Anglo-Siamese Treaty of 1909 The Anglo-Siamese Treaty of 1909 or Bangkok Treaty of 1909 was a treaty between the United

Kingdom and Thailand signed on March 10, 1909, in Bangkok.[1] Ratifications were exchanged in London on July 9, 1909.[2] The agreement, in which the Malay people were not represented, effectively dissected the northern Malay states into two parts. The area around modern Pattani (Malay: Patani), Narathiwat (Malay: Menara), Songkhla (Malay: Singgora), Satun (Malay: Setul) and Yala (Malay: Jala) remained under Thai control, while Thailand relinquished its claims to sovereignty over Kedah (Thai: (Saiburi)), Kelantan

(Thai: (Kalantan)), Perlis (Thai: (Palit)) and Terengganu (Thai: (Trangkanu)) which integrated the British sphere of influence as protectorates. These four states, along with Johor, later became known as the Unfederated Malay States. Originally Satun and Perlis were part of the Malay Sultanate of Kedah but only Satun remained with Thailand. Patani, Narathiwat, Songkhla and Yala were historically ruled by the Malay Sultanate of Patani. The British logic for sanctioning the continued Thai occupation of the remaining northern half of the Malaya was the perceived value of Thailand as a friendly buffer against the French in Indochina. Both signatories of the 1909 treaty had previously agreed to the Burney Treaty in 1826. The Burney Treaty stated that Kedah, Kelantan, Perlis and Terengganu were Thai provinces while Penang and Province Wellesley belonged to the British while Thailand would not interfere with British trade in Kelantan and Terengganu. This agreement has had a long lasting effect on both Thailand and the Federation of Malaysia. The border between them was mainly drawn by this treaty. Moreover, to some extent, Pattani separatist movement is due to Pattani's refusal to recognize Thai domination over it and ultimately the deal made between the United Kingdom and Thailand. Notes 1. U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Intelligence and Research, Office of the Geographer, "International Boundary Study: Malaysia - Thailand Boundary," No. 57, 15 November 1965. 2. Great Britain, Treaty Series, No. 19 (1909)

Malay lands affirmed as Siamese territory by Great Britain in the 1909 Anglo-Siamese Treaty:1) The four Monthon Pattani districts of Patani, Jala (Siamised as Yala), Teluban (Saiburi) and Menara (Narathiwat); 2) The old Patani districts of Tiba (Thepha) and Cenak (Chana) in Monthon Nakhon Si Thammarat (old Ligor); 3) The Kelantan district of Tabal (Takbai) and slivers of Kelantan territory on the northwest

and west banks of the Golok river; 4) The old Kedah principality of Setul (Satun), somehow detached from Kedah/Monthon Saiburi at the 11th hour of the Treaty reputedly in part-exchange for Kelantans Tumpat district; 5) The Terutau (Tarutao) and Butang island groups, including Pulau Terutau, Pulau Butang, Pulau Udang, Pulau Singa, Pulau Belitong, Pulau Besi, Pulau Tengah, Pulau Cabang, Pulau Nipis, Pulau Rawi, Pulau Petra and Pulau Bulan; 6) All historical Malay domains up to the 11th degree parallel. A cursory reading of the Treaty would elucidate the inevitable conclusion that it was an incomplete project. The arbitrary nature of the demarcation gives the document a distinct work-in-process flavour, the interim stage of a bigger scheme. On both coasts, the international frontier cuts across the heart of Malay villages and communities, effectively dissecting families and kinfolk into two separate nationalities. In the east, the insignificant Golok River, more a glorified meandering stream, became the international frontier that, even today and for practical reasons, is not entirely accepted and viewed as an unnecessary irritant by the Kelantanese and their Patani kinfolk. The Treaty should, hence, be seen as a prelude to subsequent agreements to reflect further adjustments to the frontier per the blueprint of the 1897 Anglo-Siamese Secret Convention. Thus, Patani conspicuously was not mentioned by name in the Treaty; an unfinished matter to be fought on another day. But that day never arrived. The outbreak of the First World War and the tumultuous period leading to and during the Second World War preoccupied the Western World and effectively marked the end of their Southeast Asia land grab. Decolonisation in the decade following the end of the Second World War saw the withdrawal of European powers, with Southeast Asian states gaining independence within the borders carved by their old colonizers. Thailand, Siams new appellation, was consequently saddled with vast tracts of alien territories in its southern frontier, inhabited by a bitter, resentful and disenfranchised populace who could not comprehend nor accept the logic of their land being governed by an alien race with a distinctly divergent language, culture and religion. The old Patani Kingdom was stuck in Thailand; an unwitting pawn of an unfinished political chess game played by others, indeed, a cruel accident of history and a flailing socio-political appendage tethered painfully to the soft underbelly of the Thai nation to this day. The 1909 Anglo-Siamese Treaty has been a catalyst for turmoil from the onset, and remains the worst travesty of justice in the history of the Malays of the peninsula. The Patani Malays, the very people affected by the terms of the treaty, were neither consulted nor participated in the negotiations. Likewise for their Malay brethrens under British rule. To expect the Malay race to simply accept this arbitrary partitioning of their World, without any political recourse, and indeed to compel the Patani people to languish in an undefined national existence devoid of their ethnic, cultural and linguistic identity, and to deny them the affirmation of their race

and national heritage on their own soil, is to go against the most basic, the most primal of human instincts, and an insult to the Malay nation and the people of the Nusantara. The need of a human society to defend and perpetuate its heritage in its homeland is a force no empire in the history of mankind has been able to contain. Repressed societies are sustained and will eventually thrive from their inner strength, a need to survive, and will almost invariably exhaust and dissipate the fragile resolve of the colonising power.

Malay States (Siamese) Ads by Google RM100 Free In Advertising - Start Running Your Own Ads Here. Fill Out the Form & We'll Help You! www.Google.com/AdWords Malay deal - Enjoy great discounts with HSBC home&Aways credit card offers. www.homeandaway.hsbc.com Preaching in Malaysia - Plain and powerful truth from KJV about mysteries, church, and peril. www.LetGodBeTrue.com MALAY STATES (SIAMESE). The authority of Siam, which at one time covered the whole of the Malay peninsula, now extends southward to an irregular line drawn across the Peninsula at about 6 30' N. Between that line and the Isthmus of Kra, usually accepted as the northernmost point of the Malay Peninsula, there lie some 20,000 sq. m. of territory inhabited by a mixed population of Siamese and Malays with here and there a few remnants of the aboriginal inhabitants clinging to the wilder districts, and with a few Chinese settlers engaged in commerce. Formerly this tract was divided into a number of states, each of which was ruled by a chief (Siamese, Chao Muang;Malay, raja), who held his title from the king of Siam, but, subject to a few restrictions, conducted the affairs of his state in accordance with his own desires; the office of chief, moreover, was hereditary, subject always to the approval of the suzerain. The states formed two groups: a northern, including Langsuan, Chaya, Nakhon Sri Tammarat, Songkla, Renawng, Takoapa, Pang Nga, Tongka and Trang, in which the Siamese element predominated and of which the chiefs were usually Siamese or Chinese; and a southern, including Palean, Satun (Setul), Patani, Raman, Jering, Sai (Teloban), Re Nge (Legeh), Yala (Jalor) and Nong Chik, in which the population was principally Malay and the ruler also Malay. Four other states of the southern group, Kelantan, Trengganu, Kedah and Perlis, of which the population is entirely Malay, passed from Siamese to British protection in 1909. With the gradual consolidation of the Siamese kingdom all the states of the northern group have been incorporated as ordinary provinces of Siam (q.v.), the hereditaryChao Muang having died or been pensioned and replaced by officials of the Siamese Civil Service, while the states

themselves now constitute provinces of the administrative divisions of Chumpon, Nakhon Sri Tammarat and Puket. The states of the southern group, however, retain their hereditary rulers, each of whom presides over a council and governs with the aid of a Siamese assistant commissioner and with a staff of Siamese district officials, subject to the general control of high commissioners under whom the states are grouped. This southern group, with a total area of about 7000 sq. m. and a population of 375,000, constitutes the Siamese Malay States. A British consul with headquarters at Puket, and a vice-consul who resides at Songkla, watch over the interests of British subjects in the states of the west and east sides of the peninsula respectively. Other foreign powers are unrepresented. [edit] Palean This small state on the west coast, bounded N. by the province of Trang, E. by the Songkla division, S. by the state of Setul, and W. by the sea, is about 900 sq. m. in area, and has a population of about 20,000. It is attached for administrative purposes to the province of Trang, and its people are chiefly engaged in the cultivation ofpepper, of which about 150 tons are annually exported. A few tin mines are also worked. [edit] Satun (Setul) This small state, bounded N. by Palean, E. by Songkla, S. by Perlis, and W. by the sea, contains about woo sq. m. area with a population of about 25,000, Malays, Siamese and a few Chinese. The principal production is pepper, which is exported in junks and in the small Penang steamers which ply on the west coast of the peninsula. In 1897 Setul was placed under the control of Kedah, then a Siamese dependency, but the arrangement was not a success, and in 1907 the Siamese government was forced, owing to prevailing corruption and misrule, to restrict the powers of the chief and, cancelling the authority of Kedah, to place him to some extent under the orders of the high commissioner of Songkla. By the terms of the AngloSiamese treaty of 1909 about half of the state of Perlis was added to Satun, an arrangement by which the importance of the latter was considerably increased. [edit] Patani The seven Malay states of Nawng Chik, Patani, Jering, Yala (Jalor), Sai (Teloban), Raman and Ra-nge (Legeh) were constituted from the old state of Patani at the beginning of the 19th century. In 1906 they were reunited to form the Patani administrative division of Siam, but each

state retains its Malay ruler, who governs jointly with a Siamese officer under the direction of the Siamese high commissioner, and many of the ancient privileges and customs of Malay government are preserved. The group of states is situated between 5 34' and 6 52' N. and too 54' and rot 58' E. It is bounded N. by the China Sea, E. by the China Sea and Kelantan, S. by Perak, and W. by Kedah. The total area is about 5000 sq. m. The country is mountainous except close to the coast. The principal rivers are the Patani and tle Teloban, long, winding and shallow, and navigable for small boats only. The population is about 335,000, of whom the great majority are Malays. Each state has its capital, but Patani (the headquarters of the high commissioner) is the only town of importance. Communications are poor and are chiefly by river, but roads are under construction. Patani and Sai are in telegraphic communication with Bangkok and Singapore, and regular weekly mails are despatched to those places. The area under cultivation is small except round about Patani and in Nawng Chik, where much rice is grown. Tin mining is a growing industry; many Chinese own mines and several European syndicates are at work in Raman, Ra-nge and Patani, prospecting for, or mining, this metal. Fishing and salt-evaporation occupy a large proportion of the population. The annual export of tin is about 400 tons, and dried fish, salt, cattle and elephants are other exports. Steamers up to 300 tons maintain frequent communication with Bangkok and Singapore, and the Patani roads afford good anchorage at all seasons. Mahommedan law is followed in the settlement of inherited property disputes and of matrimonial affairs; otherwise the laws of Siam obtain. Efficient law courts have been established in each state, and there is a serviceable force of gendarmerie recruited from amongst Malays and Siamese alike. The revenue amounts to about 600,000 ticals, or 45,000 a year, one-third being payable to the rulers as private income for themselves and their relatives, one-third expended on the administration, and one-third reserved for special purposes, but it is usually found necessary to devote the lastmentioned third to the expenses of administration. Patani has been subject to Siam from the remotest times. It is said that the old state adopted Islamism in the 16th century, the chief, a relative of the kings of Siam, embracing that religion and at the same time revolting to Malacca. It has several times been necessary to send punitive expeditions to recall the state to its allegiance. The present rulers are mostly descended from the ruling families of the neighbouring state of Kelantan, but the chief of Patani itself is a member of the family which ruled there in the days of its greatness. Throughout the 17th century Patani was resorted to by Portuguese, Dutch and English merchants, who had factories ashore and used the place as anemporium for trade with Siam. In 1621 an engagement took place in the Patani roads between three Dutch and two British ships, the latter being taken after the president of the British merchants, John Jourdain, had been killed. In 1899 the border between the state of

Perak and Raman was fixed by an agreement between England and Siam, a dispute of old standing being thereby settled, but the question was reopened in the negotiations which preceded the Anglo-Siamese treaty of 1909, when a new border line was fixed between British and Siamese possessions in the Peninsula. (W. A. G.)

Perlis was originally part of Kedah, until 1842. A series of conflicts between Kedah, Perak and Siam forced British intervention in 1826 where the Burney and Low Treaties were signed formalising relations between the two Malay states and Siam, their nominal overlord. In the Burney Treaty, the exiled Kedahan sultan Ahmad Tajuddin was not restored to his throne. Sultan Ahmad and his armed supporters then fought for his restoration over twelve years (1830-1842). In 1842 Britain put pressure on Siam to restore the Sultan. This was done, but Perlis and Setul were separated. Perlis was given to Syed Sapee, an Arab merchant. His descendants still rule Perlis, as rajas, instead of as sultans. The Anglo-Siamese Treaty of 1909 transferred Thai sovereignty over Perlis to the British but the Japanese "handed it back" to Thailand during its occupation of the Malay Peninsular. After the Japanese surrendered, Perlis once again came under British protection until it gained independence under the banner of the Federation of Malaya in 1957. Not all the southern Malay provinces of Thailand were once a part of Malaysia! In fact, none of them was a part of Malaysia because Malaysia was created only in 1963 through the union of Malaya (West Malaysia bordering Thailand), Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore (Singapore left Malaysia in 1965). But these are the facts: the Thai province of SATUN was once a part of the Malaysian state of KEDAH. Under the Anglo-Siamese Treaty of 1909, the two colonial powers (Britain and Siam) decided to split Malaya between the two of them. In this Treaty, the Malay sultanate of PATTANI was given in entirety to Siam. The Malay sultanates of KELANTAN and TERENGGANU were given in entirety to the British. The Malay sultanate of KEDAH was split into three parts: Kedah proper, Setul and Perlis. SETUL was given to Siam and renamed SATUN by the Siamese. PERLIS was made a new sultanate and given to the British, and Kedah proper, called SAIBURI in Siamese, was also given to the British. So, when MALAYA became independent in 1957, it inherited KEDAH, PERLIS, KELANTAN and TERENGGANU from the British. In 1963, Malaya united with SABAH and SARAWAK to form MALAYSIA. As for PATTANI, it was formerly a vassal of Thailandfor hundreds of years that still

retained some degree of autonomy. But after the 1909 Anglo-Siam Treaty, Thailand (formerly Siam) officially annexed Pattani later on and abolished its autonomy. Pattani was then split into three smaller provinces of NARATHIWAT (from MENARA in Malay), PATTANI (from PATANI in Malay) and YALA (from JALA in Malay). About 80% of the people of Pattani, Yala and Narathiwat are Malays who are Muslims, thus sharing the ethnic and religious bonds with Malaysia. Pattani has always been a rebellious province for hunderds of years long before the 1909 Anglo-Siamese Treaty. And the provinces that once made up the Sultanate of Pattani continue to be rebellious even to this day. SATUN is the only Malay province of Thailand that has been peaceful and has never had any history of rebellion against the central government in Bangkok. The Malaysian state of Kedah, however, has a record of going to wars against Siam many times, in fact, it won one some wars against the Siamese, even successfully liberated parts of Pattani for a short while. Kedah was militarily stronger than Pattani. The Thai-Malay conflict in south Thailand has been going on for the last 200-300 years with or without al-Qaeda or Malaysia. The conflict is still ON-GOING as we speak. Pattani was a Malay Muslim Sultanate. Its last major war with Thailand was in 1787 when it lost that war. The Sultan of Pattani and thousands of Pattani Malay Muslim soldiers were dragged in iron chains to Bangkok and forced to be slaves. Pattani was defeated and humiliated. Ever since, Pattani has been fighting for its independence to THIS DAY. I personally think that Thailand is COLONIZING Pattani, just like the British colonized Malaysia or the French colonized Cambodia. The people of Pattani are ethnically Malays, not Thais. They are Muslims, not Buddhists. Pattani has its own history, culture and used to have its own kingdom and kings. They deserve to be independent. The only reason Thailand is in Pattani now is because of its superior military power. The Thai-Pattani conflict in southern Thailand will go on forever, just like it has been going on in the past. The people of Pattani will never stop fighting NOW because they had never stopped fighting in the PAST, with or without alQaeda. Even MY HOME Malaysian state of KEDAH too had been fighting the Siamese for hundreds of years. Kedah was luckier to be transferred to BRITAIN and joined Malaysia and became a part of a big Malay country called MALAYSIA in 1957. Kedah's last war against Thailand was in 1841. Thailand won that war with British help: the British blockaded Kedah at the sea with 30 warships for 3 months so no weapons could reach Kedah, to weaken Kedah so that it would be easier for the Thais to defeat Kedah. Kedah, like Pattani, remained COLONIZED by Siam until 1909 after which it was transferred to Britain under the Anglo-Siamese Treaty.

Kedah officially became a part of MALAYA in 1948, and Malaya became independent from Britain in 1957. But Kedah's province of SETUL (now called SATUN in Thailand) was given to Thailand only because 30% of its population were Siamese. PATTANI was not lucky: they begged FRANK SWETTENHAM (British Resident in Malaysia) to include Pattani in Malaya but failed. The British refused to take in Pattani into Malaya; they only took in KEDAH, KELANTAN, PERLIS and TRENGGANU. If the British had taken in Pattani, then today Pattani would have been a part of Malaysia. But that's history. Anglo-Siamese Treaty of 1909 -- Partitioning of the Malay Heartland Book Excerpt Extract of Anglo-Siamese Treaty, 1909 Delineation of Boundary Commencing from the most seaward point of the northern bank of the estuary of the Perlis River and thence north to the range of hills which is the watershed between the Perlis River on one side and the Pujok River on the other; then following the watershed formed by the said range of hills until it reaches the main watershed or dividing line between those rivers which flow into the Gulf of Siam on the one side and into the Indian Ocean on the other; following this main watershed so as to pass the sources of the Sungei Patani, Sungei Telubin, and Sungei Perak, to the point which is the source of the Sungei Pergau; then leaving the main watershed and going along the watershed separating the waters of the Sungei Pergau from the Sungei Telubin, to the hill called Bukit Jeli or the source of the main stream of the Sungei Golok to the sea at a place called Kuala Tabar. This line will leave the valleys of the Sungei Patani, Sungei Telubin, and Sungei Tanjung Mas and the valley on the left or west bank of the Golok to Siam and the whole valley of the Perak River and the valley on the right or east bank of the Golok to Great Britain. The island known as Pule Langkawi, together with all the islets south of the midchannel between Terutau and Langkawi, and all the islands south of Langkawi shall become British. Terutau and the islets to the north of mid-channel ... to Siam. Source: Bangkok Treaty (Anglo-Siamese Treaty) signed on March 10, 1909, with ratifications exchanged in London on July 9, 1909. (Great Britain, Foreign Office, Treaty Series 1909, No. 19, Command 4703, London) As a rule, such statements do explain the general flow of British Colonization in Malaya. But there were at least three uprising for the period 1891-1928 that seemed to defy any sweeping generalization. Elements that prompted the Birch debacle, such as the infringement of Malay values, tradition and the chiefs taxing rights, seemed to be again operative in the latter rebellions. It might seemed that the supposedly "lessons" of Birchs murder did not stick. For example, in the Pahang Rising of 1891-1895, the chief perpetuator, Dato Bahamans grievances originated from the loss of his income and privileges in the aftermath of British mining regulations. Similarly, members of the Pahang cabal, such as To Raja, To Gajah,

Panglima Muda and Mat Kilau had similar grievances. This state of affairs had its antecedent in 1889 where one Haji Wan Daud ran amok in Kuala Lipis killing W. C. Mitchell the Superintendent of Ulu Pahang who had tried to evict the former. Clearly, the British interference in the form of district offices and State Council precipitated the magnitude of the subsequent Pahang Rising. In Kelantan, the To Janggut Rebellion of 1915 had similar origins. Following the Anglo-Siamese Treaty of 1909, Britain obtained from Siam the suzerainties of Kelantan, Trengganu, Kedah and Perlis in exchange for a loan of four million pounds to extend Siams railway to the Northern Malay States. Realpolitik aside, Kelantan found herself beholden to administrative reforms she neither like nor welcomed. Again, the District Officers replaced the territorial chiefs in collecting taxes, which were being channeled into the state treasury. Not only were the territorial chiefs removed from a source of pride and lucrative income, the peasants were faced with an faceless taxation system which took no account of the prevailing ground conditions. Engku Besar, the chief of Pasir Puteh, apparently felt the pinch and instigated his follower, To Janggut (Haji Mat Hassan) into rebellion. Similarly, British rationalization of Trengganus administration hurt the peripheral elites authority. But Ulu Trengganus peasantry was worse off under the 1921 new land regulation. Impoverished peasants were not allowed to clear the forest to plant hill rice. The 1926 Land Enactment Act worsen the situation, now the peasants had to purchase permits for land clearing and even firewood could not be gathered at will. This "closing of the frontier" exacerbated the peasants hardship. A freak flood, Bah Besar, which devastated villages in December 1926, was the spark in such a tinder-like situation. That a Telemong religious recluse, Khatib Abdul Rahman, who had the backing of Ulu Trengannus local elites, could led a protest march towards Kuala Trengganu in May 1928 could only be attributed to the "culmination of tension" for the past six years. In each of the three cases, the local lites provided leadership. Scott, however, perceptively alludes to the size of the movements, which varies directly with the kind of leaders throw up by the rebellion. Such chieftains materialized "as leaders by virtue of the respect and esteem others held for them and perhaps because of other attributes such as being the head of a large local kindred." Dato Bahaman had orang aslis support, which largely accounted for his ability to evade capture. The Ulu Trengganu peasants grievances featured large in Khatib Abdul Rahmans rebellion. All three rebellions had peasantry support. Throughout the bulk of this period, 1821-1909, the northern states of Malaya (Perlis, Kedah, Terrenganu and Kelantan) were conquered by the Siamese and thereafter transferred over to the British through the Anglo-Siamese Treaty of 1909 aka Bangkok Treaty 1909. There was rarely any form of systematic economic development during this period due to political instability. Between 1821 and 1841, states were under direct rule from Bangkok. During this period, conditions in the northern states were dismal, mainly because of the Siamese invasion. Furthermore, internal disturbances such as floods and droughts only induced further deterioration.