Les lois et coutumes de la guerre — the laws and customs of war — was the body of international rules invoked by H. van Kol in the Tweede Kamer on 17 November 1897 to argue that the Dutch manner of conducting the Atjeh-oorlog placed the Netherlands in daily collision with the war law accepted by all European peoples, and thereby gave every great power a pretext for intervention.
The texts cited
Van Kol quoted first from the articles of the Conference of Brussels of 1874: “il est interdit de mutiler ou de tuer un ennemi qui est hors de combat, et de déclarer d’avance qu’on ne fait pas de quartier, même si l’on ne le réclame pas pour soi-même.” — it is forbidden to mutilate or to kill an enemy who is out of the fight, and to declare in advance that no quarter will be given, even if one does not claim it for oneself. The pamphlet’s footnote renders it: “Het is verboden, een vijand, die buiten staat van gevecht is gesteld, te mishandelen of te dooden en vooraf te verklaren, dat men geen kwartier zal geven, zelfs wanneer men dit niet voor zichzelf eischt.” — It is forbidden to ill-treat or to kill an enemy who has been placed out of the fight, and to declare in advance that no quarter will be given, even when one does not demand this for oneself.
He quoted second the Dictionnaire général de la politique of M. Block, p. 1165: “tuer un ennemi qui se rend, ou qui est impuissant à se défendre est un crime déshonorant. Il en est de même des attentats commis sur des femmes et les enfants en pays ennemi.” — to kill an enemy who surrenders, or who is powerless to defend himself, is a dishonouring crime. It is the same with assaults committed on women and children in an enemy country. The footnote renders: “Een vijand dooden, die zich overgeeft, of die onmachtig is om zich te verdedigen, is een onteerende misdaad. Zoo is het ook met aanvallen op vrouwen en kinderen in een vijandig land.” — To kill an enemy who surrenders, or who is powerless to defend himself, is a dishonouring crime. So it is also with attacks on women and children in an enemy land.
“Welnu,” said Van Kol, “hieraan maken en maakten wij ons schuldig!” — of this we make and made ourselves guilty!
The political argument
The invocation was not only moral but strategic. Van Kol argued that if the Dutch withdrew they had nothing to fear from the other powers, but that if they continued the war à outrance they ran a serious danger precisely on that account: “Wij komen toch door onze wreede wijze van oorlogvoeren voortdurend in strijd met het internationaal oorlogsrecht, waardoor elke groote Mogendheid, evenals Noord-Amerika op Cuba, een voorwendsel kan vinden tot inmenging.” — By our cruel manner of waging war we come continually into conflict with international law of war, whereby every great Power, like North America in Cuba, can find a pretext for interference.
He returned to the comparison later: as danger of North American intervention already existed on account of the severe conduct and cruelties of the Spaniards in Cuba, so Atjeh might furnish some European power a welcome pretext to call a halt to the Netherlands on that road of blood and violence.
The catalogue of breaches
The specific acts Van Kol adduced as breaches are set out at Atrocities in the Aceh War as alleged in the Tweede Kamer (1897): the shooting down and beheading of the defenceless, the killing and violation of women, the refusal of quarter, the killing of prisoners, the burning of villages and destruction of harvests; the order of the commander in Atjeh of 27 July 1875 recommending all acts that damage the enemy and ordering the burning of houses and destruction of kampongs; the dagorder enjoining abstention from cruelties against women and children; the taking of the daughter of Wakil Joesoef as hostage; the exposure of some fifty thousand convicts to hostile fire; the treacherous arrests of the Radja van Samalangan, of the head of Bintara Peunang and of Toekoe Njak Amat; the shooting of Njahim; and the marginal note “er worden geen krijgsgevangenen gemaakt” on the krijgsorder attributed to Van der Heyden.
See Also
- Brussels Conference of 1874
- Atrocities in the Aceh War as alleged in the Tweede Kamer (1897)
- H. van Kol
- Kring van belang
- Atjeh debate in the Tweede Kamer (16-17 November 1897)
- 1874
- 1897
Source
Atjeh in de Tweede Kamer: Debatten bij de behandeling der begrooting van Nederlandsch-Indië voor 1898, uitgave van de Sociaaldemokratische Arbeiderspartij in Nederland (Amsterdam: J. A. Fortuijn, 1897). Koninklijk Instituut voor de Tropen, Br P95-178, pp. 62–64, 65–66.
Acknowledgement of sources. The material in this article derives from Atjeh in de Tweede Kamer: Debatten bij de behandeling der begrooting van Nederlandsch-Indië voor 1898 (Amsterdam: J. A. Fortuijn, 1897). Dutch passages are quoted in the original with an English rendering.