Coup in Siam 1932

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Soldiers during the coup on June 24, 1932

The coup d'état in Siam in 1932 (also known as the "Siamese Revolution" ) was a military coup on June 24, 1932 that marked the transition of the country from absolute to constitutional monarchy .

The "revolution" had been planned and prepared from 1927 onwards by a small group of young officers and intellectuals who had studied in Europe. It called itself Khana Ratsadon ("People's Party"). They were able to win four senior officers for their plans, which enabled the military implementation and the success of the coup . Only the leadership of the rebel units was privy to the plans for a coup. The associated troops only followed the orders of their commanders and were not aware of participating in a "revolution".

The overthrow caught the feudal elite unprepared, which initially accepted it without resistance. It therefore remained bloodless. Siam got a parliament and a cabinet, initially called the “public committee”. On December 10th of the same year King Prajadhipok was compelled to sign a constitution . Subsequently, representatives of the “People's Party” ruled, which, however, split up into several rival wings and groups. Later attempts by royalists to reverse the system change, in particular the rebellion of Prince Boworadet in October 1933, were repulsed by the ruling forces.

prehistory

Even before the Great Depression in the 1920s , there had been dissatisfaction in some circles in Siamese society with the way the country's monarchy was handled; so there was a plan by officers in 1917 to depose the Siamese king. The attempted attack was exposed because the actors disagreed on what should follow the absolute ruler. Siam was one of the last absolute monarchies in the 20th century, was ruled by a lavish king during and after the First World War ( Rama VI , reigning from 1910 to 1925) and experienced a profound state crisis after the war because of the unbalanced budget. Even the subsequent King Rama VII (Prajadhipok) did not contribute to any real improvement, even if he carried out political reforms, e.g. B. in the form of a (first) constitution of the country.

In 1925, Prajadhipok was the last son of King Chulalongkorn (Rama V, reigning from 1868 to 1910), surprisingly (and rather unwillingly) to become king. He now had energetic efforts to restore orderly state finances. Traditionally, he was supported by an advisor from the British Crown.

In addition to the princes of the Privy Council (aphirathamontri) , Prajadhipok only included princes and closest relatives in political affairs who did not belong to the hated civil servant class. He wanted to regain lost trust among the people. But the newly formed five-member council included three sons of King Mongkut (Rama IV, reigning from 1851 to 1868) and two sons of King Chulalongkorn, all of whom had been dismissed under King Vajiravudh due to personal differences. This council had little trouble in practically eliminating the king, who was considered influenceable, and taking over the government, even if he had the last word in all affairs of the state. All discredited bourgeois employees of the old king were swiftly removed from service, which sparked criticism from the elite who did not belong to the royal family. But at first it was only the Privy Council that became the target of hostility.

Indeed, Prajadhipok was way ahead of many of his compatriots in political thinking. He dealt very seriously with the questions of the introduction of democratic structures in Siam and found in 1927 that it was not a question of whether Siam would adopt a democratic form of government, but only “whether the Siamese people could really and truly be democratic, not just in that Form, but also actually ”. His most important advisers - Prince Damrong Rajanubhab and the American lawyer Francis B. Sayre  - reinforced his doubts and stated that the Siamese people were not yet ready for democracy.

In addition to the tangible questions of political power, the economic problems were generally noticeable and were therefore more in the foreground of public interest. The state budget simply lacked the means to adequately supply the population, even if the Siamese economy, contrary to the global economic problems, remained relatively stable, in fact experienced an upswing. With the decline of the British pound, Siam was also drawn into the downward trend in the world economy in the early 1930s . The price of rice fell to just 30% of its previous value, and Siam's budget to 16%. In this situation, Prajadhipok decided to make severe cuts in the military budget, the money of which was more urgently needed in the country's agriculture , since there were no more far-reaching threats to Siam. War Minister Prince Boworadet then resigned from his post. It was clear to the bourgeois elites, who had already been dissatisfied, that their position was in danger; They saw their future in the civil service, since Chinese businessmen had laid a firm hand on Siam's economy. Now would have been the right time for the long-discussed democratization or at least an opening up to it. But Prajadhipok let that time pass. This paved the way for a violent development in Siam.

Planning the coup

Pridi Phanomyong
Phibunsongkhram

In the "Roaring Twenties" the education of Siamese students abroad continued, which had been started under King Chulalongkorn in the 1880s , who had seen a modernization of society and the military as a prerequisite for the survival of an independent Siam. Just over 300 Siamese students were abroad in the mid-1920s, more than 10 of whom were studying in Paris . Here the plan for a coup was drafted by a group of enthusiastic students who, on the one hand, felt racially discriminated against in France and, on the other hand, learned to abhor the rigid hierarchy in their homeland. The initiator was Prayun Phamonmontri , born in Berlin in 1900 , son of a German mother and a Siamese diplomat. His godfather was the powerful Prince Paribatra Sukhumbandh , later Minister of War of Siam. With this patronage he was accepted into the page corps of King Vajiravudh and came to the Military Academy of Bangkok. He studied political science and journalism at the Sorbonne in the mid-1920s and was interested in the struggle of Europeans for the freedom of the individual.

Even Pridi Banomyong , a lawyer from Bangkok, studied at the Sorbonne. He was the son of a wealthy family of Chinese descent and was interested in European law. Prayun and Pridi became friends. They met in the Siamese student association SIAM or in small groups in Prayun's apartment, where people discussed society, the king and the changes in the world. Prayun also knew Plaek Khittasangkha (Luang Phibunsongkhram) from his military service , who studied at the Paris Military Academy, and brought him into contact with Pridi. Around 1927 it was agreed to introduce a constitution for Siam, so that the king who was above the law at the time would come under the law. There were seven people who saw themselves as protagonists of progress ( phu ko kan , "promoter"), as they assessed the Siamese people - similar to the king's advisors - as backward and uneducated. They conspired to change the political situation in Siam in such a way that democratic structures would become possible - at least at risk of death, because this was treason under Siamese law.

Despite some unpredictable little difficulties within the group, Prayun was not only able to hold together the original seven members from Paris times - even though they, like Pridi, had returned to Siam and made careers there - but also won new ones. In particular, you needed the military to be able to take action against the royal family.

The group, Khana Ratsadon , ultimately consisted of the following people:

Pridi became chairman of the group.

Despite all the differences between the military and civilians, an agreement was reached on what would apply after the overthrow. Six goals were pursued for the future of the country, later called the Six Principles ( หลัก 6 ประการ ของ คณะ ราษฎร ). They read:

  1. Maintaining the sovereignty of the people
  2. Safeguarding national security
  3. Maintaining the people's economic development in line with the objectives of the Siamese Economic Plan
  4. Protection of the principle of equality before the law (no privileges for the nobility)
  5. Preservation of the rights and freedom of the people, provided none of the above principles are violated
  6. Providing general education to every citizen.

According to a well-known prophecy, the Chakri dynasty founded by Rama I on April 6, 1782, would end after 150 years of rule over Siam. King Prajadhipok opened the first bridge over the Mae Nam Chao Phraya (Chao Phraya River) in Bangkok punctually for the 150th anniversary , but nothing happened. However, after the festival, the real problems persisted. In May the King ordered the Ministry of Navy to be subordinate to the Ministry of War, and the number of provinces was reduced from 79 to 70. All of this saved money but also drove civil servants out of work. In his last announcement as absolute monarch at the beginning of June he asked the people to pay their taxes and to refrain from petitions. The family traveled by rail to Hua Hin on June 8 , where they traditionally resided in summer.

The young intellectuals and officers who formed the core of the “People's Party” made contact with four senior officers who were also dissatisfied with the feudal system: Colonels Phraya Phahon , Phraya Song , Phraya Ritthi and Lieutenant Colonel Phra Prasat. The link was Prayun Phamonmontri, whose German mother Phraya Phahon had given language lessons at the Prussian cadet institute before his stay. Phraya Song, in particular, had great influence in the military as the head of the education department of the military academy. He was able to get many of his subordinates and cadets to participate in the coup. His intelligence and tactical talent were crucial to the success of the coup.

Carried out on June 24, 1932

The four military leaders of the coup ("Four Musketeers"): Phraya Song , Phraya Phahon , Phraya Ritthi and Phra Prasat
Military in front of the throne hall
Front page of the Siam Council newspaper on June 24, 1932

On the evening of June 23, the Bangkok police commander gave the regent and interior minister Prince Paribatra a list of people who were suspected of preparing for a coup and were to be arrested immediately, and asked for their arrest to be approved. Paribatra could not make up his mind when he found the name of his protégé Prayun on the list. First of all, he sent the police chief home.

On the same evening, the four senior military officers of the group (the "Four Musketeers"), Phraya Phahon, Phraya Song, Phraya Ritthi and Phra Prasat, met in the house of Phraya Song. The stipulation was that blood should not be spilled, which required an elaborate military bluff devised by Phraya Song. Disguised as a military exercise - Phraya Song hinted at an uprising by the Chinese - a group of officers, soldiers and cadets moved to the equestrian statue of King Chulalongkorn in front of the Dusit Palace in Bangkok on the early morning of June 24th . At the same time, the inspector general of the army, Phraya Phahon, went to a surprise check in the ammunition depots and gained entry. He had the ammunition loaded and the soldiers mounted. They also drove to the square in front of the throne hall.

Phra Prasat had the task of "summoning" the high princes in the throne hall. He had the residence of the most important person, Prince Paribatra, rearranged, but the prince fled to the nearby bank of the Chao Phraya. Shots rang out and a young captain was wounded. The warship commanded to secure the Chao Phraya responded with a volley, whereupon Prince Paribatra stood. After all the other princes had also been gathered in the throne hall, the “four musketeers” and their regiments arrived at the throne hall square at 6 o'clock in the morning. Phraya Phahon took advantage of the confusion to deliver a speech that proclaimed the abolition of absolute monarchy in Siam and ended with the traditional battle cry "Chaiyo!" The soldiers also answered this call with "Chaiyo!" As they were used to.

Prayun had meanwhile interrupted all communications to and from Bangkok with civilian forces from the Khana Ratsadon and the recently inaugurated telegraph officer Khuang Aphaiwong . After controlling Bangkok - and that was what mattered in Siam - Phahon sent the warship HMS Sukhothai and a telegram to King Prajadhipok in Hua Hin, in which he ultimately asked him to return to Bangkok and accept the constitutional monarchy.

Prajadhipok and his crisis team (the princes present in Hua Hin and the ladies of the court) considered three answers: returning to the capital with the associated acceptance of the constitutional monarchy, fleeing abroad or mobilizing armed forces loyal to the king .

The last alternative would have meant a civil war , which the king - like the putschists - wanted to avoid. Escape was out of the question for reasons of personal honor. All that remained was to accept the demands and return to Bangkok.

Formation of government and further development up to the adoption of the constitution

King Prajadhipok signs the constitution.

On June 26th Prajadhipok returned to Bangkok and received the members of the Khana Ratsadon. They behaved politely, the king expressed his sympathy for the goals of the group. The next day he signed the provisional version of the constitution, which had been corrected at his request. On June 28th, the first popular assembly of Siam opened with a greeting from the king. To the great surprise, Pridi presented the conservative lawyer Phraya Manopakorn as the first Prime Minister of Thailand . By choosing an outsider, the attempt was made to avoid the impression of wanting to take over the state.

In the months that followed, there was great uncertainty about the future course of state affairs. The Comintern distributed leaflets in Bangkok in August and September calling for the establishment of a Soviet government. The king mostly took care of the constitutional committee, from which he tried to wrest more influence than the original draft. Finally, on November 16, 1932, in the National Assembly, the king's approval of the new constitution was announced, under which he intended to remain on the throne. The 10th of December was set as the date for the signing of the new constitution, which took place with a state act.

Effects

Relief "Soldiers fighting for democracy" at the democracy monument in Bangkok.

As a result, the alliance between civilians and the military collapsed in a dramatically short time. Unbridgeable contradictions emerged, the "Four Musketeers" fought against each other for power. On March 12, Pridi announced his economic plan in parliament, which caused a scandal during its reading, as it was viewed as " communist " by more conservative forces . He had to break off, the session was interrupted by Manopakorn, and finally the parliament was dissolved on March 31st with the blessing of King Prajadhipok. Nobody should find out about Pridi's plans, which were rejected not only by the king and the prime minister, but also by representatives of the “People's Party” such as Phraya Song and Prayun Phamonmontri. Newspapers that published were censored or closed entirely. The ceremony for the Thai New Year 2476 (April 1, 1933) had to be canceled because the king had surprisingly left Bangkok.

The later development of Siam (or Thailand) led to a series of military governments, which were sporadically interrupted by civilian governments with mostly liberal backgrounds.

Contemporary reception

German Empire

In the German Reich, despite all of their own day-to-day problems, the events in Siam were briefly discussed. The events on the morning of June 24th appeared in the evening edition of the Vossische Zeitung , which at the time was particularly valued for its extensive foreign policy coverage. About a quarter of the title page was dedicated to the events in Siam. Not only the six-hour time difference at the time contributed to this surprisingly fast reporting, but also the German aviator Marga von Etzdorf , who was in Bangkok on her East Asia flight. She passed a telephone report that was used for part of the article in the Vossische Zeitung . She reported:

“The King of Siam is deposed. Revolution in the last absolute monarchy. A revolution broke out in Siam tonight. The royal family has been captured and held hostage in the royal palace in case acts of violence against the revolutionaries and their leaders occur. Later the royal family is to be put on a warship. ... the leadership of the revolution is obviously in the hands of the People's Party, which is joined by military troops and navy. "

The Berliner Tageblatt and Handelszeitung brought a little message to Siam on June 25th:

“One can only wish for the Siamese people, who have always had friendly political and not at all unsightly trade relations with the Germans, that the transition to the new conditions ... may take place calmly and smoothly. ... We can only wish this success from the bottom of our hearts to the Siamese people, to whom a very peculiar, fine and independent culture gives the right to continue the name Muang Tai, which means land of the free, in history. "

Current processing

Nowadays, the coup d'état of 1932 is mainly reflected in Thailand itself, there are of course also specialist books that comment and explain from today's perspective (see literature).

Thai teaching material

The Thai high school textbooks treat the coup of 1932 as a turning point in their own history. Today's political system in Thailand is clearly traced back to the upheavals of 1932, although an exact description of the events is not given. The role of King Prajadhipok is considered to be crucial in reshaping the political order, especially as the successor to King Chulalongkorn, who laid the foundations for democracy.

Thai newspapers

In 1997, especially for the 65th anniversary, numerous articles were published, some of which complained that the anniversary went almost unnoticed by the Thai public. In the Bangkok Post of June 27, it is further stated that as early as 1932 the people were not involved in the events.

See also

literature

  • Benjamin A. Batson (Ed.): Siam's Political Future: documents from the end of absolute monarchy . Ithaca 1974.
  • Benjamin A. Batson: The End of the Absolute Monarchy in Siam . Singapore 1984.
  • Michael Steinmetz: Siam in 2475 (1932): the end of absolute monarchy . Master's thesis, Humboldt University Berlin, 2000 (= Southeast Asia Working Papers; 19).
  • Judith A. Stowe: Siam Becomes Thailand . London 1991.
  • Andreas Sturm: The trade and agricultural policy of Thailand from 1767 to 1932 . Passau 1997.
  • Thak Chalömtiarana: Extracts and Documents 1932-1957 . Bangkok 1978.
  • Prayun Phamonmontri: ชีวิต 5 แผ่นดิน ของ ข้าพเจ้า (My life in five dominions). Bangkok 1975.

Individual evidence

  1. ^ Batson: The End of the Absolute Monarchy in Siam. 1984, p. 30
  2. ^ Prajadhipok: Problems of Siam . In: Batson: Siam's Political Future. 1974, p. 17
  3. ^ Prajadhipok: Democracy in Siam. In: Batson: Siam's Political Future. 1974, p. 48
  4. ↑ Sturm: The trade and agricultural policy of Thailand from 1767 to 1932. 1997, p. 112
  5. ↑ Prayun: ชีวิต 5 แผ่นดิน ของ ข้าพเจ้า. 1975, p. 2
  6. ↑ Prayun: ชีวิต 5 แผ่นดิน ของ ข้าพเจ้า. 1975, p. 7
  7. ^ Batson: The End of the Absolute Monarchy in Siam. 1984, p. 209
  8. ^ Stowe: Siam Becomes Thailand. 1991, p. 4
  9. ^ Thak: Extracts and Documents 1932-1957. 1978, p. 43
  10. ↑ In the following presented according to Steinmetz: Siam in the year 2475 (1932). 2000, p. 78 ff.
  11. ^ Vossische Zeitung , June 24, 1932
  12. ↑ Berliner Tageblatt , June 25, 1932, p. 2
Note on Thai names : This article addresses people by their first name.