For a French Indo-Chinese Federation

Abstract

IN ANY DISCUSSION of political problems in French Indo-China today,' the first and basic question is: Do we want to see French Indo-China perpetuated? The author believes that the continued existence of such an entity would be in the interest of peace in Southeast Asia, and that its dissolution would be more detrimental than advantageous. If the Indo-Chinese Federation, sponsored and guided by France, were to disappear, the lands lying between the Annamite areas and Siam-that is, Cambodia, Laos and the Moi regions-would become the pawn of more powerful neighbors which would become embroiled eventually in imperialistic rivalry and armed conflicts. There can be no doubt about it: the French Indo-Chinese Federation is a factor for peace. Before France appeared in Indo-China, there had never existed in that part of Asia any state with territorial holdings so extensive as those of the prewar Federation. The largest state in Indo-Chinese history had been the Khmer empire which, even in its greatest period, did not extend to the eastern shores of Indo-China. At the end of the nineteenth century, France, rightly or wrongly, brought together Cochin China, Cambodia, Annam, Tonkin and eastern Laos-territories which had no political life or cultural heritage in common. Cambodia and Laos owed much to Indian civilization; Tonkin, Annam and Cochin China had been influenced most strongly by China; while the Moi areas, which were attached loosely to Cambodia, Laos and Annam, were peopled by primitive Indonesians. French Indo-China is thus a hotchpotch of very different peoples. A Cambodian, for example, differs far more from an Annamite than an Englishman does from an Italian. There is a much greater difference between a Laotian living on the western slope of the Annamite Cordillera and an Annamite on the eastern than