The Treaty - Britain's role in covering up Thailand's southern occupation
Adam John
Thu, 10/03/2016
While today marks a historically important event for many politically and socially active groups in Patani, the day will pass by unnoticed in Thailand and the rest of the world for that matter. However, the event is of international importance. It will be remembered by those aware of the Anglo-Siamese Treaty of 1909 as the day Thailand colonized Patani. This isn't exactly true. Thailand or the Siamese Kingdom as it was at that time had already forcibly moved in to occupy the most northerly Malay State on the eastern coast of the Malay Peninsula much earlier.
The 10thth century are arguably the reason why the British were eager to get Siam to agree to ratifying the 1909 Treaty and the cause of how the border between modern day Thailand and Malaysia was drawn.
Thanks to confidential British governmental documents dating back to the early 20th century, which are now publicly available and held at the National Archives in London, we know that not only was the British government aware of the occupation in Patani and mistreatment of Patani Malays by Siam but also that the British authorities dismissed the ill treatment of the Malays and without consultation of the Patani population or its leaders accepted Siam's occupation of Patani in return for strengthening Anglo-Siamese relations in order to secure its own economic interests in the Malay Peninsula.
Secret internal correspondence within the British Empire at the turn of the 20th[1][2][3]His majesty's government would therefore request that the Siamese government shall not code or lease, directly or indirectly, to any foreign government any territory situated in the Malay peninsula south of the southern boundary of Monthon Rajaburi, or in any of the islands adjacent to the said territory; also that within the limits above mentioned a right to establish or lease any coaling station, to build or own any construction or repairing docks, or to occupy exclusively any harbours the occupation of which would be likely to be prejudicial to British interests from a strategic point of view, shall not be granted to any foreign Government or Company[4][5][6][7].
By 1908, Patani's fate was decided. Britain's Foreign Office was not in the mood of entertaining any suggestions that Siam's occupation of Patani ends. When Sir John Anderson, the British governor who replaced Swettenham, mentions that he would like to see Patani become a British Malay colony, the Foreign Office showed their disapproval[8]
[1] National Archives, London. Document FCO 141 16286.
[2] National Archives, London. Document CO 537 4744.
[3] National Archives, London. Document FCO 141 16286.
[4] National Archives, London. Document FO 821 58.
[5] National Archives, London. Document FCO 141 16286
[6] National Archives, London. Document FCO 141 16286.
[7] National Archives, London. Document FCO 141 16286.
[8] National Archives, London. Document FCO 141 16286.
prachatai.com
Adam John
Thu, 10/03/2016
While today marks a historically important event for many politically and socially active groups in Patani, the day will pass by unnoticed in Thailand and the rest of the world for that matter. However, the event is of international importance. It will be remembered by those aware of the Anglo-Siamese Treaty of 1909 as the day Thailand colonized Patani. This isn't exactly true. Thailand or the Siamese Kingdom as it was at that time had already forcibly moved in to occupy the most northerly Malay State on the eastern coast of the Malay Peninsula much earlier.
The 10thth century are arguably the reason why the British were eager to get Siam to agree to ratifying the 1909 Treaty and the cause of how the border between modern day Thailand and Malaysia was drawn.
Thanks to confidential British governmental documents dating back to the early 20th century, which are now publicly available and held at the National Archives in London, we know that not only was the British government aware of the occupation in Patani and mistreatment of Patani Malays by Siam but also that the British authorities dismissed the ill treatment of the Malays and without consultation of the Patani population or its leaders accepted Siam's occupation of Patani in return for strengthening Anglo-Siamese relations in order to secure its own economic interests in the Malay Peninsula.
Secret internal correspondence within the British Empire at the turn of the 20th[1][2][3]His majesty's government would therefore request that the Siamese government shall not code or lease, directly or indirectly, to any foreign government any territory situated in the Malay peninsula south of the southern boundary of Monthon Rajaburi, or in any of the islands adjacent to the said territory; also that within the limits above mentioned a right to establish or lease any coaling station, to build or own any construction or repairing docks, or to occupy exclusively any harbours the occupation of which would be likely to be prejudicial to British interests from a strategic point of view, shall not be granted to any foreign Government or Company[4][5][6][7].
By 1908, Patani's fate was decided. Britain's Foreign Office was not in the mood of entertaining any suggestions that Siam's occupation of Patani ends. When Sir John Anderson, the British governor who replaced Swettenham, mentions that he would like to see Patani become a British Malay colony, the Foreign Office showed their disapproval[8]
[1] National Archives, London. Document FCO 141 16286.
[2] National Archives, London. Document CO 537 4744.
[3] National Archives, London. Document FCO 141 16286.
[4] National Archives, London. Document FO 821 58.
[5] National Archives, London. Document FCO 141 16286
[6] National Archives, London. Document FCO 141 16286.
[7] National Archives, London. Document FCO 141 16286.
[8] National Archives, London. Document FCO 141 16286.
prachatai.com
Comment