eastern borders with Cambodia, both of which
countries were threatened with communist insur-
gencies in the 1960s. A communist (Pathet Lao)
takeover of Laos with North Vietnamese support
was a particular danger, as there are about three
times as many Laotian-speaking inhabitants within
Thailand (more than 8 million) as in Laos itself.
Thailand provided support and bases for US
troops in the Vietnam War during the 1960s, but
was critical of America’s reluctance to fight com-
munism in Laos with determination. It viewed the
international agreement to neutralise Laos in
1962 as merely a step in the direction of a com-
plete communist takeover.
Thailand’s worst fears were realised in 1973
when the US pulled out of the war in Vietnam;
two years later communism was victorious in
Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos. But in the 1980s
civil wars continued to be fought in neighbouring
Cambodia, with most of the country occupied
until 1989 by Vietnam. In the early 1990s
Thailand found itself the unenthusiastic host of
some 400,000 refugees who had crossed its east-
ern borders, though its borders remained secure.
The US in SEATO (1955) and subsequent decla-
rations pledged itself to defend Thailand, but in
1976 as part of a general withdrawal from south-
east Asia gave up its Thai bases. A leading member
of ASEAN, the Association of South-East Asian
Nations, founded in 1967, Thailand hoped with
its four partners, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia
and the Philippines, to maintain the existing
peace. But its best protection was an unexpected
one: the disunity, confusion and, latterly, collapse
in the communist world.
Of all countries involved in civil wars, bloodshed
and great-power conflicts, no country, not even
Vietnam, suffered as much as Cambodia. Under
Japanese control from 1941 to 1945 the country
came into being on the eve of Japan’s defeat in
March 1945, when King Norodom Sihanouk
proclaimed Cambodia’s independence. After the
French had returned, Sihanouk placed himself at
the head of the national movement and succeeded
in extracting full French independence for his
small kingdom (5 million inhabitants in 1954).
By then the king had to contend with commu-
nist rivals supported by the North Vietnamese.
Sihanouk attempted to rescue the country by
creating a neutralist coalition, which might also
help prevent internal rivalries from wrenching the
country apart. From 1945 to 1970 he was the
most respected Cambodian politician, and in
order to play an effective part in politics he took
the unusual step of giving up his throne to his
father. He then (1955) presented himself as
humble Mr Sihanouk, though he continued to be
known as ‘Prince’.
Realising early on that North Vietnam and the
Pathet Lao were likely to prove the stronger in the
war, he abandoned America and the West to seek
the friendship of China in the 1960s. He was pow-
erless to prevent the North Vietnamese from using
the Ho Chi-minh trail in Cambodian border terri-
tories for moving troops and supplies from the
communist North to South Vietnam. But his pro-
Chinese, pro-communist stance was unwelcome to
the US, and while in Beijing in 1970 he was over-
thrown; with American support, Lon Nol took
control of the royal government in Cambodia’s
capital, Phnom Penh. This marked the end of any
hope that Cambodia might achieve neutrality: it
was invaded by American and South Vietnamese
troops intent on destroying the Vietnamese com-
munist bases and supply lines on the borders,
which were also bombed. In Beijing, Sihanouk
now threw in his lot with the Khmer Rouge com-
munist opposition. American policy in Cambodia
proved a disastrous failure, and after the US with-
drawal from Vietnam in 1973 there was no possi-
bility that Congress would have accepted a new
military commitment in Cambodia. Deprived of
US combat support, the Lon Nol regime could
not survive the onslaught of communist forces, so
when the Americans finally left, the Khmer Rouge
easily captured Phnom Penh in April 1975 and
took over the whole country.
Had the Americans not turned against
Sihanouk, one of the cleverest and wiliest of
south-east Asian leaders, Cambodia might have
been spared the almost unbelievable horrors that
followed. Sihanouk was now practically a prisoner
in Khmer Rouge hands; for a short while he
served as a useful figurehead, but the infamous
Khmer Rouge leader, known as Pol Pot, wielded
total power. He forced the inhabitants of Phnom
Penh to march into the countryside, where most
1
TURMOIL, WAR AND BLOODSHED IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA 599
