Suchergebnisse

In insurgent wars, gaining reliable intelligence is of essential importance to both sides of the conflict. This paper examines the functioning of Dutch intelligence and security services in the Indonesian decolonization war (1945–1949), focusing in particular on their practices of arresting people to be questioned or interrogated. On the basis of interrogation reports produced by the various intelligence and security services, it argues that the arrest and interrogation practices of the intelligence apparatus itself should be seen as a form of violence. These practices created a psychological terror that forced 'ordinary' citizens to choose a side, exposing them to retribution from the other. The consequence was increasing social distrust, with potentially long-lasting effects.

Charlotte Laarman, Oude onbekenden. Het politieke en publieke debat over postkoloniale migranten, 1945-2005 (Hilversum: Verloren, 2013, 295 pp., isbn 978 90 8704 371 1).

Legally Sanctioned Apologies: Rawagedeh, South Sulawesi, and Dutch ReticenceIn the summer of 2013, for the first time in history, the Netherlands decided to officially apologise for crimes committed by its troops during the Indonesian war of independence (1945-1949). Indonesian victims had forced the Dutch government to take this step by suing it in two consecutive civil lawsuits. Taking legal steps had offered these victims a chance to demand justice and have their voices heard in the land of the perpetrators. However the legal approach to bringing historical injustice to public attention can also have adverse effects. It confines public debate to very specific types of incidents that fall within the parameters of legal responsibility and legal evidence. Moreover, the fact that apologies have to be legally enforced diminishes the chance of successful reconciliation – the apparent goal of apologies. The juridification of speaking about historical apologies is therefore a double-edged sword. In de zomer van 2013 bood Nederland voor het eerst in de geschiedenis officieel excuses aan voor misdaden begaan tijdens de onafhankelijkheidsoorlog in Indonesië (1945-1949). Indonesische slachtoffers hadden de Nederlandse regering hiertoe gedwongen door middel van twee civiele rechtszaken. Het bewandelen van de juridische weg verschafte aan hen een stem in het land van de daders en gaf ze een kans hun rechten op te eisen. Maar de juridische benadering van het spreken over historisch onrecht kan ook keerzijden hebben. Het beperkt namelijk het publieke debat tot nauw omlijnde gevallen die binnen de parameters van de juridische bewijsvoering vallen. Bovendien zorgt het feit dat excuses juridisch afgedwongen moeten worden ervoor dat de kans op verzoening – het doel van de excuses – aanmerkelijk vermindert. De juridisering van het spreken over historische excuses is daarmee een tweesnijdend zwaard.

In de zomer van 2013 bood Nederland voor het eerst in de geschiedenis officieel excuses aan voor misdaden begaan tijdens de onafhankelijkheidsoorlog in Indonesië (1945-1949). Indonesische slachtoffers hadden de Nederlandse regering hiertoe gedwongen door middel van twee civiele rechtszaken. Het bewandelen van de juridische weg verschafte aan hen een stem in het land van de daders en gaf ze een kans hun rechten op te eisen. Maar de juridische benadering van het spreken over historisch onrecht kan ook keerzijden hebben. Het beperkt namelijk het publieke debat tot nauw omlijnde gevallen die binnen de parameters van de juridische bewijsvoering vallen. Bovendien zorgt het feit dat excuses juridisch afgedwongen moeten worden ervoor dat de kans op verzoening – het doel van de excuses – aanmerkelijk vermindert. De juridisering van het spreken over historische excuses is daarmee een tweesnijdend zwaard. Dit artikel maakt deel uit van het forum 'Historische excuses'.Legally Sanctioned Apologies: Rawagedeh, South Sulawesi, and Dutch ReticenceIn the summer of 2013, for the first time in history, the Netherlands decided to officially apologise for crimes committed by its troops during the Indonesian war of independence (1945-1949). Indonesian victims had forced the Dutch government to take this step by suing it in two consecutive civil lawsuits. Taking legal steps had offered these victims a chance to demand justice and have their voices heard in the land of the perpetrators. However the legal approach to bringing historical injustice to public attention can also have adverse effects. It confines public debate to very specific types of incidents that fall within the parameters of legal responsibility and legal evidence. Moreover, the fact that apologies have to be legally enforced diminishes the chance of successful reconciliation – the apparent goal of apologies. The juridification of speaking about historical apologies is therefore a double-edged sword. This article is part of the forum 'Historical apologies'.

Challenging the colonial perspective: researching the war in Indonesia 1945-1949 with Indonesian sourcesDutch historiography on the Indonesian War of Independence (1945-1949) has until this day remained almost exclusively dependent on Dutch primary sources. This article offers a first survey of new insights that can be gained by studying Indonesian archival records. Using several case studies of Dutch military violence, it sheds new light on four key aspects of counterinsurgent violence in the age of decolonization: the distinction between 'civilians' and 'combatants'; the role of 'low-key violence' like arson and theft; the practise of mass-arrests; and the results of aerial, artillery and naval bombardments. The authors conclude that Dutch historiography as a consequence of selective use of sources has remained in the dark on the disruptive effects of Dutch warfare on Indonesian society. They argue for moving beyond the hegemony of the colonial perspective inherent to the colonial sources, by studying Indonesian archives more systematically.In de Nederlandse historiografie van de oorlog in Indonesië (1945-1949) wordt tot op de dag van vandaag vrijwel uitsluitend Nederlands bronnenmateriaal gebruikt. Dit artikel biedt een eerste inventarisatie van de nieuwe inzichten die de studie van Indonesisch archiefmateriaal kan verschaffen. Aan de hand van enkele casussenover Nederlands militair geweld wordt een viertal aspecten van de oorlogsvoering opnieuw belicht: de afgrenzing tussen 'burgers' en 'combattanten'; de rol van 'klein geweld' zoals brandstichting en diefstal; de praktijk van massa-arrestaties; en de gevolgen van artilleriebeschietingen en luchtaanvallen. De auteurs concluderendat de Nederlandse geschiedschrijving door selectief bronnengebruik blind is gebleven voor de ontwrichtende gevolgen van de Nederlandse oorlogvoering voor de Indonesische maatschappij. Zij pleiten daarom voor het doorbreken van de hegemonie van de Nederlandse bron en zijn koloniale perspectief door middel van een meer systematische studie in Indonesische archieven.

Introduction : Beyond the League Table of Barbarity : Comparing Extreme Violence during the Wars of Decolonization / Thijs Brocades Zaalberg and Bart Luttikhuis -- Not an Afterthought : Accountability for Colonial Violence in the Dutch and British Metropoles / Huw Bennett and Peter Romijn -- Windows onto the Micro-Dynamics of Insurgent and Counterinsurgent Violence : Evidence from Late Colonial Southeast Asia and Africa Compared / Roel Frakking and Martin Thomas -- Cracking Down on Revolutionary Zeal and Violence : Local Dynamics and Early Colonial Responses to the Independence Struggle in Indochina and the Indonesian Archipelago, 1945-1947 / Pierre Asselin and Henk Schulte Nordholt -- The Places, Traces, and Politics of Rape in the Indonesian and the Algerian Wars of Independence / Stef Scagliola and Natalya Vince, in collaboration with Khedidja Adel and Galuh Amba -- "The normal order of things" : Contextualizing "Technical Violence" in the Netherlands-Indonesia War / Azarja Harmanny and Brian McAllister Linn -- "Bloodshed on a rather large scale" : Tactical Conduct and Non-combatant Casualties in Dutch, French, and British Colonial Counterinsurgency / Christiaan Harinck -- Comparing the Afterlives, Political Uses, and Memories of Extreme Violence during the Wars of Decolonization in France, the Netherlands, and Britain / Raphaëlle Branche.

In Empire's Violent End, Thijs Brocades Zaalberg and Bart Luttikhuis, along with expert contributors, present comparative research focused specifically on excessive violence in Indonesia, Algeria, Vietnam, Malaysia, Kenya and other areas during the wars of decolonization. In the last two decades, there have been heated public and scholarly debates in France, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands on the violent end of empire. Nevertheless, the broader comparative exploits into colonial counter-insurgency tend to treat atrocities such as torture, execution, rape, and others on the side. The editors describe how such comparisons mostly focus on the differences by engaging in 'guilt rating.' Moreover, the dramas that have unfolded in Algeria and Kenya tend to overshadow similar violent events in Indonesia, the very first nation to declare independence directly after World War II. Empire's Violent End is the first book to place the Dutch-Indonesian case at the heart of a comparison with focused, thematic analysis on a diverse range of topics to demonstrate that despite variation in scale, combat intensity and international dynamics, there were more similarities than differences in the ways colonial powers used extreme forms of violence. By delving into the causes and nature of the abuse, Brocades Zaalberg and Luttikhuis conclude that all cases involved some form of institutionalized impunity, which enabled the type of situation in which the forces in the service of the colonial rulers were able to use extreme violence