffat, SEA |
Prince Wan called at my request and I informed him that the French Ambassador had presented a strong note to the Acting Secretar of State this afternoon stating that the French investigations of the Siem Reap incident had clearly established to the satisfaction of the French Government at least the indirect responsibility of the Siamese Government for the incident. The French Government felt-therefore that it must withdraw its proposals to submit the disputed territories question to the International Court. It would require at least a year for a Court decision to be rendered and during that period the border would be open to further incidents. The French note stated in effect that the French Government could not be certain what action the military Commandant in Indochina would have to take to prevent further acts of aggression which might interfere with French pacification of Indochina. The French feel that the situation must be cleared up promptly and they will oppose any action deviating from this purpose such as pressing the dispute before the Security Council. In order to reach a prompt settlement they have authorized M. Guillaume Georges-Picot to carry on conversations semi-officially with the Siamese delegation.
Prince Wan stated that the reports from his Government show that the Siamese Government was in no way responsible for the Siem Reap incident and I informed him that the French note merely made the assertion and did not endeavor to argue the point.
He indicated, but obviously with some doubt, that he assumed the French Government had the right to withdraw its proposals for submitting the question to the Court but that he could not then feel bound not to press the matter before the Security Council. I explained that that was not a condition which the French imposed—it was merely a statement that they would oppose the submission invoking Articles 35 and 107.
I stated that the French Ambassador indicated definitely that the French Government would oppose the Siamese application for membership [Page 1071] so long as Siam was holding territory which it received through the help of Japan; that, however, if this matter could be settled before the adjournment of the General Assembly France itself would invoke Rule 6075 to raise again the Siamese membership application. Prince Wan inquired whether the Security Council could not recommend acceptance of the Siamese membership application conditional upon a Franco-Siamese settlement having been concluded before the General Assembly meeting. I replied that I did not know and suggested that he discuss this point with Georges-Picot. I stated that in connection with other matters and particularly our concern against a wholesale use of vetoes we had suggested to the French the possibility of a postponement of action on the Siamese application until the end of September. This would have the same effect as the present French plans without the actual exercise of a veto assuming a settlement is reached before the end of September.
Prince Wan said that he would like to meet with M. Georges-Picot as soon as possible and it was arranged that M. Georges-Picot dine with Prince Wan this evening and meet the delegation tomorrow morning.
- United Nations, Security Council Official Records, First Year, Second Series, Supplement No. 4, p. 53.↩