This brought to my mind again the debate about the difference between Dutch and Portuguese/Spanish colonialism. Were the Dutch traders and the Iberians hardline conquerers? Is this the difference between Sinbad the trader and the cowboy (as once contrasted by Fatima Mernissi, where the cowboy was George Bush)? Gerrit Knaap held his inaugural lecture on 10 October 2014 as Professor of Overseas and Colonial History in Utrecht.
Azyumardi Azra wrote in our History of Christianity in Indonesia a very lucid chapter II about the Race between Islam and Christianity in the Malay Archipelago, 1530-1670? He depicts the Iberians as fostering great hopes for massive conversion, which did not materialise. The Dutch were less outspoken in their religious concerns. But both parties had priorities for strong fortified settlements and political power. They did not just come as visitors for trade, but considered some permanent power basis as necessary.
In my own description (Dutch Colonialism and Indonesian Islam) I make the distinction between the first explorations (people who wrote positive descriptions of pious Muslims and quiet mosques) and later colonial officials who did not really trust Muslims. This may be corrected in this way that from the beginning there were the doves, the diplomats versus the warriors, those who sought power and domination.