BANGKOK — The fall of Saigon on April 30, 1975, marked the end of a 35-year war period that began with resistance against French colonization, continued through the Japanese occupation, and concluded with the expulsion of American forces. On that day, Viet Cong troops successfully captured the capital of South Vietnam.
Thailand’s leading newspaper “Prachachat” reported this world-changing event with the headline “Viet Cong Captures Saigon, Rules South Vietnam” in its May 1, 1975 edition. The newspaper detailed how Dương Văn Minh announced surrender to the Viet Cong via Saigon radio at 10:40 AM.
“After the surrender announcement, three white flags were raised over the Central Police Department in Saigon, with another fluttering in the northern suburbs, just four hours after the last American soldier jumped onto a helicopter to escape the city,” the newspaper reported.
The report also noted that the United States had been involved in the Vietnam War for 30 years, resulting in 56,000 American deaths, 150,000 injuries, and affecting the lives of more than ten million Vietnamese people.
The end of the “Republic of South Vietnam” came as a result of the “Nixon Doctrine,” implemented by President Richard Nixon, who sought to withdraw the United States from the Vietnam War. This naturally meant that the US no longer needed to maintain military forces and bases in Thailand for operations in Indochina.
Thailand Congratulates the Fall of Saigon
Thailand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement saying, “The long-suffering of Vietnam has ended, and the dream of all Vietnamese people to reunify their country has now become a reality. We extend our best wishes and hope for their success, and we hope that with peace in Indochina, Southeast Asia will be able to develop its resources for the benefit of everyone.”
Major General Chatichai Choonhavan, then Thailand’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, commented on the fall of Saigon, suggesting that the situation might improve because the fighting would finally stop, leaving governance to the people. Meanwhile, M.R. Seni Pramoj, leader of the Democrat Party and the opposition in parliament, stated, “Thailand can no longer dream that after Saigon falls, Bangkok won’t fall. It will come to us someday.”
M.R. Seni further emphasized that “Thailand must not remain passive about the situation. We should begin relations with China, as well as Cambodia and Vietnam. We need to revise our foreign policy. If American troops withdraw, it would be beneficial. Over the past 40 years, Thailand’s foreign policy implementation has been terrible.”
Difficult Negotiations for US Military Withdrawal
Mr. Anand Panyarachun, former Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, later reflected in an interview 40 years after the event that establishing diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of China in 1975 (July 1) faced relatively little pressure compared to the negotiations for US military withdrawal, which encountered significant resistance.
The M.R. Kukrit government wanted the United States to recognize that Thailand’s foreign policy decision-making process had changed since the pre-October 14 era, and that this government had decided to withdraw American troops.
In his foreign policy statement to parliament on March 19, 1975, M.R. Kukrit Pramoj clearly stated, “To create balance in relationships with superpowers, this government will ensure the withdrawal of foreign troops from Thailand within one year.” At that time, the United States still had 25,000 troops and 350 aircraft stationed in Thailand.
Seven Principles of New ground rules
A report on “Thailand’s Foreign Policy Adjustment (1973 to 1976)” states that Anand Panyarachun, who headed the negotiations for US troop withdrawal, spoke about “New ground rules” for a new framework of relations based on seven principles:
- Placing US assets and personnel under Thai legal jurisdiction
- Prohibiting use of US resources to threaten any nation’s sovereignty
- Requiring activity reports to the Thai government
- Replacing American personnel with Thai staff for training purposes
- Limiting US personnel numbers to Thai-approved levels
- Providing US technical officers with the same privileges as those from other countries
- Capping cooperation agreements at two years, with options for renewal or early termination
Conflicts Between Military and Civilian Officials
The Matichon Information Center reported that the Ramasoon Camp issue not only deteriorated Thai-US relations but also created conflicts within the Thai bureaucracy—between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Defense, or in other words, between military and civilian officials. Similarly, conflicting mass movements emerged: one led by the Student Center of Thailand demanding US base withdrawals, and another right-wing group opposing communist threats.
Thai military leaders were extremely concerned about the US withdrawal from Thailand, with rumors of a potential coup during M.R. Kukrit’s government. Signs included General Boonjai Bamrungpong, Commander-in-Chief of the Royal Thai Army, ordering military readiness in 1976, and warnings that a coup might occur before the general election on April 4, 1976.
Nevertheless, M.R. Kukrit’s foreign policy led to the closure of US bases in the Northeast on January 31, 1976, and the withdrawal of US troops from Thailand.
Ultimately, the April 4 election results showed M.R. Kukrit receiving only 23,634 votes, losing to Samak Sundaravej who received 33,335 votes in Dusit district, where most eligible voters were military personnel.
Establish Relations with Vietnam
The subsequent government led by M.R. Seni Pramoj as Prime Minister, with Pichai Rattakul as Minister of Foreign Affairs, attempted to establish relations with the Democratic Republic of Vietnam. Pichai and Anand Panyarachun traveled to negotiate with the Vietnamese government in Hanoi in August 1976, reaching an agreement for a joint statement to establish diplomatic relations, pending cabinet approval.
Pichai had to send three telegrams to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to request cabinet approval, with Minister Lek Nana waiting for negotiation results. This revealed an obstacle in policy implementation, as noted in the report on Thailand’s foreign policy adjustment.
“It turned out that the right-wing coalition government partners disagreed, fearing various consequences. I sent a third telegram to Khun Lek, telling him to inform Professor Seni that this was government policy already announced to parliament. We had now succeeded and merely needed cabinet approval. As leader of the Democrat Party and head of government, he couldn’t just sit idly—he needed to make a decision.”
Eventually, the cabinet approved the Foreign Minister’s signing, establishing diplomatic relations with Vietnam that continue to this day.
___________
Related articles:
