Skip to main content

Historical documents

196 Note by Eastman

CANBERRA, 17 November 1949


Official relations between Australia and Thailand, as seen from
the Bangkok end, are at present worse than they have been at any
stage in the past. This results from the cumulative effect of our
unfriendly postwar attitude and in particular from the following
specific acts and decisions:-

(a) Whereas the United States ignored the Thai declaration of war,
Australia, in conjunction with United Kingdom and India, insisted
on more or less onerous peace agreements before terminating the
state of war;

(b) Whereas the U.K. and India signed a final peace agreement on
1st January, 1946, and terminated the state of war a few days
later, Australia did not present its final peace agreement until
March 1946 and did not terminate the state of war until
approximately July 1946;

(c) We included in our peace agreement Article XI [1], which was
over and above the demands of U.K. and India and was resented as
an infringement of sovereignty;

(d) When Thailand asked for financial assistance in 1946 to
rehabilitate trade, we refused although U.K., India and U.S.A.

extended loans or credit;

(e) We were the only prominent nation not to extend an invitation
to Pridi during his goodwill tour in 1946, although it had been
hinted that he would appreciate an invitation;

(f) Although I was appointed Consul-General in Thailand in
September 1946, we refused until September 1947 to agree to
reciprocal representation here;

(g) We were the only country to refuse recognition to the Khuang
Government (November 1947 - May 1948);

(h) Although all other countries recognised the Pibul Government
immediately in May 194 8, we withheld recognition until July or

(i) We continue to freeze privately-owned Thai funds in Australia,
although similar funds in U.K. and U.S.A. have long since been

(j) The activities of the Immigration Department in relation to
Kularb Saipradit, Nang Cherm Bulgetr and a number of Thai students
[2] in Melbourne created official as well as public resentment in
Thailand. These cases have been explained fully by me to the Thai
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but they remain sceptical and

(k) The general operation of our immigration policy in relation to
Asiatics is poorly received;

(l) The prominent part which Australia played in trying to prevent
the handing over to Thailand of certain gold in Japan [3] aroused
keen resentment;

(m) Our strong attitude in pressing for settlement of war damage
claims on our own terms (which the Thais regard as unreasonable)
has had a similar effect;

(n) Our blunt refusal to consider exchange of legations before
full settlement of war claims has provoked an unfriendly public
statement by the Thai Minister of Foreign Affairs.

2. As against this imposing list of unfriendly acts, the only
tangible gestures of goodwill to which we can point in the last 4
years are the 4 or 5 UNESCO fellowships and the educational
supplies which were promised over a year ago but have still not
been delivered.

3. If a similar attitude had been adopted by other Allied powers,
the combined effect might perhaps have been salutary and war
damage claims might perhaps have been settled more promptly and
satisfactorily. For various reasons of their own, however, the
other powers entered into full diplomatic relations with Thailand,
and U.K. and U.S.A., in particular, have been sedulously courting
the Thais for some time. In these circumstances our continued
bluntness and unfriendliness have had merely an irritating instead
of a wholesome effect on Thailand.

4. Whether or not the Australian attitude has been wise or
necessary and whether or not the Thai Government has been
unreasonable in some or all of its reactions, the fact is that we
have succeeded in building up a considerable store of illwill in
official and political circles in Thailand. In view of the
importance which the Government attaches to friendly relations
with South East Asia, it is a matter for consideration whether
some positive steps might not be taken to remedy the situation.


5. I should mention that a small but satisfactory amount of
goodwill towards Australia is to be found in non-official circles
in Thailand as a result of friendly personal contacts between Thai
students and the Australian public.

1. Article XI Siam undertook to inform and confer 'with the
Government of Australia regarding any proposed international
arrangements relating to tin, rubber, oil or other commodities'
and 'not to complete such arrangements unless the Government of
Australia has bee. given an opportunity to become a party

2 Cases involving overstaying . temporary entry permit and the
alleged ill treatment of students.

3 See Document 358.

4 The Australian Consulant-General, Bangkok, was raised to a
Legation in 1951. In 1952 Thailand established a Legation in

Malayan Emergency

[AA:A1838, 451/3/1/2]
Last Updated: 11 September 2013
Back to top