Thailand’s Response to the Cambodian Genocide
https://static.blog4ever.com/2011/01/463666/artfichier_463666_207456_201102042526568.pdf
Thailand’s Response to the Cambodian Genocide
Puangthong Rungswasdisab
Independent Researcher
Introduction
In January 1999, Cambodian Prime Minister Hen Sen proposed that the Khmer Rouge’s foreign backers be brought to justice. His proposal was an act of retaliation against the international community who condemned his warm welcome of two defected Khmer Rouge leaders, Khieu Samphan and Nuon Chea. His remark prompted the Thai leaders to distance the country from its
past involvement with the murderous regime. The then Prime Minister Chuan Leekpai asserted that Thailand was not involved and had even objected and disagreed with the genocide. He reiterated that a trial was a matter for Cambodia alone. But the Cambodian problem was rarely regarded by its neighbors as an internal affair. The rise of the communist regime in Cambodia,
together with those in Laos and Vietnam in 1975, was perceived as a threat for Thailand. But ironically, soon after its fall, the Khmer Rouge became Thailand’s military ally in fighting against the Vietnamese and the new Cambodian regime.
Later on, a new dimension was added to the relationship between Thailand and the Khmer Rouge. Though a policy of turning Indochina from a battlefield into a market place of the Chatichai Choonhavan government was initially aimed at breaking a decade-long impasse of the Cambodian conflict, the Thais nevertheless enjoyed having the Khmer Rouge as their business partner. This chapter examines the development of Thailand’s policy towards the genocidal
regime between 1975 and the mid 1990s. And as the friendly relationship with the regime was widely supported by the Thais, this chapter also sheds light on the perspectives of various Thai political groups on the crimes committed by the Khmer Rouge.
The Khmer Rouge as a Threat
Khmer Rouge rule began as Thailand was going through a transitional period. The civilian governments after the 14 October 1973 revolution had to cope with expansive communist power. The intense struggle between the left and the right subsequently led to a massacre of students and the military coup 79 of 6 October 1976. Between 1973 and 1976, there were rapid shifts of Thailand’s foreign policy toward its neighbors from anti-communism to co-existence and
then back to anti-communism again.
Since Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat took power in 1958, Thailand had served as a launching ground for the United States to conduct covert operations against the communist movements in Laos, Vietnam and Cambodia. The U.S. failure in the Vietnam War as well as Washington’s shift of focus to the Middle East, Europe, and Latin America forced Washington to abandon its full
involvement in Southeast Asia.Meanwhile, the Thai military was facing serious political storms from both domestic and regional political changes. After the October 14 uprising, the new civilian governments were forced to adopt two interrelated policies: the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Thailand and the establishment of normal relations with the communist countries.
1 The withdrawal of the U.S. bases in Thailand became one of the top campaign issues for the leading student organization, the National Student Center of Thailand (NSCT), after 1973.2 Soon after the royally appointed Prime Minister Sanya Dhammasakti (October 1973 - February 1975) had taken office, his government announced that the U.S. was no longer allowed to use the air bases in Thailand to support its war in Indochina. The successive governments of M.R. Seni Pramoj (February - March 1975 and April - October 1976), and his younger brother M.R. Kukrit Promoj (March 1975 - April 1976) also adopted the same policy. The Sanya administration also tried to establish relations with Vietnam.
Later, Kukrit announced the establishment of diplomatic relations with China, visiting Beijing on July 1, 1975. In fact, the governments of Seni and Kukrit, which comprised conservative and right wing politicians, were initially reluctant to force the U.S. troops from Thailand, particularly at the time of the rapid expansion of both domestic and regional communism. They believed Thailand would be the next domino to fall if the Khmer Rouge-Sihanouk group came to power in Cambodia. At the beginning of his tenure of office in February 1975, Seni primarily stressed the
necessity of maintaining U.S. troops in Thailand, reasoning that it was Thailand who had invited the U.S. troops and that Thailand should, therefore, give them time for withdrawal.3 As the situation in Phnom Penh entered the terminal period, the Thai Army Commander General Kris Sivara expressed strong opposition to the calls for immediate withdrawal of the U.S. troops.4 .....