This page contains additional information about the research programme and answers a number of frequently asked questions. The following list will be continually updated during the research. If you have any other questions, please contact us via info@ind45-50.nl.

1. Results

Can I attend the presentation?

Due to the COVID-19 measures, the presentation will be held online only. There will be no audience at the presentation. You can watch the recording of the presentation here.

Do I have to buy a book in order to read the results?

You can, but you don’t have to. A few weeks after publication, digital versions of the books produced by this research project will be made available for free via open access. To find out more, see https://aup.nl/odgoi. For this reason, you don’t need to buy a book in order to read the results.

Will the results also be available in English?

Some of the books will be published in English, including the concluding volume and the book on bersiap. For more on this, see the website of the publisher, Amsterdam University Press.

Will the results also be published in Indonesia?

Some of the books will also be published in Indonesian by an Indonesian publishing company. The translation is currently underway.

Where can I find the results of this research?

On 17 February, a summary of the research findings will be made available on the website https://www.ind45-50.org/. An extended version of the results can be found in the concluding volume Beyond the pale and a large number of books about the various projects. For an overview, see https://aup.nl/odgoi

Background and research design

Did the government order this research?

In 2016, the Dutch government outlined its decision in this letter that there was a need for further research on the actions of the Dutch armed forces. Proposals could be submitted for the research and, if they were convincing, the government would subsidize them. As set out in this letter, the cabinet decided to finance the research plans [link] submitted by NIOD, the NIMH and the KITLV. The programme is thus subsidized research, not commissioned research. The difference is that a subsidy-provider does not interfere with the research once the funding has been provided, whereas in commissioned research the client plays a much bigger role. For example, the client determines the formulation of the research question. In the case of commissioned research, the client is also the ‘owner’ of the results. Neither was applicable in the case of this research programme.

How objective is this research?

The research is scholarly research, which means that the researchers had to adhere to the rules of scholarly integrity. They had to work in an honest, careful, transparent, independent and responsible way. This is what objectivity means; it relates to the methodology that is used. It does not mean that there cannot be differences of opinion at the end of a research study. In addition to the researchers who participated in this programme, an independent international Scientific Advisory Committee was set up. Throughout the research programme, the committee monitored the scientific quality of the research proposals and the results.

Why are you doing this research?

The three institutes conducted this research because they believe that there is a need for a better understanding of this important and complex history. This is not only important for scholarly knowledge about the past, but also for social debates and for different groups in society. The history of the Indonesian War of Independence is still very much alive, both in the Netherlands and in Indonesia.

Are you doing this research in order to pass judgement on the KNIL/veterans?

The aim of the research was not to pass judgement on particular groups, but to further analyse and explain the Dutch military action in Indonesia between 1945 and 1949, while paying ample attention to the historical, political and international context. The specific emphasis was on the use of extreme violence by the Dutch armed forces, its consequences, and the extent to which political and legal responsibility was taken for this extreme violence both at the time and afterwards. 

Hasn’t this research come too late?

The research did indeed come late, but we should not forget that many things had already been investigated. This research was about compiling all of the existing knowledge and filling in the remaining gaps. This does not alter the fact that some of the issues should indeed have been investigated back in the day. 

Weren’t these findings already known?

Before this research programme began, a great deal of research had already been done. The research programme built on academic work that had been produced since 1970. First, this research programme wanted to bring the existing research together. Second, neglected themes were investigated further, such as the operation of the intelligence services, the deployment of heavy weapons, the extreme violence during the bersiap period, theactions of the judiciary, and communication between the battlefield and the Dutch government in The Hague. The researchers also took a closer look at the international political dynamics, and comparisons were made with other wars of decolonization. Adding this new research to the existing research produced a more comprehensive, deeper picture of this history.

Isn’t the research biased?

The research was conducted in accordance with the standards of scholarly research, such as those formulated by the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW). Independence, impartiality and integrity are paramount. This does not mean that there cannot be differences of opinion at the end of a research study.

Is Indonesia also conducting research on Indonesian violence?

In the Regional Studies project, Dutch and Indonesian researchers jointly investigated various aspects of the war and the revolution, including (extreme) violence on the Indonesian side. There is no equivalent research programme in Indonesia, however. That is not surprising; this research programme arose primarily from debates within the Netherlands about the Dutch colonial past, and in particular the extreme violence used against the Indonesian people who stood up their freedom.

Did the government determine what you had to research?

In this letter, the government set out the general framework to be used by subsidized research studies. This framework formed the starting point of the programme. From the moment the subsidy was granted, the government did not interfere with the content of the research in any way.

3. Research staff/participants

Who took part in this research?

The research was conducted by almost thirty permanent and temporary staff at three institutes: the NIOD Institute for War, Holocaust and Genocide Studies, the Royal Netherlands Institute of Southeast Asian and Caribbean Studies (KITLV-KNAW), and the Netherlands Institute for Military History (NIMH). In addition, a research group in Indonesia worked with Dutch researchers on the Regional Studies project. Dozens of research assistants and interns were also involved in the programme. You can find the names of everyone who worked on this project here.

Did you invite veterans to participate?

Many dozens of veterans and Indo-Dutch were involved in the research, especially in the Witnesses & Contemporaries project. Veterans were also interviewed by other projects, and use was made of their diaries, memoires, letters and photo albums.

Did you involve the Indo-Dutch community in the research?

Many dozens of veterans and Indo-Dutch were involved in the research, especially in the Witnesses & Contemporaries project. Veterans were also interviewed by other projects, and use was made of their diaries, memoires, letters and photo albums.

Was there cooperation with Indonesia?

There was a lot of cooperation with Indonesian historians. The Regional Studies project was a joint project in which twelve Indonesian and five Dutch researchers participated. Cooperation also featured in other projects, such as the Witnesses & Contemporaries project and the project on the bersiap period. Some of the books will also be published in Indonesian. Finally, the distinguished Indonesian historian Hilmar Farid contributed the epilogue to the concluding volume, Beyond the pale.

Who led the research? Who is responsible for it?

The research was carried out under the responsibility of three institutes: the NIOD Institute for War, Holocaust and Genocide Studies, the Royal Netherlands Institute of Southeast Asian and Caribbean Studies (KITLV-KNAW), and the Netherlands Institute for Military History (NIMH). NIOD acted as programme secretary and was thus responsible for the practical implementation.

4. Research content

Why did you only research Dutch violence?

The research programme arose from a need in the Netherlands to know more about the nature of Dutch military action in Indonesia and the use of extreme violence in particular. That was the main objective from the outset, and it was for that purpose that the government provided the subsidy. However, the programme also aimed to pay ample attention to the historical context: as a result, the (extreme) violence by other parties was also addressed in various places, starting with the book about extreme violence in the first phase of the Indonesian Revolution, known in the Netherlands as the ‘bersiap period’. You can read more about the original design of the research here.

Why are you not investigating x or y?

The selection of the research questions was linked to the state of academic scholarship in 2016. At that time, we looked at what was needed in order to answer the main question about the actions of the Dutch armed forces. We focused on issues that had yet to be researched or had received insufficient attention.

What exactly did you investigate?

The aim of this research was always to provide a more detailed analysis and explanation of the nature of the Dutch military action in Indonesia between 1945 and 1949, paying ample attention to the historical, political and international context, as well as to the political and social aftermath of the war. The programme focused specifically on the use of extreme violence by the Dutch armed forces, its consequences, and the extent to which political and legal responsibility was taken for the extreme violence both at the time and later. These questions guided the selection of the various sub-projects, as formulated in the programme that was awarded funding by the government in 2017.

Were war crimes committed?

This research is a historical investigation. We describe the events that took place, but we do not attach any legal significance to them in our conclusions. ‘War crime’ is a term with a specific legal meaning. We opted for a broader approach, using the overarching term ‘extreme violence’ to describe a whole range of violent acts directed against civilians or against soldiers or fighters who had been disarmed after their capture or surrender. Such violence could include torture, execution without trial, abuse, rape, looting, violent reprisals such as torching kampongs or shooting civilians, or mass detention. But it could also include actions in which soldiers fired at attackers more intensively and for longer than was necessary.

Can I use this research to get information about my relatives in Indonesia/the Dutch army?

Anyone who wishes know more about relatives, for example, should consult the collections and archives of the NIMH, NIOD or other institutions. This research is not about individual civilians or individual members of the armed forces. For more information about the personal files of soldiers who served in the Royal Netherlands East Indies Army (KNIL), please contact the Foundation for the Administration of Indonesian Pensions (Stichting Administratie Indonesische Pensioenen, www.saip.nl, 045-5793058).

Did you also investigate the fate of the Dutch during the bersiap period?

Yes. One of the projects is wholly dedicated to the extreme violence in the first phase of the Indonesian Revolution, known in the Netherlands as the ‘bersiap period’. The summary of this project can also be found in the concluding volume, Beyond the pale. The book about the bersiap period will probably be published in April.

Are you also investigating the Indonesian violence?

The research programme mainly arose from the need to learn more about the Dutch military action in Indonesia, and the use of extreme violence in particular. However, that action is placed in its historical context. That means that (extreme) violence by other parties, including supporters of the Republic, is addressed in various places in the research, starting with the book about the extreme violence in the first phase of the Indonesian Revolution, known in the Netherlands as the ‘bersiap period’.

Why did you choose to keep 17 August as the date of Indonesian independence?

On 17 August 1945, Indonesia declared independence. It was only after the formal transfer of sovereignty by the Netherlands in December 1949 that Indonesian independence was also internationally recognized in law (although various countries had done this much earlier). Even before Indonesian independence was universally recognized, however, various countries, including the Netherlands, negotiated with the Republic in practice. The Netherlands also recognized that the Republic did in fact govern large parts of Indonesia. And although the Netherlands stubbornly insisted that it was not fighting a war because Indonesia as a ‘country’ did not officially exist (hence the term ‘police action’), the rest of the world saw things differently. Finally, in 2005 the Dutch government effectively recognized 17 August 1945 as the birth of the Republic. With this, the Netherlands also retroactively recognized the Indonesian date of independence as 17 August 1945, although this could not undo the legal history.

Did you interview eyewitnesses?

Yes. Dutch and Indonesian witnesses and contemporaries are addressed at length in the research; one of the books is even dedicated to this subject. In addition, the researchers made significant use of large collections of existing interviews, diaries and letters from eyewitnesses.

Did the researchers only consult Dutch sources? Were international sources also consulted?

For the majority of the research, the Dutch archives were the most important source. Various sub-projects also examined documents from international archives, however, including in the United Kingdom, the United States and France. Written and oral sources in Indonesia were also consulted, of course. This was the case for the joint project by Indonesian and Dutch historians (Regional Studies), as well as for other projects.

Archival research in Indonesia proved to be challenging, however. In recent years, foreign researchers have found it difficult to obtain visas to conduct research in the official Indonesian archives. The research programme was nevertheless able to view a lot of Indonesian archival material, including through the collaboration with Indonesian historians and research assistants, and the large amount of Indonesian material that is present in the Netherlands. From March 2020, travel between the Netherlands and Indonesia became impossible due to COVID-19. Even then, however, the consultation of Indonesian written and oral sources continued with the aid of local researchers.

Were the Indonesian researchers able to do their work independently?

The Indonesian researchers had complete freedom in which do their work. They worked under the auspices of Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM) university in Yogyakarta.

5. Financing the research

Why did this research cost 4.1 million euros?

The research is estimated to have cost over 6,4 million euros, of which 4.1 million euros was subsidized by the Dutch government and the remainder was paid by the institutes themselves. The three institutes that conducted the research used the money to pay for temporary research positions specifically for this programme. All research institutes and universities work in this way: they receive a fixed amount from the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, but for special projects they have to apply for extra funding from the government, the private sector, or Dutch or European research funds.

How exactly was the money spent?

The government subsidy was mainly spent on hiring specialized researchers and the costs of implementing the programme.

Who paid for the research?

A significant part of the costs of the research programme was covered by the subsidy awarded by the Dutch government in 2017 (4.1 million euros). In addition, the institutes themselves contributed an estimated 2,3 million euros, mainly in order to cover the salaries of the researchers and other personnel.

6. Consequences of the research

Will lawsuits now be brought?

This is a historical investigation. We do not know whether lawsuits will be brought or what politicians will do with the research findings, nor will we make any statement or recommendations on this matter.

7. Other

Reading about your research reminded me that I still have a diary/letters/artefacts from this period. What can I do with this?

The Witnesses & Contemporaries helpdesk is still keen to receive your material about the period 1945-1950 in Indonesia. You can contact the helpdesk by email at getuigen@ind45-50.nl, or by post at: Witnesses & Contemporaries, c/o NIOD Herengracht 380, 1016 CJ Amsterdam.