Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume XXVII, Mainland Southeast Asia; Regional Affairs

408. Memorandum of Conversation¹

Bangkok, November 16, 1968.

SUBJECT

• Politics in Thailand

PARTICIPANTS

• H.E. Pote Sarasin, Minister of National Development
• Ambassador Unger

Replying to my question Pote explained the origin of the policy statement and the rules of procedure which the SPT (Saha Pracha Thai) Party submitted on October 24 when the Party applied for registration and which were also distributed for discussion at the Party seminar this week. He said that about 2–1/2 years ago, when the decision to form a government party had first been made, he had agreed to undertake the preparation of some basic documents to set forth the policies of the projected party. He had called together a group of academic people and experienced civil servants and they had produced a thick set of documents, a copy of which he said he would send me if I wished; I replied affirmatively. Pote added that these documents represented a distillation of experience on constitutions and parliamentary governments around the world and were not specifically related to Thailandʼs situation.

More recently, according to Pote, General Sawaeng was given the task by the Party of taking the raw material mentioned above and distilling out of it party procedures and policy which would be appropriate to Thailand and the SPT Party. It is this which was submitted on October 24 at the time of registration. Pote added that Gen. Sawaeng was assisted in his efforts by Ari of the police and also by a former fellow-traveler, Prasert Sapsunthorn, who could supply language which would preempt possible propaganda points the Communists might try to score. Pote hastened to add that he wouldnʼt consider using an established Communist like Saeng Phatthanothai no matter how much he seems to have recanted, but a reformed fellow-traveler could be helpful. Referring to criticism over recent days of some of the borrowings from Communist models detected in the SPT documents, Pote said he was reminded of Bernard Shawʼs saying that just because your enemy goes to heaven, it doesnʼt mean you have to go to hell! The types of rules which he cited as having been criticized on these grounds sounded quite innocuous and seemed to bear out his point.

I then asked Pote what was his own view of all of the documents in question and he confessed that he had not yet read them. I promptly gave him to read an excerpt from “The Policies of the SPT Party”: Part II C, Foreign Affairs. He stopped at the reference in sentence one to the Revolutionary Party and seemed concerned that that Party was mentioned by name in the document; he professed to believe there had been an earlier agreement with Praphat and Thanom that the Revolutionary Party was no longer pertinent once the Constitution had come into effect and it should not figure in the policy documents. In due course Pote read on, finished the paper, expressed his general satisfaction with it and asked me what was the matter.

Although I had not said anything was the matter, I replied that it seemed strange to me that there would be no mention in a foreign affairs policy document of the Government Party of Thailand of the Thai effort to support the Government of South Vietnam, including the sending of more than 10,000 Thai troops. Pote promptly dismissed my doubts on the grounds that this was a basic policy statement expected to be pertinent over the long range and not to address itself to questions such as Viet-Nam which apply to the situation of the moment.

This brought us around to the question of the status of the documents submitted by the SPT Party on October 24. According to Pote they were then and still remain drafts, subject to some further revision, presumably by the Party leadership. He said that he had prevailed on the Prime Minister to agree to give further consideration to some of the complaints that had been raised at this weekʼs seminar and take them into account in the final drafting of the documents. Pote felt that the Party membership had been treated quite cavalierly and that at least some of their objections should be taken into account. When I mentioned Sanong he confirmed that he had been the cause of much of the complaining; Sanong, he remarked, is from Sawaengʼs office and has little understanding of how to deal with people in politics. Before we left this subject Pote made the point that at this stage when the Party is new, all the membership should be given an opportunity to express their views on party policy and some account of this should be taken in the final draft of the Partyʼs policy documents; later on anyone who wishes to join the Party will have to read the final documents and agree to abide by them or not join.

Pote gave me the impression that he had attended some of the seminar session. However, in reply to my question he said he had not attended Party leader Thanomʼs dinner and probably not the final meeting of the Party which immediately preceded. Pote explained that the dinner had originally been set for Friday and when it was advanced to Thursday it conflicted with an earlier engagement of his.

I then referred to the recent Senate decision on the electoral law in which several key provisions advocated by the Government had been rejected. In particular I stressed the proposal to which Pote himself had attached fundamental importance, i.e., that candidates, in order to qualify, had to stand for election as members of a registered political party. I expressed some astonishment that a Senate appointed by the Government should have been able to flaunt the clearly expressed wishes of the Governmentʼs leadership. Pote acknowledged that this should not have happened and noted his concern that candidates will now be able to play the old Thai game of running as independents and then, if successful, exacting their price for joining up and supporting a party after election; Pote also noted how unreliable that association and support was likely to be. Commenting on the Senateʼs action on the Governmentʼs proposals, he observed that both he and General Praphat had been absent and that they were the principal supporters of the requirement for party membership; he also identified Sanong as partly responsible for the Governmentʼs defeat because of his free-wheeling activities with the Senators.

At this point I delivered a brief lecture on how much more difficult it was to make a representative form of government work than an autocracy. I reviewed some of the operating practices followed in politics in the United States, noting the importance of political leaders maintaining constant touch with the legislative process, lining up support for bills, being sure the party leadersʼ wishes are known and that speakers and arguments are lined up in advance. I remarked that the Thai Government may turn out to have created a Frankenstein for itself unless the leadership gets down to the hard work of making parliamentary government work in the way it wished. There were others—notably the Communists—who would be happy to step in and take full advantage of the democratic machinery. In my view representative government would in the long run make a great contribution to stability in Thailand, particularly because of the role of an elected assembly as a watch-dog on public officials and a kind of “ombudsman” for the public. These benefits wouldnʼt be realized, however, unless political leaders worked hard to get the new system into effective operation.

Pote acknowledged this and said that the Senate action has taught the SPT Party a lesson and they will have to organize themselves better in the future. He remarked, however, that he couldnʼt be the kind of politician I was describing, available 24 hours a day for visiting provincial delegations, back-slapping and the like; he noted ruefully that this had been Khuang Aphaiwongseʼs great talent and he mentioned Dawee as having an ability to get along well with the politicians and to speak entertainingly at length (and say little or nothing). I said he, Pote, couldnʼt be expected to play this role but it was up to him and the other SPT leaders to see that capable people were selected to carry on the business of political organization and contact as a full-time job. Having in mind all his other responsibilities I wondered whether Dawee could also do his job as Secretary-General of the Party. While I recognized that the leading positions had to be staffed in name by prestigious persons, it was essential that full-time, hard-working and experienced people, perhaps younger men, do the every-day indispensable work.

Pote reverted to the problem of selection of candidates for the limited number of assembly seats out of the 900-odd individuals who have presented themselves, all claiming to have sure-fire vote-getting credentials. He mentioned specifically a 70-man farmersʼ group which has been urging its members on him. When he failed to promise them places on the SPT ticket the group then suggested he break away from the SPT Party and join them in a new party. Pote cited this as typical of Thai politics where the idea of continuing parties with clear policies, an organization and a body of supporters beyond the candidates themselves was virtually unknown. He took some satisfaction from the fact that the SPT Party has organized itself in advance of the elections contrary to the prevalent practice of the past in which parties really got organized only after the election was over and it was clear who had won.

As an aside Pote expressed the view that the Democrat Party will not do well outside of Bangkok. He continues to regard Seni as a largely unsuccessful successor of Khuang—“a professor rather than a politician”.

Pote asked me at one point what was the trouble with Thanat, pre-sumably with reference to his aloofness from the political scene; he wondered whether he was contemplating leaving the government. I said that Thanat, in my opinion, has not a great taste for politics and in any case he probably prefers to wait and see how this first round comes out. I noted, however, that Thanat on at least one occasion had indicated a willingness to continue to serve Thai governments in his present capacity. Pote acknowledged this and observed only that he guessed Thanat was primarily a professional man.

Pote also commented on his continuing satisfaction with Prime Minister Thanom, above all because of his continuing loyalty to King and religion, the prime cements of the Thai nation. He reminisced about Phibunʼs alienation from the King and said even Sarit had shown signs of beginning to feel above the monarchy toward the close of his regime. Thanom remains absolutely loyal.

Comment: Pote betrays a woeful lack of understanding of what must be done to make a democratic system work constructively and also a lack of disposition to involve himself very deeply in the process. Since this is true in large degree of most of the other top SPT Party leaders it suggests problems ahead for Thailandʼs first venture into parliamentary democracy in more than ten years. If, as seems to have been the case recently, matters are left largely to Gen. Sawaeng and his cohorts, some ill-considered decisions may be made and the differences between Praphatʼs group and the rest of the SPT Party leadership will be exacerbated. Pote was clearly shaken both by the Senate action and by the dissension evident at the SPT Party sessions and it is hoped that with continuous prodding he, and the other leaders, will begin at once to exert themselves more to exercise a guiding hand and to get some competent Party activists into operation.

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, POL 15 THAI. Secret. Copies were sent to Hannah, Hamilton, Jantzen, Godley, and Spear. Drafted by Unger. The meeting was held at Poteʼs residence.