HISTORY TEST 2: UNIT 3 NATIONALISM IN SOUTHEAST ASIA 12th MARCH
1
How similar were the limitations of pre-war nationalist
movements in Southeast Asia?
(You should refer to at least two of the following countries to
support your answer: Vietnam, Indonesia and Malaya.)
L1
Writes about limitations
comparison
Award 1m max.
L2
Identifies difference (s) AND/OR similarity (s)
Award 2 marks for one, 3 marks for both
of
pre-war
nationalism
but
[12]
no [1]
[2-3]
More similar than different, as they generally lacked mass support,
were not united as a movement, and did not possess a credible
military force. However, Vietnam and Indonesia managed to progress
beyond ethnic nationalism to advocate a more inclusive territorial
nationalism, but Malaya failed to do so. (3m)
L3
Explains difference (s) AND/OR similarity (s), but without [3-4]
examples from at least two countries.
Award 3 marks for explaining one difference/similarity and an
additional mark for any supporting detail, up to a maximum of 4
marks.
The limitations of pre-war nationalists were similar as they lacked
mass support from the people, who felt that their ideas on nationalism
was either idealistic or alien, and therefore unappealing. This was a
limitation as the small size of the movements made it easy for the
colonial masters to suppress them (3m)
This can be seen in the case of Vietnam, where the VNQDD
appealed mainly to the Northern Vietnamese, teachers and
intellectuals and only had 1.500 members in 1929. This accounts for
the failure of the Yen Bay Uprising 1930, and they were unable to
create a widespread revolt due to the fact that the Vietnamese
peasants were largely apathetic to their aims to overthrow the French
and to establish a democratic republic. (4m)
(General observation + example from 1 country)
No answer can achieve more than L3 if it has not drawn
examples from at least two countries: Indonesia, Malaya and
Vietnam.
L4
Explains difference (s) OR similarity (s), with examples from at
least two countries
[5-8]
Award 5 marks for an explained comparison, with references to at
1
least two countries
Award 8 marks max for two explained comparisons, with references
to at least two countries
The limitations of pre-war nationalists were similar as they lacked
mass support from the people, who felt that their ideas on nationalism
was either idealistic or alien, and therefore unappealing. This was a
limitation as the small size of the movements made it easy for the
colonial masters to suppress them (3m)
This can be seen in the case of Vietnam, where the VNQDD (1927)
appealed mainly to the Northern Vietnamese, teachers and
intellectuals and only had 1.500 members in 1929. This accounts for
the failure of the Yen Bay Uprising 1930, and they were unable to
create a widespread revolt due to the fact that the Vietnamese
peasants were largely apathetic to their aims to overthrow the French
and to establish a democratic republic. (4m)
Moreover, the Indonesians were also largely apathetic towards the
aims of the National Indies Party (1912), which only managed to
appeal to 7000 members, of which only 1500 were Indonesians.
Their aims to promote a state-based territorial nationalism were too
radical for the masses who were rooted in their regional identities and
also brought about rapid suppression from the Dutch. (5m)
OR
Another common limitation that they shared was that the nationalist
movements were internally divided, and were thus weakened, as they
were competing with each other for support from the masses, had
conflicting aims and thus could not launch a concerted attack on the
colonial powers. (6m)
In Vietnam, although there were attempts made by Ho Chi Minh to
form an organization – the Indochina Communist Party in 1930 to
unite the Communist elements in Vietnam, nevertheless, they faced
competition from the Trotskyite factions in south Vietnam. (7m)
Similarly, although the Sarekat Islam managed to circumvent the
above problem, of lack of mass support, as it claimed to have 2
million supporters, it was internally divided between the Islamic
elements, who were in control of the central apparatus, and the
Marxist elements who were in control of the branches, and which
broke away in 1920 to form the PKI (Communist Party of Indonesia),
and caused the defection from many members, hence undermining
the reform movement led by Sarekat Islam. Similarly, the PKI was
internally divided between the secular and the religious elements. It
was the latter that decided to go ahead with the revolution of 1926
despite objections from other leaders. That the PKI movement was
divided certainly compromised on the effectiveness of the revolt
which was subsequently brutally suppressed by the Dutch. (8m)
2
OR
Lack of a viable military force.
-Vietnam: VNQDD did not have professional weapons due to lack of
financial support. Had home-made weapons to counter the French in
the Yen Bay uprising 1930, which accounted for its failure.
-Indonesia: PKI’s 1926/7 revolt was fought not by professionally
trained soldiers, but by peasants who were nursing their red party
membership cards like precious amulets. Unable to match the military
might of the Dutch.
L5
Both elements of L4
9-11
Difference:
However, they were different in that while Indonesia and Vietnam
managed to develop a more inclusive territorial nationalism, Malaya
was still very preoccupied with ethnic nationalism, which was a
limitation as each group looked after its own parochial needs without
trying to foster a common national identity which is a prerequisite for
nationalism to flourish.
In Vietnam, the Indochina Communist Party, and subsequently the
Vietminh (1941) were trying to create a more inclusive identity based
on loyalty to the state (Vietnam), which endeavored to encompass
different elements. This was also seen in the formation of the PNI
(1927) in Indonesia which was trying to promote a state-based
nationalism based on the concept of “Indonesia” as opposed to a
particular regional identity.
In contrast, nationalism in Malaya was still based on ethnic lines, as
the Malays mobilized themselves through the Singapore Malay Union
and Kersatuan Melayu Muda (KMM), and the Chinese through the
Malayan Communist Party and the Indians through the CIAM, Central
Indian Association of Malaya. The entrenched plural society in
Malaya thus prevented the forging of a national consciousness and
showed how far Malaya lagged behind Vietnam and Indonesia.
L5
L4 + Explain conclusion: Why more similar/more different
[12]
In conclusion, the limitations of the pre-war nationalist groups were
largely similar, as they were internally divided, lacked mass support
and did not have a viable military force with which to fight against the
colonial powers. This explains the failure of the nationalist groups to
achieve independence during the period 1900-1941.
3
1
“The Japanese Occupation was a turning point in the
development of Southeast Asian nationalism.” How far do you
agree? Explain your answer.
(You should refer to at least two of the following countries to
support your answer: Vietnam, Indonesia and Malaya.)
L1
Writes about Japanese occupation but without focus on the [1]
question
Award 1m max.
L2
Describes the given perspective and/or identifies other [2-3]
perspective
Award 2 marks for describing the given perspective and/or other
perspectives. Award 3 marks for both perspectives.
[13]
The Japanese Occupation was largely a turning point for Southeast
Asian nationalist movements, as it strengthened a previously weak
movement, through its active support of nationalism in some areas,
which helped nationalism to gain more support from the masses, and
how it led directly to the formation of military bands that gave
S.E.Asian nationalist movements a concrete means of fighting for
independence that they didn’t have before. However, there was also
an element of continuity in that Japanese occupation worsened
existing relations between some nationalist groups, which may have
compromised on the collective identity that is necessary for
nationalism to truly flourish.
(3m)
L3
Explains perspective, but without examples from at least two [3-4]
countries.
Award 3 marks for explaining one perspective and an additional mark
for any supporting detail, up to a maximum of 4 marks.
The Japanese Occupation was a turning point in that the Japanese
actively encouraged nationalism in some areas, and allowed
nationalists to hold mass rallies that they were previously unable to
organize (as these were suppressed by the European colonial
masters) and therefore helped to garner mass support from the
people. 3m
General Imamura encouraged nationalism in Indonesia, released
Hatta and Sukarno from prison and gave them a political role to play
in Javanese society. The Japanese gave Sukarno a seat on the
advisory council (PUTERA), and this gave him the opportunity to
inspire anti-colonialism in the Indonesian masses through public
mass rallies. He was allowed to visit major Javanese cities to make
speeches, an opportunity he was not given under Dutch rule. 4m
4
(General observation + example from 1 country)
No answer can achieve more than L3 if it has not drawn
examples from at least two countries: Indonesia, Malaya and
Vietnam.
L4
Explains the given perspective OR other perspective, with [5-8]
examples from at least two countries.
Award 5 marks for a main point, with references to at least two
countries
Award 8 marks max for two points, with references to at least two
countries
The Japanese Occupation was a turning point in that the Japanese
actively encouraged nationalism in some areas, and allowed
nationalists to hold mass rallies that they were previously unable to
organize (as these were suppressed by the European colonial
masters) and therefore helped to garner mass support from the
people. 3m
General Imamura encouraged nationalism in Indonesia, released
Hatta and Sukarno from prison and gave them a political role to play
in Javanese society. The Japanese gave Sukarno a seat on the
advisory council (PUTERA), and this gave him the opportunity to
inspire anti-colonialism in the Indonesian masses through public
mass rallies. He was allowed to visit major Javanese cities to make
speeches, an opportunity he was not given under Dutch rule. 4m
Similarly, the Japanese released Ibrahim Yaacob, the leader of the
anti- British Kersatuan Malayu Muda, and put him in charge of the
Union of Peninsular Indonesia (KRIS) when he was given an
opportunity to make public speeches to convince the Malay
community to work towards Malayan Independence as part of
Indonesia. Although this movement was not popularly received,
nevertheless it marked the increasing politicization of the Malay
community and that was a change from the earlier period. 5m
OR
The Japanese Occupation also marked a turning point as it led to the
creation of military bands, which did not exist before 1941, and thus
strengthened the hand of the nationalists as they were now able to
have a concrete means with which to fight for independence. 6m
The Japanese actively fostered the creation of PETA and Hizbullah
so as to create an effective local armed force that could successfully
defend their homeland and resist the reimposition of Dutch rule.
PETA eventually became the foundation of the future Indonesian
Army, and also helped in mobilizing the youths for the cause of
nationalism. This remedied a previous weakness of the Indonesian
5
nationalist movements, as seen from the failure of the PKI 1926-7
Revolt and the superior military might of the Dutch. 7m
Although the Japanese did not foster the creation of armies in
Vietnam, the Vietminh came about as a direct reaction to the
Japanese occupation, and were both anti-French and anti-Japanese
in their aims. The Vietminh launched guerilla attacks on the French
and Japanese, and gained valuable war experiences and support
from the people, which was instrumental in their subsequent fight for
independence. Previously, the failure of the VNQDD’s Yen Bay
Uprising 1930 showed clearly how weak the Vietnamese nationalists
were at fighting against the French. 8m
(Can also bring in MPAJA)
In Malaya too, the MPAJA, like the Vietminh, was set up as an antiJapanese fighting force, and marked a turning point as this was the
first time in Malayan nationalist history that an army had been formed
to fight against a colonial power. They would subsequently harness
this military power to fight against the British after 1945.
L5
Both elements of L4
9-11
Award 9 marks for explaining the given and alternative perspective,
and additional marks for any supporting detail, to a maximum of 11.
Other perspective:
However, the Japanese also reinforced the existing tensions in
society with its policy of divide and rule, and this caused potential
problems for the future of nationalism, as there were elements within
the same country that were divided. (9m)
The Japanese reinforced the regional divide in Indonesia by splitting
up the administration of Indonesia into three, Sumatra under the 25th
Army, Java under the 16th Army, and the Eastern Islands under the
Japanese navy. Moreover, it was only in Java that nationalism was
encouraged, hence it was dominated by Javanese elements, which
may be unappealing to other non-Javanese Indonesians who may
see this as a form of Javanisation, along the lines of the Budi
Utomo’s idea of “Greater Java.” 10m
Moreover, the Japanese supported the religious nationalist groups
such as Cao Dai and Hoa Hao which were predominant in the South
(Cochinchina), against the Vietminh, which was prominent in the
North (Tonkin); and this reinforced existing tensions between North
and South Vietnam, as well as religious vs. secular nationalism,
which made it subsequently difficult to unify the nation. 11m
OR
The Japanese also reinforced existing racial tensions in Malaya by
supporting Indian and Malay nationalism, through the formation of the
6
Indian National Army and KRIS (respectively) but suppressing the
Chinese community. Consequently, the majority of MPAJA members
were from the Chinese community. Hence the sense of ethnic-based
nationalism that existed before was still entrenched in Malayan
society and the Japanese Occupation did little to change that.
L6
Reaches a balanced conclusion
significance of the reasons.
based
on
the
relative [12-13]
Ultimately, the Japanese Occupation was largely a turning point, as it
conclusively dispelled the myth of white superiority and showed very
clearly the humiliation of the European powers at the hands of the
Japanese. The once demoralized nationalist movements were given
a new lease of life, as this defeat boosted their hopes that they too
would be able to defeat their one-time masters and to achieve
independence. It brought changes that improved the fortunes of the
nationalists, and helped them to gain mass support and military
strength – concrete means with which to fight for independence.
7