Thailand In World War 2

[Cassandra]

Thailand was changing quite a bit during this time period and many things that were going on not directly related to the war IMHO are skewed to look as though they were related to the war. In all reality Thailand could have cared less about either side, and had enough problems at home to deal with. Outside pressures being what they were, and the geographical location, in combination with the natural resources of Thailand meant they were certain to be involved.

If you look back Thailand had a very favorable view of Japan leading up to the war. In 1933 when the League of Nations voted in regard to Japan’s invasion of Manchuria, Thailand was the SOLE vote of abstention. Also Thailand began sending Thai military to train in Japan in 1935. During these early to mid 1930’s Khun Phibun was very active and vocal in his favorable feelings about Japan. Japan was held up as a prime example of a strong Asian nation.

Also the rift between Phibun and Pridi began about the same time as the war, but was more over right-wing (Phibun) vs. left-wing (Pridi) ideologies rather than allied vs axis associations or preferences. As both Phibun and Pridi had worked together in the 1932 coup. So while there were some anti-Phibun actions being taken by Pridi during this time frame were more about what direction Thailand should be heading (left vs right). What I consider the truly anti-Japanese movement really did not kick in until around 1943 – well into the war. These anti-Japanese factions surfaced more because it was becoming clear that Japan might actually loose the war, and due to continually deteriorating situations inside Thailand (high inflation, lack of even some basic goods). Also of note in the relationship between Phibun, and Pridi was that following the war Pridi was basically in charge of things (at least by mid 1946), and during this time the war crimes charges against Phibun were dismissed.

Thailand had been fighting with France (allied power – kind of), since 1939 in regard to localized land issues, and Japan helped Thailand to settle some of these issues, and agreements (gbetween the French and Thai) were struck aboard Japan navy vessels (hardly any arm twisting by the Japanese), in March of 1941. In 1941 Thailand loaned Japan around 35 million baht to purchase Thai goods (such as rubber that was crucial to the Japan war effort).

Also of note while many books and such that cover this topic indicate that Thailand was “forced” into declaring war against the allied powers there are sources that indicate other wise. In the diaries of Josef Goebbels (a major player in the Nazi propaganda machine), he indicates that Japan actually requested Thailand to NOT declare war against England at that time. Another source indicating that Thailand took this action without Japanese “forcing” them is “Siam and Japan: The Perils of Independence”.

At the end of the war the British sure seemed to think Thailand deserved little slack in their role in the war, and wanted to stick it to Thailand. The US pretty much put the skids on this and played a large role in getting Thailand off the hook. The Brits seemed to think that Thailand played a significant role in the speed with which Japan was able to expand across Southeast Asia, and that they were more an active partner than a pawn. As supporting proof for this the Brits pointed to the relatively good condition of the Thai agricultural sector as compared to Indo-China and parts of the Dutch Indies, both of which had been pretty much ravaged by the Japanese.

In light of the reading/ research I have done on the topic I tend to agree with the Brits at the time of the end of the war. IMHO Thailand was certainly not a Japanese pawn, they took advantage of the situation to try and expand their role/position and only when things started to turn sour (1943) did Thailand start to really resist the Japanese actions. This is not to say there was no resistance to the Japanese at all inside of Thailand prior to 1943, or that ALL Thai’s were in favor of the actions being taken.

An excellent summary.I agree with all the conclusions.I had virtually given up on seeing sensible contributions on this topic but this post proves me wrong.

[IMA_FARANG]

I watched an interesting program th'other day about the Flying Tigers on CCTV , old pilots telling stories about WWII. They did mention some bombing raids as well in Chiang Mai.

Bangkok was also bombed, especially near the end of the war. Shipping in the Chaopaya river and railroad tracks were bombed in an attempt to disrupt Japanese movement and military supplies in April(?) 1945 attacks by Allied (British, Australian, American) aircraft.

As I think someone pointed out at the beginning of the war the Thai choice was to let the Japanese troops enter Thailand voluntarily, or the Japanese Army was coming in anyhow. Whatever Thai forces there were to oppose the Japanese were not in the same leauge as the Japanese Army.

As for the "Bridge on the River Kwai" (which was not really on the River Kwai as the Thais called the area) the Japanese made sure the local villagers turned over any prisioners who attempted to escape by the simple method of killing any Thai villager found with any allied prisoner attempting to escape. Few prisioners got away.

I had a friend from the Netherlands, now deceased, who was interviewed in the 50's for the "Bridge On The River Kwai" movie. He them told a story of how the Red Cross shipped packages for the Dutch war prisioners into the prision camp. When the food packages arrived the British Army confiscated all the food parcels from the Dutch soldiers and re-allocated them to the British soldiers, BRITISH OFFICERS FIRST, BRITISH ENLISTED NEXT, and if any non-British were left (including Canadians, Aussies, and New Zealanders) they only got the food when the British officers gave it to them.

Now, I wonder why THAT INCIDENT, never got into the movie?

To be fair, they were all just about starving.

Oh, and case you remember the scene in the movie where the British supposedly refused to work until they were given better food. That scene never happened. The Japanese only fed two meals a day at the work site. If you did not, or could not, walk to the work site; the Japanese simply didn't feed you. So if you were sick, you died.

[leftcross]

Just wonder about the relevance of this question 60 years(!) after the war has ended.

Back then the majority of the people reading here were surely still floating in the big swamp not even scheduled for delivery

The relevance is that I live in Thailand and I am interested in the history of the country. It is called educating yourself. Your post baffled me (surely nobody could really be so sensitive about the WAR)

but then I saw your signature.......

German national living and working in Bangkok since February 2000. Founder of the trading company Tramaico Co. Ltd.

Real home is only where your heart is and not necessarily the place of the cradle of your birth.

and it all made sense. awfully sorry if mentioning the war upsets you chum. never mind though eh?

[meom]

Also of note in the relationship between Phibun, and Pridi was that following the war Pridi was basically in charge of things (at least by mid 1946), and during this time the war crimes charges against Phibun were dismissed.

I thought the war crimes charges against Phibun were dismissed because Phin Choonhavan bribed the judges? Apparently Phin Choonhavan had the real power and was the key figure behind Phibun.

[longway]

Thailand was changing quite a bit during this time period and many things that were going on not directly related to the war IMHO are skewed to look as though they were related to the war. In all reality Thailand could have cared less about either side, and had enough problems at home to deal with. Outside pressures being what they were, and the geographical location, in combination with the natural resources of Thailand meant they were certain to be involved.

If you look back Thailand had a very favorable view of Japan leading up to the war. In 1933 when the League of Nations voted in regard to Japan's invasion of Manchuria, Thailand was the SOLE vote of abstention. Also Thailand began sending Thai military to train in Japan in 1935. During these early to mid 1930's Khun Phibun was very active and vocal in his favorable feelings about Japan. Japan was held up as a prime example of a strong Asian nation.

Also the rift between Phibun and Pridi began about the same time as the war, but was more over right-wing (Phibun) vs. left-wing (Pridi) ideologies rather than allied vs axis associations or preferences. As both Phibun and Pridi had worked together in the 1932 coup. So while there were some anti-Phibun actions being taken by Pridi during this time frame were more about what direction Thailand should be heading (left vs right). What I consider the truly anti-Japanese movement really did not kick in until around 1943 - well into the war. These anti-Japanese factions surfaced more because it was becoming clear that Japan might actually loose the war, and due to continually deteriorating situations inside Thailand (high inflation, lack of even some basic goods). Also of note in the relationship between Phibun, and Pridi was that following the war Pridi was basically in charge of things (at least by mid 1946), and during this time the war crimes charges against Phibun were dismissed.

Thailand had been fighting with France (allied power - kind of), since 1939 in regard to localized land issues, and Japan helped Thailand to settle some of these issues, and agreements (gbetween the French and Thai) were struck aboard Japan navy vessels (hardly any arm twisting by the Japanese), in March of 1941. In 1941 Thailand loaned Japan around 35 million baht to purchase Thai goods (such as rubber that was crucial to the Japan war effort).

Also of note while many books and such that cover this topic indicate that Thailand was "forced" into declaring war against the allied powers there are sources that indicate other wise. In the diaries of Josef Goebbels (a major player in the Nazi propaganda machine), he indicates that Japan actually requested Thailand to NOT declare war against England at that time. Another source indicating that Thailand took this action without Japanese "forcing" them is "Siam and Japan: The Perils of Independence".

At the end of the war the British sure seemed to think Thailand deserved little slack in their role in the war, and wanted to stick it to Thailand. The US pretty much put the skids on this and played a large role in getting Thailand off the hook. The Brits seemed to think that Thailand played a significant role in the speed with which Japan was able to expand across Southeast Asia, and that they were more an active partner than a pawn. As supporting proof for this the Brits pointed to the relatively good condition of the Thai agricultural sector as compared to Indo-China and parts of the Dutch Indies, both of which had been pretty much ravaged by the Japanese.

In light of the reading/ research I have done on the topic I tend to agree with the Brits at the time of the end of the war. IMHO Thailand was certainly not a Japanese pawn, they took advantage of the situation to try and expand their role/position and only when things started to turn sour (1943) did Thailand start to really resist the Japanese actions. This is not to say there was no resistance to the Japanese at all inside of Thailand prior to 1943, or that ALL Thai's were in favor of the actions being taken.

An excellent summary.I agree with all the conclusions.I had virtually given up on seeing sensible contributions on this topic but this post proves me wrong.

Its a petty fair description. A few things I havent come accross myself. Its poss. that Phibun wanted to declare war on UK, as he was desperate to expand Thai territory west and south, however I have never come accross that info. myself. Secondly Pridi resigned in 1941 over Phibun's decision to support the Japs. He with the support of the US started to organise resistance. In 1943 Phibun realised that the Japs would lose the war, so changed tack. Thirdly I have not come accross any indication that Thai troops ever fought allied soldiers.

Personally I think that Thailand being a pawn/partner is trying to categorise something that cannot be categorised. I cannot agree with the Brits as they were never that wonderful in this part of the world either,and were just after cash.

The war and aftermath shows how thru history that Thailand's location gives it great strategic value for the big players, thailand has been lucky/clever enough to stay free despite the machinations of many other countries, thats not to say that Thailand did not play dirty themselves.