Could Aceh have like Siam maintained formal independence with different 19th century policies

What is it about?

The question of Aceh's historical inepondence can now be raised without fear iof encouraging separatism. Once we accept that Southeast Asian states had some degree of agency in their international relations in the 19th century, it is apparent that some policies were more important than others. Siam (Thailand) was the most successful at playing the diplomatic game while conceding a degree of economic autonomy in order to satisfy the most powerful player of the time, Britain. Aceh had a similar option to exploit British interest in maintaining Aceh independence, but Sultan Ibrahim maybe said to have been misled by the dream of Ottoman sovereignty into overplaying his hand.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

The pre-1900 history of Indonesia will only be meaningful to 21st century Indonesians when they shed the nationalist tendency to blame everything on Dutch ruthlessness in favour of accepting the agency and analyzing the choices of their ancestors