792.02/12–551

Memorandum by the Director of the Office of Philippine and Southeast Asian Affairs (Lacy) to the Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs (Allison)

restricted

Subject: Mr. Peake’s Memorandum “Recognition of New Regime in Thailand”1

The question of recognition of the recent constitutional and governmental changes in Thailand was not raised because King Phumiphon continued without interruption as Chief of State. If He had not sanctioned those changes and had been forced to abdicate then of course the question would have been raised. Those forces which brought about the changes were also those who have been in charge of the government since 1947 without interruption. Furthermore, they are the very elements which have identified themselves in purpose with the free nations of the world opposing Communism. The fact that the King has approved of the changes indicates his acknowledgement that there could be no successful opposition of an internal political nature.

The memorandum under question mentions “the strength of constitutional forces involved” and the “lessening of faith in democratic processes.” As far as Thailand is concerned, the Government has always been authoritarian whether under the absolute monarchy or during the constitutional regime which began on June 24, 1932. During the last twenty years Thailand has had a one-party form of government which was initiated under the 1932 constitution. The recent changes were aimed against a drift toward possible multiple party government. The 1948 constitution provided for multiple political parties; the parliament as previously constituted provided a platform for splinter opposition groups which attacked the government on every occasion; elections were due in March 1952; and the King, an unknown quantity Thai politics, was due to arrive. The conjunction of these factors made the governmental elements decide to recreate a situation more favorable to one-party government. Consequently, the recent coup was not against any political organization or group as such but against the current constitution and the parliament. Even though Thailand has developed a certain amount of democratic equipment during the past twenty years, it has not yet learned to use it in a [Page 1643] democratic way and apparently prefers a more authoritarian form of government.

It is expected that very shortly the Thai Government will take a stronger and public stand against Communism and will enact anti-Communist legislation while reaffirming its intention to fight with the free world against the Communists.

  1. Not printed. In this memorandum of December 5, which was addressed to Mr. Allison and to Mr. U. Alexis Johnson, Director of the Office of Northeast Asian Affairs, from Mr. Cyrus Peake, Intelligence Adviser to the Bureau of Far Eastern Affairs, the latest coup d’état was analyzed as a setback to the development of democracy in Thailand and in other Asian nations as well. Mr. Peake suggested that the United States consider the use of its latent veto over the situation through its ability to hold up aid programs. (792.02/12–551)