Resisting Colonialism in Thailand

There are many factors that contributed to Thailand not being colonized in the 19th and 20th centuries. Early in the book “The Asian Pacific” by Vera Simone, she initially attributes Thailand’s success at repelling European colonial expansion, which had swept up other larger countries like China, to the clever diplomacy of King Rama IV and “the willingness of France and England to have his country serve as a buffer between their holdings…” 1 However many other factors also account for Thailand’s durability in the face of imperialism, not simply the beneficence of powerful nations. Some of the leading factors, which will be covered in more detail below, included a consolidation of national government power, cementing nationalism, and rapidly moving towards self-imposed modernism. All three of these movements would make Thailand a much more complex system for colonial powers to manipulate and control.

Unlike China, Thai leaders worked methodically to consolidate government power in Thailand once they perceived the European colonial threat. While at once working to avoid conflict with Western powers by avoiding reactionary or arbitrary policies that would spark a conflict, King Mongkut and his successors led a top-down reform that incorporated local power bases into a nationally controlled scheme and integrated those local leaders who lost power in the process into the national bureaucracy. 2 The focus of government transformed from that of local, semiautonomous cells of administration to a centralized body with specialized departments with national responsibility. This transformation led to a more powerful central government able to approach dissent and threats in a more cohesive way. Indeed, cultural cohesion within the nation was strengthened with the new mandate of the national government.

As in other Asian countries reacting to colonialism, nationalism played an important role in Thailand, but more in a preemptive role as opposed to an armed opposition role in the 19th and early 20th century. For example, nationalism and an idea of a unique and proud Thai state made it more difficult for Western powers to manipulate the Thai people into inequitable agreements (although some inequitable agreements were made for the sake of neutral relations with France and Britain, but not on the same devastating scale as in China). 3 The government used its power and moral capital to promote a standard Thai language (which would effectively allow all Thais to communicate in a common vernacular and concurrently weaken regional differences), elevate the prestige of the royal family as the ultimate national leadership body, and promote the role of orthodox Thammayut Buddhism in society, which the royal family was undeniably and piously devoted to. 4 These movements, in addition to other cultural reforms, served to strengthen the bond of Thai citizens and promote a nationalistic view of themselves in opposition to outside influence.

Finally, Thailand adapted itself to understand the Western mindset while retaining its Eastern identity. It also understood that colonization was bringing with it modernization, often for the capitalist benefit of the predator country, under the guise of a civilizing project. 5 In order to preempt Western advances and promises of modernity, the Thai leadership began a system of raising state revenue and investment in infrastructure. While a nation like China was suffocating in bogus debts and reliant on Western powers to build infrastructure (such as railways) and in no position to challenge their dependence, Thailand was able to provide limited modernization and reinforce its legitimacy with its citizens. 6

Because of the compounded effects of consolidation, nationalism, and modernization, Thailand was able to effectively resist Western coercion and the lasting effects of colonialism.

Notes

1. Vera Simone, The Asian Pacific, 2nd ed. (New York: Longman, 2001), 3.
2. Ibid., 101
3. Ibid., 101
4. Ibid., 102
5. Ibid., 108
6. Ibid., 108