Not surprisingly, he didn’t blame
himself for all of the bloodshed. Nor
did he blame the government in The Hague, though he did point out some of its
miscalculations, as well as the shortcomings of his more conservative fellow
colonials. More than anything, van Mook
blamed the interference of inexpert foreigners – the British and the naïve
Americans, the unreliable Australians, the newly independent Indians, the
calculating Russians and their communist satellites, and the do-gooders at the
United Nations. Already at the founding
conference of the United Nations in San Francisco in 1945 he had rejected the
notion that the Dutch East Indies should become a trusteeship of the UN: “When
the prerequisites are on their course to completion: political and economic
stability, a common citizenship and a common language, and an assured
succession of ever better educated generations, the realization of
self-government needs no trusteeship, no commissions and no time-table as long
as the intentions of both parties remain unsullied by greed, or bad faith or
tyranny.”[3]
Some months after his book’s publication he still echoed this belief in an
article in Foreign Affairs: “Its [The
Indonesian problem] solution was and is primarily the concern of the
Netherlands and Indonesia themselves. Unfortunately (…) it came to be treated
internationally as a problem to all for debate and interference.”[4]
He argued that the government of the Netherlands had defended the best
interests of Indonesians: “The Netherlands Government was quite prepared to
grant self-government and independence to Indonesia (…) But it wanted to go
about the grave business of setting up a nation in an orderly and efficient
way. It could not hand over its responsibility to an illegally constituted
organization that showed hardly any capacity to provide justice and stability
for millions of suffering people.”[5]
Van Mook began his book by
reminding the reader of the new, totalitarian form of imperialism, the “police
terror” of the Soviet Union.[6]
The Soviets, he claimed, preyed on the poor and weak but their ultimate aim was
not liberation but driving out the West.[7]
They are helped, he added, by fellow travelers such as Australia, "which in
various votes over Indonesia in the Security Council stood on the side of the
Russians.”[8]
An initial error of perception,
according to van Mook, was for the new Labour government in Britain to give in
to “liberation mania” and accept all Asian liberation movements at face value.[9] More grievous still was the Allies’ change in
the policy with which they had been tasked – to disarm the Japanese and take
them into custody - and the “over hastiness” with which the British began to
deal with and semi- officially recognize the Indonesian republican movement.[10]
He repeated the point at a lecture at Chatham House in March 1949, that: “in
recognizing a Republican Government as a semi-legal authority, both the British
and occupying forces, and later on the world at large, went, in my view, much
too fast”, though, recognising that British troops saved the lives of countless
Dutch citizens, and in incredibly difficult and dangerous conditions, he added:
“we are extremely grateful for what the British did.”[11]
One thing, according to van Mook, is certain: had the British quickly disarmed
the Japanese, rather than permitting the latter to hand over their weapons to
Indonesian nationalists, “a lot of misery would have been spared the
Indonesians and Dutch.”[12]
The situation in 1945 was further
complicated by the strike by Australian dock workers, inspired by the Australian
Communist Party,[13]
as well as the British refusal to allow Dutch troops to return to Java and
Sumatra.[14]
Although van Mook was repelled at
the idea of negotiating with Sukarno, a man who, during the Japanese
occupation, “had placed himself so completely behind Japan” that he must be
considered to be a “collaborator”,[15]
he did begin personal negotiations with the nationalists, including Sukarno, in
October, 1945.[16]
But this first meeting caused widespread negative reactions among the public in
The Netherlands and began a rift between van Mook and the authorities in The
Hague.[17]
Indeed an urgent meeting of the Dutch cabinet was called and the minutes reveal
that the ministers considered van Mook’s behavior to be “incorrect and not
acceptable to the government” and they immediately began discussing the process
of replacing him.[18]
A week later the Minister for the Colonies, Logemann, wrote to van Mook, accusing him
of doing a 180 degree about face, and furthermore letting him know that among
important sections of the Dutch public and parliament, his meeting with Sukarno
was considered to be an act of “national treason”.[19]
Shortly thereafter van Mook visited
The Netherlands and was alarmed by some of the strong sentiments that he
encountered there, as well as by the stridency of some voices who refused to
recognize the difficulties of the new and ever changing situation in Indonesia.[20] Likewise, when in April 1946 the Dutch
authorities did sit down with the Indonesian nationalist leaders at a conference
in the Hoge Veluwe in The Netherlands, van Mook was disappointed, firstly by
the exaggerated security measures at the conference, secondly by the refusal of
the Dutch government to allow van Mook to make any public statements, and
thirdly by the negative attitude of the Dutch press towards negotiation.[21]
He informs us that from this time onward he became the target of a continuous
orgy of criticism and lies in the Dutch press and, what is more, the government
failed to defend him adequately.[22]
Nevertheless, negotiations between
the two sides continued in Indonesia itself, culminating in van Mook and a
Dutch delegation visiting the rebel controlled zone and, in November 1946,
signing the Linggadjati Accord. According
to van Mook, at this point many believed that the conflict was over.[23]
Feelings of optimism seemed even more justified when the news reached Indonesia
in December that a majority in the Dutch parliament in The Hague had voted to
ratify the accord.[24]
Alas, it soon became clear that what the Dutch authorities had accepted was a
truncated version of Linggadjati; an interpretation of the original agreement
of their own devising which, unsurprisingly, was rejected by the Indonesian
republicans.[25]
![]() |
| The Infamous campaign on South Celebes |
Van Mook next mentions that around
this time he ordered a special military action in South Celebes, in order to
put an end to the nationalist regime of systematic terror that had been unleashed
on this island. He admitted that during
the pacification of the island, the Dutch had committed some “excesses”.[26]
Many decades later what had happened on South Celebes would come back to haunt
Holland. Van Mook also tells us that the Dutch soldiers within their own zone
had become the daily targets of the nationalists and that the breakdown in law
and order had gradually become “near unbearable”.[27]
At last, van Mook, the Commission General and the government in The Hague
concluded that there was no other option than a military solution.[28]
He described the first Police Action as being a military success, with Dutch
soldiers being mostly greeted “with a sigh of relief”.[29]
It seemed logical that the cleansing of the republican areas should be set
forth to the end,[30]
but it is at this point that the UN intervened, with India and Australia
sponsoring a Security Council resolution on July 31st , calling for
a ceasefire. It was passed and accepted immediately by the Dutch government.[31]
Van Mook obviously felt betrayed; with the conflict’s end in sight, he had been
forced to stop with the job only half done.[32]
Speaking of the Security Council’s resolution at his Chatham House lecture some
years later, he would admit “I myself think that that was a calamity.” [33]Not
only that, but The Netherlands also accepted the presence in Indonesia of a UN
appointed Commission of Good Services, thereby allowing what van Mook
considered to be “international interference”,[34]
or even more strongly worded “inexpert international meddling.”[35]
What followed was a year of futile, failed negotiations, terror and
counter-terror.
Van Mook tells us that the communist
influence among the republicans now grew much stronger and that even
non-communist nationalists began to draw nearer to the Soviet Union as they
awaited a third world war, which they expected Russia to win.[36]
He informs us that the members of the
Commission of Good Services were blind to the true nature of the republican
government and that the American in the group had concluded that a communist
takeover of the republican area could only be avoided by giving far reaching
concessions.[37]
His sense of betrayal was deepened when it became clear that by mid-1948 the
authorities in The Hague had come to consider him to be an obstacle that had to
be removed. On October 5th 1948 Prime Minister Drees informed van
Mook that his services were no longer required.[38]
On November 3rd he left his office and departed from Indonesia the next
day, never to return to the place where he had been born and raised and to
which he had devoted his entire working life. The following month the Dutch
began their second military “Police Action”, setting forth what van Mook had
started in June 1947. Like the first Police Action, this one too was brought to
an abrupt end “by an inevitable new action of the Security Council.”[39]
![]() |
| Sukarno reading The Declaration of Independence, August 17th 1945 |
Van Mook concluded his book in
February 1949 with a call for the Indonesians and the Dutch to together build
something great, something that could serve as a beacon for South East Asia. He
concluded: ”But then all of us who can contribute, must bring together, and
offer the leadership, to people who love both the Netherlands and Indonesia and
who can see for both countries such a great, common future”.[40]
One cannot help but think that what van Mook has in mind is a collection of
people like van Mook. Ten months later The Republic of Indonesia was recognized
by The Kingdom of the Netherlands. There
was to be no common future and van Mook’s dream had come to nought. Van Mook has gotten to write his own history, but few were listening.
Van Mook’s work was just hot off the press when, in May
1949, a counter-argument appeared. The author was the social democrat
parliamentarian Jacques de Kadt. In his De
Indonesische tragedie: Het treurspel van gemiste kansen he accused the
Dutch government of following a policy whose goal was to deny Indonesia real
freedom. Van Mook’s aim, according to de Kadt, had been to create a federation
composed of a “completely powerless and chaotic collection of puppet states”
over which the Netherlands could continue to exert its control.[41]
According to H. W. van den Doel, most Dutch historians fell into line behind
Kadt’s general analysis.[42]
[1] H. W. Van den Doel, Afschied van Indie, (Amsterdam:
Prometheus, 2001) p. 43-44
[2]
He explained his goal: “Firstly the national liberation of the country
[Indonesia], by which it can take its place, under its own government, among
the nations as an equal. And also, a
permanent relationship with the Netherlands such that cooperation - now
voluntary and abased on equal footing – can be perpetuated.” H. J. Van Mook, Indonesie, Nederland en de Wereld. (Amsterdam: De Bezige Bij, 1949)
p. 12
[3]
Quoted in H. J. Van Mook, Indonesie,
Nederland en de Wereld. (Amsterdam: De Bezige Bij, 1949) p. 45
[4]
H. J. Van Mook, „Indonesia and the Problem of Southeast Asia“. Foreign Affairs, vol. 27, no. 4 (July,
1949) p. 561
[5]
Ibid., p. 571
[6]
Van Mook, Indonesie, p. 7
[7]
Ibid., p. 11
[8]
Ibidem.
[9]
Ibid., p. 90
[10]
Ibid., p. 91
[11]
H. J. Van Mook, „Indonesia“. International Affairs, vol. 25, No. 3, p. 274
[12]
Van Mook, Indonesie, p. 77
[13]
Ibid., p. 88
[14]
Ibid., p. 95
[15]
Ibid., p. 102
[16]
Ibid., p. 104
[17]
Ibid. P. 104-105
[18]
Minutes of the cabinet meeting 1 November 1945: Officiele Bescheiden betreffende de Nederlands-Indonesische
Betrekkingen 1945-1950, KS 36: 282. Archive A.Z.
[19]
Logemann
(Minister of the Colonies) to Van Mook (Lt. Governor General), 9 November 1945:
Officiele Bescheiden betreffende
de Nederlands-Indonesische Betrekkingen 1945-1950, KS 37: 1. Archive
Ministry of Colonies, I.A. 178
[20]
Van Mook, Indonesie, p. 111-112
[21]
Ibid., p. 132
[22]
Ibid., p. 141
[23]
Ibid., p. 157-161
[24]
Ibid., p. 162-163
[25]
Ibid., p. 167- 169
[26]
Ibid., p. 171
[27]
Ibid., p. 165
[28]
Ibid., p. 182
[29]
Ibid., p. 185
[30]
Ibid., p. 186
[31]
Ibid., p. 187
[32]
Ibid., p. 188
[33]
van Mook., “Indonesia”, p. 278
[34]
van Mook , Indonesie, p. 190
[35]
Ibid., p. 212
[36]
Ibid., p. 210
[37]
Ibidem
[38]
Prime-Minister
Drees to Lt. Governor-General Van Mook, 5 okt. 1948: Officiele Bescheiden betreffende de
Nederlands-Indonesische Betrekkingen 1945-1950, KS 66: 160. A.R.A. Archive
Van Mook 269, no. 155
[39]
Van Mook, Indonesie, p. 220
[40] Ibid. , p. 229
[41] Jacques de Kadt, De Indonesische tragedie: Het treurspel van
gemiste kansen. (2nd edition, Amtserdam: 1989) p. 117
[42] van den Doel, p. 14




It's fascinating to see the different perspectives in the writing of history by 'winners' and 'losers' - I'd always taken the quote to mean that the course of history was determined by the winners - though that's no more literally true than looking at it from a purely writing point of view
ReplyDeleteI tend to see history as a lieteray form that is written by historians, as opposed to the past itself. Thanks for your comment Juliette.
ReplyDeleteI am reаllу impreѕsed with youг writing skills aѕ well
ReplyDeleteas with the layout on your blog. Is this a paid theme or
did you сustomize it yourself? Anyωay keep up thе eхcellent qualitу wrіting, it's rare to see a great blog like this one these days.
Stop by my web site :: Mergers Strategy