The Inlandsche Militieplicht — the proposed obligation of compulsory military service for the native (inheemsche) population of Netherlands Indies — was one of the most contentious political and military questions of the colonial defence debate of 1916 and 1917, exposing deep divisions over the nature of Dutch colonial rule and the capacity of the indigenous population for modern military service.
Van Heutsz’s Reversal
As Governor-General of Netherlands Indies, J. B. van Heutsz had strongly advised against the introduction of militia service for natives prior to his retirement around 1909. By 1917, however, Van Heutsz had completely reversed his position and advocated in favour of native military service. This about-face was essential to the defence proposals advanced by his son-in-law, J. Van der Weyden, which required a large pool of native conscripts to be viable. Van der Maaten characterised this reversal as hypocritical, arguing that conditions in India (the contemporary Dutch term for Netherlands Indies) had not changed sufficiently since Van Heutsz’s departure to justify it. As Van der Maaten observed, “in elk geval blijkt eruit, dat de denkbeelden van den Generaal Van Heutsz niet zoo onomstootelijk en onaanvechtbaar zijn” (in any case it appears that the ideas of General Van Heutsz are not so unshakeable and unassailable).
Native Opinion
The question of whether the indigenous population would accept or resist compulsory military service was addressed directly at a meeting of the Indische Krijgsvereeniging on 6 March 1916, where four native intellectuals were invited to speak. Three of the four were far from enthusiastic about the prospect of native militia service. Heer Satiman, supported by Heer Sastro Adimedjo, declared that the Javanese regarded becoming a soldier as “als het ergste beschouwen, wat hun in dit ondermaansche rijk van tranen kan overkomen” (the worst thing that could happen to them in this world of tears). These testimonies suggested that the cultural resistance to military service among the native population posed a formidable practical obstacle to any scheme of compulsory conscription.
The Defence Demonstrations of 1916
Defence demonstrations were held across Netherlands Indies on 31 August 1916, intended to showcase public support for military preparedness. J. B. van Heutsz subsequently misrepresented the scale and significance of these demonstrations, using them as evidence of native enthusiasm for military service. Van der Maaten challenged this characterisation, arguing that the demonstrations did not in fact demonstrate the widespread native support that Van Heutsz claimed.
Parliamentary and Ministerial Positions
The Minister of Colonies proposed introducing European militia service first, with further study required before extending compulsory service to the native population. Van der Maaten criticised this approach as insufficiently urgent given the wartime conditions prevailing in 1917. The Nederlandsche volksvertegenwoordiging (Dutch parliament) raised additional concerns about exposing native conscripts to “verderfelijke invloeden van het leven in de kazernes” (the corrupting influences of barracks life). Van der Maaten dismissed these objections as “Nederlandsche zedelijkheidsaposteltje” (Dutch moralising apostleship) and argued that they reflected ignorance of actual conditions in well-run military barracks.
The Standing Army Question
A further dimension of the Inlandsche Militieplicht debate concerned the relationship between a native militia and the existing staande leger (standing army). Van der Maaten warned against incorporating the militia into the standing army or allowing it to replace the regular forces. He argued that the standing army — the KNIL — must be preserved as an independent division, and that a militia of only thirteen years’ total service, without landstorm (reserve) capability, would produce an army incapable of resisting a more sensible enemy.
Connection to the Kader-quaestie
The question of native military service was intimately connected to the Kader-quaestie — the problem of finding sufficient European officer and non-commissioned officer cadres to lead an expanded native army. The Indische Legerbestuur considered the cadre question “een uiterst moeilijk, ja bijna onoplosbaar vraagstuk” (an extremely difficult, almost insoluble problem), and this personnel constraint was frequently cited as a reason to delay or restrict the introduction of native militia service.
Significance
The Inlandsche Militieplicht debate crystallised the fundamental tensions of colonial military policy in Netherlands Indies. It raised questions not only about military efficiency but about the political relationship between the colonial state and its indigenous subjects, the cultural assumptions underlying Dutch attitudes toward native capacity and morality, and the willingness of the metropole to invest adequately in colonial defence. The reversal of J. B. van Heutsz on this question illustrated the degree to which defence advocacy in 1917 was shaped by personal and familial considerations as well as by strategic analysis.
See Also
- J. B. van Heutsz
- J. Van der Weyden
- Van der Maaten
- Kader-quaestie
- Indische Krijgsvereeniging
- KNIL
- Netherlands Indies
- Minister of Colonies
- Staatscommissie
- Bond van Vrije Liberalen
- Vereeniging ter Beoefening van de Krijgswetenschap
Source
K. van der Maaten, Z. E. De Oud Gouverneur-Generaal J. B. van Heutsz en de Defensie van Nederlandsch-Indië (‘s-Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff, 1917).