|
Does anyone want to incorporate Achin? - Mustafaa 07:46, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)
There was some pretty racist, archaic stuff in there i.e. Mohammedans and value judgments about the appearance of ethnic groups. Much of the rest of it is somewhat dated as well unless the Dutch still have a garrison there. It would only serve as minor reference for someone willing to write about the history of Aceh. - Gest 17:09, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- I've just changed Achin into a redirect; like Gest, there wasn't much there that I felt was worth bringing into the article, although I did update the colonial history a little. If someone was writing a History of Aceh article, and wanted much more detail on the pre-1900 history of Aceh, though, they should look through the old revision history of Achin. - Cdc 01:04, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Separatist
I wish people would refrain from using "separatist", this is a completely biased term
"Separatist" is the generally accepted and used term elsewhere in the article, other Wikipedia articles, the media, and in the political sphere. The US has had sanctions in place on Indonesia because of their brutal tactics in Aceh.
See: 2004 CIA World Factbook Intro to Indonesia (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/id.html#Intro) ("armed separatist movements")
Davenbelle 19:22, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)
- Actually members of various independence, or secessionist if you will, movements find the term offensive. People who oppose certain independence movements favour the term, since it gives them an added legitimacy, and/or suggests that said area was always part of whichever state (often not true). Members of independence movements in general should not be confused with violent groups which favour armed insurrection...
- I suggest it is only "generally accepted", in that many of the large states of the world have ulterior motives in hanging on to certain territories, and do not wish to give their self-determination movements positive publicity.
- This article while mentioning armed insurrections does not completely explain the actual grievances of the self-determination movement in Aceh.
The article also fails to explains the pre-1800 issues in Aceh. Aceh was part of the Kingdom of Atjeh in the middle ages. Those peoples were of indonesian descents while the indonesians of today are of javan descents. Ie: they are descendants of the Kingdom of Mataram which was situated near Jakarta. I'm not saying that it explains today self-determination movement but it does explain a bit the beginning of the article. If you doubt it check the CIA World Factbook. Over 80% of the population is of javan ethnicity. - Mystra007, January 26 2004
Also (opinion follow) Aceh independance isn't like independance in other places. Like Africa or Timor, those independance movements are mainly between remnants of colonization (like in Timor, the dutch settled indonesia but Portugal owned Timor. So today it's kinda a war between indonesian sunni and portugese catholics). While in Aceh it's the remnants of two kingdoms who are still fighting today like they always did
NPOV in the history section
The history section needs a looking over by someone with knowledge in this area. Various facts strike me as confusing (like who was general-major Köhler?) and many statements are quite POV for example:
- Major J.B. van Heutsz, a colonial millitary leader, then wrote a series of articles on Aceh, proclaiming the use of excessive force to subjugate the province. This advice was followed: in 1898 Van Heutsz was proclaimed governor of Aceh, and with his lieutenant, later Dutch Prime Minister Hendrikus Colijn, most of Aceh was (nominally) brought under Dutch control. They charged colonel Van Daalen with breaking remaining resistance. Van Daalen destroyed several villages, killing at least 2,900 Acehnese, among which 1,150 women and children. Dutch losses numbered just 26, and Van Daalen was promoted. By 1904 Aceh was fully under Dutch control.
- When news about the brutal acts in Aceh reached the Netherlands there was a public outcry against Van Daalen, and he was discharged. The true account of the Aceh war was never investigated, however. Estimated total casualties on the Aceh side range from 50,000 to 100,000 dead, and over a million wounded.
(Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 15:44, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
|
