The Resistance at Lhong — the resistance at Lhong on the Westkust of Atjeh — is the set-piece Aceh story of Oost-Indisch Journael by Merac (1947), told by the old Aceh fighter Musket as an example of the colonial army’s failure to use modern methods (tear-gas bombs and gas masks) against the djahat resistance. The story — of the encirclement of a house at Lhong in which eight exiles had fortified themselves, the breakout of the djahats “with the bare weapon in the fist,” the fortification of the band in one of the caves of the Glé Groetèë, and the decision to destroy them — is the book’s argument that the colonial army had prevented “the attainment of the goal that underlies all resistance on any scale: the paradise-death.”
The encirclement
“At the most recent resistance in Lhong, according to the old, formerly much-applied method, a house was surrounded in which the remaining eight exiles had fortified themselves.” At Lhong, the colonial army — following the old, formerly much-applied method — surrounded a house in which the remaining eight exiles had fortified themselves. The method — “the surrounding and searching of gampongs, gampong complexes, and isolated dwellings” — is called belabberen in the colonial army’s idiom, and is judged by Musket as “according to some military men, more decorative than effective.”
The breakout
“the djahats broke out with the bare weapon in the fist, and seven of the eight escaped in the half-confusion of the klewang fight.” The djahats broke out with the bare weapon (the klewang, the colonial sword) in the fist, and seven of the eight escaped in the half-confusion of the klewang fight. “A kilometre from the battlefield, however, they waited for their eventual pursuers, and so two forced labourers, who had been sent out to bring a report of the battle, fell into their hands. They forced these chain-gang convicts to turn back, but let them otherwise unharmed.” A kilometre from the battlefield, the djahats waited for their eventual pursuers, and so two forced labourers sent out to report fell into their hands. The djahats forced these chain-gang convicts to turn back, but let them otherwise unharmed.
The book’s argument: no confusion or panic
“You see, then, that there was no question of confusion or panic among them.” Musket’s point — the book’s argument — is that the djahats showed no confusion or panic: they broke out, escaped, waited for their pursuers, and captured the forced labourers without panic. “Besides, such djahats do not hope for victory either. They know in advance that they must lose, and so do not shun the fight in any case, but rather seek death. Their eye is not fixed on the present, but on the hereafter.” Such djahats did not hope for victory; they knew in advance that they would lose, did not shun the fight, but rather sought death. Their eye was not on the present, but on the hereafter — the paradise-death that was the goal of the prang sabil (holy war).
The Glé Groetèë and the destruction
“After a sharp pursuit by the marechaussée, the band fortified itself in one of the caves of the Glé Groetèë to fight its last battle there. It had been decided to destroy them! And this decision was then carried out.” After a sharp pursuit by the marechaussée, the band fortified itself in one of the caves of the Glé Groetèë to fight its last battle there. Destruction was decided, and the decision was carried out. “When everything was over, the population was given the opportunity, in accordance with the regulations, to bury its fallen. Eight holy graves, on which the white pennants would soon rise as erected signs.” Eight holy graves, on which the white pennants would soon rise as erected signs.
The book’s critique
“Afterwards, this outcome was regretted from higher up, because, as it was put, the opportunity for new hatred had thereby been opened. But all this was considered unavoidable. But was that so? I think not.” Musket — and the book — argues that the outcome was not unavoidable. “The question arises why, during the resistance at Lhong, the acting troop detachment made no use of tear-gas bombs and gas masks. Why the issue had to be decided in the old and, in my opinion, completely outdated manner, when the enemy could easily have been overpowered by the application of the modern aids used elsewhere to suppress riots in the most humane way?”
Musket’s argument is that the colonial army had failed to use modern aids — tear-gas bombs and gas masks — that would have gotten the opponent alive — and would have prevented “the attainment of the goal that underlies all resistance on any scale: the paradise-death.” “Instead, only shameful imprisonment would await the resisters.”
The young lieutenant’s objection
A young lieutenant — present at the table — ventures to call the application of tear gas “not very sporting.” He was of the opinion “that there would be little fun in it that way and the troops would miss a welcome opportunity for exercise.” Musket looked the young whippersnapper steadily in the eye for a moment — and the book registers the objection as the young lieutenant’s newcomer’s incomprehension of the djahat’s paradise-death.
Significance
The Resistance at Lhong is significant in Oost-Indisch Journael as the set-piece Aceh story through which the book makes its argument about the colonial army’s failure to use modern methods. The book’s argument — that the colonial army had prevented “the attainment of the goal that underlies all resistance on any scale: the paradise-death” by taking the djahats alive — is the book’s clearest example of the inter-war colonial critique of the former-times methods. The Resistance at Lhong is therefore the book’s marker of the inter-war colonial memory of the Aceh War: the old Aceh fighter Musket’s argument that the old methods had been completely outdated, and that the colonial army had failed — by its own fault — to prevent the djahat’s paradise-death.
See Also
- Musket
- Oost-Indisch Journael
- Lhong
- Glé Groetèë
- Djahat
- Prang sabil
- Atjeh-moord
- Paradijs-dood
- Belabberen
- Korps Marechaussee van Atjeh en Onderhorigen
- Atjeh-oorlog
Source
Oost-Indisch Journael: Palaver om de tafel met het gat, by Merac, Toekan-Serie no. 2, ed. G. L. Tichelman (Haarlem: De Gulden Pers, 1947), chapter Sloebers.