Indonesian Independence: Australia’s Involvement.

This paper by Dr.Nonja Peters presents a comprehensive exploration of Australia’s involvement in Indonesian independence and the complex historical narrative surrounding the Dutch East Indies during and after World War II. It addresses the “History Wars” between Dutch and Indonesian perspectives on Indonesian independence, focusing on critical issues such as the Bersiap period (1945-1946), the role of Australian unions and political movements, and the treatment of Dutch POWs and internees. The draft also examines Japan’s influence on the radicalisation of Indonesian youth and the subsequent violence that erupted as part of the nationalist revolution.

Key themes of the draft include:

1. Dutch and Indonesian Conflicting Narratives: The ongoing historiographical debate over when Indonesia achieved independence—1945 or 1949— is central, as is the under-recognised suffering during the Bersiap period.
2. The Bersiap and Its Aftermath: Peters delves into the brutal violence perpetrated by Indonesian pemuda (radical youth) during Bersiap, targeting Dutch and pro-Dutch civilians and officials, and the subsequent war crimes committed by both sides during the revolution.
3. Australia’s Role in Indonesian Independence: This is particularly significant in terms of the role played by Australian unions in supporting Indonesian independence through boycotts of Dutch ships and supplies.
4. The Japanese Influence on Indonesian Nationalism: The draft highlights how the Japanese occupation helped radicalise the Indonesian youth, drawing parallels between the Indonesian pemuda and the Hitler Jugend in terms of ideology and militancy.
5. Historical Revisionism: Peters debates the implications of revising historical dates for Indonesian independence, arguing for the acknowledgment of violence committed by all sides.

The draft combines oral history interviews, archival research, and theoretical frameworks, offering a nuanced interpretation of a turbulent period in Indonesian and Australian history. It ultimately raises questions about the morality of violence in achieving independence and reflects on the historical legacies of colonialism and nationalism.