Japan and Thailand Independence during World War II 1 Running Head: JAPAN AND THAILAND INDEPENDENCE DURING WORLD

WAR II

Japan and Thailand Independence during World War II: An Analysis of Japan-Thailand Relations before the Alliance Monsicha Hoonsuwan Drake University

Japan and Thailand Independence during World War II 2 Japan and Thailand Independence during World War II During Word War II, Japans southern advance resulted in Japans occupation of most of the Southeast Asian countries, primarily the former colonies of western powers, namely Britain, France, and the United States of America. Thailand was the only exception. During WWII, it had a self-ruling government, not a puppet government set up by the Japanese as in Manchukuo. It maintained its own right to decision-making regarding domestic and international policies. The country, under a leadership of nationalistic Prime Minister Phibun Songkhram, collaborated with Japan in its war effort, and finally declared war against the Allied powers. In other words, Thailand was the only country in Southeast Asia, and possibly in the whole East Asian continent, that decided to ally itself with Japan. The development of this alliance, however, was unclear and remains controversial. Thus, the nature of Thailand independence and the development of this alliance is worth investigating, as Japan did not permit any other countries in Asia to have the same rights to self-governing as Thailand had. Therefore, a question centering this essay concerns the Japanese decision to allow Thailand self-determination when it took over other countries in Asia by force, then occupied them as territories. After much research, the essay concludes that, Thailands independence during WWII was self-obtained, and did not result from the Japaneses will to exempt Thailand from being incorporated into one of its territories. That is, due to Thailands actions, the Japanese were prevented from occupying Thailand. The two factors that restrained the Japanese occupation were, firstly, Thailands practice of bamboo diplomacy, and secondly, Thailands ability to safeguard its sovereignty amidst the threats of colonization by the British and the French. Japanese domination of Thailand began on December 8, 1941, following the arrival of Japanese military forces from Cambodia and the sea. Skirmishes between the Japanese and Thai

Japan and Thailand Independence during World War II 3 forces occurred with casualties on the night of December 7. In the absence of Thai Prime Minister Phibun Songkhram, the Thai cabinet voted against the Japanese demand that Thailand allow Japanese troops to maneuver anywhere in the country. However, in the early morning of December 8, Prime Minister Phibun appeared and gave a cease fire order. Signing an OffensiveDefensive Alliance with Japan, the Thai government rationalized its decision as a preservation of the countrys sovereignty. The Japanese seized control of Bangkok, reported to be aided by some Japanese civilians (United States, 1944, p. 7). In a report by Office of Strategic Services, the Japanese control had an air of correctness and legality, which preserved for the Thais their selfrespect (United States, 1944, p. 1): Thailand was not invaded the Japanese obtained the right of transit across the country; Thailand is not patrolled by Japanese garrisons fifty thousand troops have permission to remain there to fight the common foe; Thailand was not forced to declare war on Great Britain and the United States she did so voluntarily under the terms of the Offensive-Defensive Alliance made with Japan; Thai economy is not controlled by Japanese shippers and manufacturers Thai banking and industry are merely participating in Greater East Asia co-prosperity (United States, 1944, p. 1). The Japanese objectives in Thailand could be sorted into two categories: the immediate objectives and the long-term objectives (United States, 1944, p. 3). Instantly, the Japanese wanted to use Thailands facilities the ports, airfields, and railways as a base to further advance into Burma and Malaya. At the same time, the Japanese wanted to make Thailand an ally who would supply Japan with food, equipment (planes, vehicles, and boats), facilities, and if possible, troops. Furthermore, the Japanese desired to include Thailand as a part of the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere as a long-term goal, which would permit Japan to control Thailands economy, foreign policy, and military affairs, through series of campaigns to indoctrinate the Thais and absorb them culturally, spiritually, and politically. The GEACPS was a political creation for the Japanese government with Japan at the center of the rational East Asia

Japan and Thailand Independence during World War II 4 system (Swan, 1996, p. 146). Thus, to include Thailand in the GEACPS meant Thailand would be treated in the same way as other East Asian states. According to Swan (1996), the Japanese intended to supervise all of the important sectors in the Thai economy, regulating closely the countrys position in the GEACPS. Hence, Thailand exemplified Japans whole new approach to its new order in East Asia (Swan, 1996, p. 143). The only thing that differed Thailand from other East Asian countries was its independence. As indicated in the policy plans, the Japanese had no intention to incorporate Thailand as one of its occupied territories as it did to Manchuria, Korea, Taiwan, and most of Southeast Asian countries. Of course, the Japanese government was determined to pay attention to upholding the honor of Thailand as an independent nation (Swan, 1996, p. 140), therefore, it sounded illogical to state that Thailand obtained its independence by itself. However, one needs to consider the fact that the Japanese had a capability to take over Thailand, but it decided not to. The decision to not take over Thailand could result from a combination of astute diplomacyand luck (Nuechterlein, 1965, p. 91) and the status of the country before joining the war. Thus, Japan sought to make Thailand its ally and seek cooperation instead of dominating the country. In the ultimatum rejected by the Thai cabinet on the night of December 7, Japan offered three alternatives to the country. First, Japan promised not to interfere with Thailands internal administration if the country allowed Japanese troops to maneuver to Burma and Malaya. Second, Thailand and Japan could form a defensive military alliance. Lastly, Thailand would join Japan in the war against the Allies in return for territories in the Malay Peninsula (Nuechterlein, 1965, p. 73). Japan viewed Thailand as a strategically important launching platform, and it could have used its military forces to incorporate Thailand into its empire

Japan and Thailand Independence during World War II 5 without having to make these offers at all. The Japanese could not, however, since they were restrained by Thailands self-governing status. Unlike other Southeast Asian countries, Thailand had never been colonized by Western powers, thus, having no need for the Japanese liberation (United States, 1944, p. 4). Taking over Thailand would jeopardize Japans plan for the New Order in East Asia greatly. Therefore, it needed other ways to gain Thailands cooperation. While Japanese at all levels did not wish their country to be seen as having invaded a friendly, neutral, Asian state, military considerations limited Tokyos flexibility (Reynolds, Anomaly or Model? Independent Thailand's Role in Japan's Asian Strategy, 1941-1943, 1996, p. 247). Hence, the Thai governments ability to maintain the countrys self-rule, regardless of being enclosed between two major imperialist powers, created a restraint on how much control the Japanese could impose on Thailand in order to achieve its goal of Pan-Asia (or the expansion of the Japanese empire, for that matter). The second factor manifested in a more intricate way. Thailands sovereignty during the imperialism era resulted partly from a skillful usage of bamboo diplomacy by the Thai government. Bamboo diplomacy, bending with the wind or sitting on the fence, became a characteristic of Thailands foreign policy. It helped Thailand avoid colonialism in the early 20th century, and it helped the country avoid, again during WWII, the Japanese occupation. During WWII, the country demonstrated skillful bamboo diplomacy by simultaneously collaborating with both Japan and the Allies. Consequently, Thailand suffered less than virtually any country in the Asian region during the war (Chen, 2007, Abstract). In order to understand how the use of bamboo diplomacy had ameliorated Thailands self-determination, the investigation of how the Japanese became a part of Thai wartime politics, one of the greatest circus performances of all time (Saunders, 1993, p. 611), is necessary.

Japan and Thailand Independence during World War II 6 Extremely proud of its independence, Thailands main objective in foreign policy was to preserve its sovereignty. Once the two most powerful imperialists, namely Britain and France, were weakened because of their engagement in WWII in Europe, Japan sought to exploit this advantage by exercising more power in Southeast Asia. Hence, Japan became Thailands new security threat. In 1940, Thailand first declared its neutrality and sought nonaggression pacts with Britain, France, and Japan. However, as soon as Thailand realized that the Allies could not offer help, it shifted its policy completely to cooperate with Japan. The problem for the government was to preserve the nations neutrality; and failing this, the next task was to reach an accommodation with whatever power presented the greatest danger (Nuechterlein, 1965, p. 67). Some Thai leaders also saw the cooperation with Japan as an opportunity to reclaim its territories ceded to Britain and France. In 1933, Thailand abstained from a vote of censure against Japan at the League of Nations, which was interpreted by the Japanese as a display of solidarity and praised it extravagantly (Reynolds, 1996, p. 244). It remains an open question whether Prime Minister Phibun was pro-Japan and disposed to a fascist view of foreign policy, using nationalism as a tool to pursue expansionist goals, or was Phibun an opportunist who sought anything beneficial to Thailand. Was merely fearful of the Japanese power? Nevertheless, many Japanese sources were quick to cite the Thais governments enthusiasm in joining the Japanese in WWII. Studies that have made substantial use of Japanese sources show a much earlier, more intense, and more willing Thai commitment to Japans aims in Southeast Asia (Batson & Hajime, 1990, p. 3). According to Batson and Hajime, Japanese sources provide some information not found in Thai sources. One of the information concerns Wanit Pananon, a person whom the Japanese believed to have played a key role in Thailand-Japan relations. Wanit was involved in controversies over economic Thailand-

Japan and Thailand Independence during World War II 7 Japan economic relations. He handled the negotiations that eventually resulted in the Japanese monopoly of the rubber market in Thailand. He was also involved in negotiations over Japanese requests for loans. In 1941, he was attached to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The rise of Wanit, who was clearly sympathetic with Japanese cause, in Thai politics might have convinced Japan that Thailand was loyal to it. As Batson and Hajime suggests in the translated version of Wanitto no Higeki, or The Tragedy of Wanit (Batson & Hajime, 1990, p. 6): So Wanit emerges suddenly from near total obscurity, becomes a key figure in Thai politics of the late 1930s and early 1940s, and particularly in Thai-Japanese relations, serving as Phibuns trusted confidant and gobetween, and then in 1944 just as suddenly (and probably violently) disappears from the scene. His subsequent neglect in Thai writings has been almost total. Batson and Hajime believes that the Thais have had good reasons to let Wanits story remains obscure as Wanit symbolized Thailands commitment to Japan. The importance of Wanit is confirmed by Nagaokas article The Drive into Southern Indochina and Thailand that Wanit was invited to the Four Ministers Conference in Japan to discuss the settlement of territorial disputes between Thailand and France on November 5, 1941 (Nagaoka, 1980, p. 218). In addition, Wanit was present during the negotiations of the 7th-8th and finally played a key role in the talks leading to the formal Thai-Japanese alliance on December 11th. In short, the fact that Japanese sources refer to Wanit as a crucial figure between Thailand and Japanese relations reflects the Japanese belief that Thailand under Prime Minister Phibun Songkhram was pro-Japanese. This fact is, of course, controversial as many Thais would cite the resistance movements led by Pridi Phanomyong and Seni Pramote, a Thai minister in Washington. They organized the underground Free Thai (or Seri Thai) movement to fight the Japanese. Nonetheless, the seemingly proJapanese actions taken by Phibun might intensely convince Japan that it was easier to ally with

Japan and Thailand Independence during World War II 8 Thailand than invading the country, wasting soldiers lives and resources, as Thailand at the time was already in support of the Japanese cause. However, Thailands loyalty to Japan was questionable as Phibun was reported to play both sides before the country decided to ally with Japan. On November 1941, Tokyo received a report stating that Thailand had secretly allied with Britain and the United States, in which Thailand would participate in the joint defense of the South Pacific and would support the United States over the Axis if she were to enter the war (Nagaoka, 1980, p. 219). Prime Minister Phibun denied all the allegations. But while Phibun had made a secret commitment to the Japanese, he was playing a double game by simultaneously urging the British and Americans to deter any further Japanese advance. He and his advisers recognized that Thailands independence could best be protected, and the nations bargaining power maximized, by a great-power standoff. (Reynolds, 1996, p. 246). Phibun showed a preference toward the Japanese, but also tried to restrain their relations as he was unsure about Japans intentions toward Thailand. Hence, he maintained dual diplomacy between Japan and the West right up to the eve of war (Swan, 1987, p. 292). Phibuns practice of bamboo diplomacy definitely was one of the factors leading to Japan-Thailand alliance instead of the incorporation of Thailand as a part of the Japanese empire. The Japanese believed that Thailand was willing to cooperate there were no reasons to waste its resources on Thailand in an invasion. Meanwhile, Phibuns contact with the United States and Britain led to some limitations on how Japan-Thailand relations would develop. For the Japanese, forceful invasion of Thailand could lead to immediate war with the United States, in which the Japanese needed more time to prepare for. Despite its alliance with Japan, Thailand was able to emerge from the right side once the war was concluded. Its resistance movements were recognized by the United States, and it

Japan and Thailand Independence during World War II 9 was the United States that affirmed Thailands claim that she was coerced into Japan-Thailand alliance that the alliance did not reflect the will of the majority of Thai people. The Free Thai movement was used to support this claim. Phibun, having supported the Japanese during the war, did not deny the Free Thai movements claim that it had been fighting along side the Allied powers against the Japanese Thailand was forced to ally with Japan. Postwar Thailand foreign policy, thus, reflected Thailands use of bamboo diplomacy. Nonetheless, the autonomy Thailand had during WWII did not protect Thailand against the disastrous consequences of war. Thailand hardly escaped the war unscathed (Reynolds, 1990, p. 66). In spite of having more freedom of action than any other country under Japanese controlThailand was still dominated by Japan militarily, politically, and economically (United States, 1944, p. 1). Japanese military control of Thailand received little Thai support, according to the Office of Strategic Services, yet, Japan had gained control of Thai bases, communications, and supplies. Thailands sovereignty meant that the Japanese could dominate Thailand politically without having to administer civil affairs. Japans domination of the Thais economy allowed Japan to obtain supplies for its army, monopolize Thai raw materials, used Thailand as a market of its export, and monopolized Thai industries. Japan attempt to dominate Thailand culturally, however, met little success because of Thai hostility (United States, 1944, p. 6). It was surprising for many to find out that, after the war, there remained little animosity against the Japanese (Reynolds, 1990, p. 66). After all, it was Thailand that manipulated the Japanese and the West for its own safety. Thailand escaping the war with relatively little damages was perhaps a good enough reason for the Thais to forgive what the Japanese had brought them during WWII.

Japan and Thailand Independence during World War II 10 References

Batson, B. A., & Hajime, S. (1990). The Tragedy of Wanit: a Japanese account of wartime Thai politics. Singapore, Singapore: The National University of Singapore. Chen, P.-H. (2007). Bamboo Diplomacy: Interpreting the Formation of Thailand's Worldview and Its Implications on Modern Thai Foreign Policy. International Studies Association; 2007 Annual Meeting (p. Abstract). International Studies Association. Nagaoka, S. (1980). The Drive into Southern Indochina and Thailand. In J. W. Morley, & J. W. Morley (Ed.), The Fateful Choice: Japan's Advance into Southeast Asia, 1939-1941 (R. A. Scalapino, Trans., pp. 209-240). New York City, New York, United States of America: Columbia University Press. Nuechterlein, D. E. (1965). Thailand and the Struggle for Southeast Asia. Ithaca, New York, United States of America: Cornell University Press. Reynolds, E. B. (1990). Aftermath of Alliance: The Wartime Legacy in Thai-Japan Relations. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies , 21 (1), 66-87. Reynolds, E. B. (1996). Anomaly or Model? Independent Thailand's Role in Japan's Asian Strategy, 1941-1943. In P. Duus, R. H. Myers, R. M. Peattie, P. Duus, R. H. Myers, & M. R. Peattie (Eds.), The Japanese Wartime Empire 1931-1945 (pp. 243-273). Princeton, New Jersey, United States of America: Princeton University Press. Saunders, D. (1993). Judith A. Stowe. Siam Becomes Thailand: A Story of Intrigue Book Review. The International History Review , 611-612.

Japan and Thailand Independence during World War II 11 Swan, W. L. (1996, March). Japan's Intentions for Its Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere as Indicated in Its Policy Plans for Thailand. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies , 27 (1), pp. 139-149. Swan, W. L. (1987). Thai-Japanese Relations at the Start of the Pacific War: New Insight into a Controversial Period. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies , 18 (2), 270-293. United States. (1944). Japanese Domination of Thailand. Office of Strategic Services, Research and Analysis Branch. Office of Strategic Services Research and Analysis Branch.