Bali and indirect colonial rule in Southeast Asia; and the value of Persisting

It was challenging to find information on the above island. Eventually, I found it at the travel guide section in Sembawang National Library. This was after trying eResources of National Library Board; the internet; the History Sections of various libraries as well as the Political Science sections. Similar information was found in several travel guides and other books I read thereby suggesting that it was reliable. Therefore I am publishing this.

===============================================================================

Bali was conquered by the Dutch with the aid of Moluccan (islands east of Java) soldiers by 1908-10. According to the Bali & Lombok: Pocket Guide (Berlitz, Singapore, 2010), the end of the Balinese resistance was essentially suicide. This horrified the Dutch back in the Netherlands and colonialism remained indirect with the rajas (kings) remaining in place . Its economy like that of Cambodia and Laos remained largely intact (and unexploited); Bali became a tourist spot from the 1920s. Its culture was likewise put in exhibitions in Europe partly to justify colonialism. This was supported the lack of nationalist leaders In fact one of the royalty like Prince Madé (born 1919) who chose to be a doctor and was in Europe getting the degree during World War Two. He spent much of his time serving in his profession outside of Indonesia instead. (His father received a car from the Dutch for instance.)

Therefore, nationalism did not grow as quickly or as strongly in Bali as in Java. Arguably, there was relatively less resentment overall. This came on radically though in the 1940s. By 1946, Balinese led by Ngurah Rai were were killed resisting the returning Dutch. Today, several memorials highlight their resting place.

One can also suggest the same result in Malaya as it was governed with the Sultans remaining in place. This very much contrasted the removal of the Burmese kings who were patrons of Buddhism in Burma. This led to the Young Men's Buddhist Association which sought to revive Burman culture and religion and later on the organisation gave rise to the General Council of Burmese Associations, a clear nationalist group with desires for independence.

Nevertheless, the deficient sense of nationalism in Malaya can also be attributed to the lack of education overall. Different ethnic groups managed their own schools prior to the 1920s without much central direction in Malaya; from the 1930s there was reorganisation of state led education in states like Johor which increased education in Johor. Further, only after 1945 did "parents become aware of the importance of education." (P. Lim Pui Huen, Johor: Local History, Local Landscapes 1855 to 1957, Straits Times Press, p. 161). Thus, it can be said that a combination of such factors prevented the origins of nationalism especially on a large scale or mass basis.

Mr. Chen

Minorities and Migrants as a factor in Southeast Asian nationalism

Here the role of Malayan Chinese, Indonesia Chinese as well as Malayan Indians are discussed.

The Chinese in Indonesia as described by Leo Suryadinata in his book "Peranakan's Search fo National Identity: Biographical Studies of Seven Indonesian Chinese" (Marshall Cavendish International, 2004) were not united on the concept of Indonesia. Even when the Dutch returned after 1945, those who stayed in the Dutch areas either remained neutral or sided with the Dutch. Pro-Dutch groups included the Chinese Union (Persatuan Tionghoa) in Jarkarta. (Note that this was on the island of Java). The Chinese in the Indonesian Republic often supported the Sukarno and nationalists. Thus, the lack of a united nationalist front impeded faster independence.

Likewise this happened in Malaya. The Chinese by and large remained loyal to China rather than Malaya. Of note, it was not until 1930 that the Malayan Communist Party was set up. Of course, this was in part created by world economic conditions of fall in tin and rubber prices especially during the 1930s Great Depression. The British tried to send back those who lost jobs but refused to give permanent land rights to remaining Chinese who went into farming. The Indians faced even stiffer challenges as there were caste differences and strikes in the 1930s against the upper classes. These made up two of the 3 ethnic groups in Malaya itself.   

In sum, nationalism failed to rise and grow due to the above circumstances. It should be no wonder that in particular with Malaya, nationalism became much more apparent only after 1945.

Mr Chen