| Almost all of the member nations have ratified the United Nations (UN) Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (1967), making those instruments' provisions a part of the settled body of international law. Yet, of all the states of Asia, only four--China, Japan, Papua New Guinea, and the Philippines--have chosen to formally accept them.;Following the fall of the states of Indochina to the communists in 1975, Thailand became the haven of refuge for the largest migration of refugees that had occurred in Asia since the end of World War II, but the Royal Thai Government (RTG) remained adamant in its refusal to accede to the U.N. instruments. This study examines the thesis that Thailand could have achieved her essential security and economic interests during the period of the Indochinese migrations as effectively as she did even if she had abided by the provisions of the U.N. Convention and Protocol.;The review of the history of the period of the Indochinese migrations demonstrated that if the RTG strictly observed these legal instruments, it would have been obliged to accept at least two or three times as many refugees as it did, making the country heavily dependent on the continued good will and charity of the international community for a prolonged, indefinite period. The Thais also would not have been able to prevent the effective depopulation of much of central Laos and western Cambodia; they would have been unable to prevent their country from becoming the preferred haven of first asylum for hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese boat people. Most important of all, the Thais would have been hindered, if not precluded, from providing covert support for the Khmer guerrilla campaign against the Vietnamese occupation forces in Cambodia.;Thus, the study concluded that Thailand could not have achieved several objectives that were of critical importance to her long-term security and economic self-sufficiency if she had been obliged to strictly observe the humanitarian norms prescribed by the U.N. legal instruments. The findings also indicated that, until there is a dramatic amelioration of political conditions in Southeast Asia, or a decision on the part of the leading members of the international community to enforce universal compliance with the humanitarian norms contained in the Convention and Protocol, Thailand and most of the other nations of the region will continue to decline to accept such obligations. |
