Including Kalangs in Dutch policy and then their rebellion shows which contradiction?

Correct answer: Colonial rule depended on local skill but also wanted to control it

The direct answer is A: colonial rule depended on local skill but also wanted to control it. The Dutch needed Kalang knowledge and labour to extract teak, yet they did not want an independent local group to decide how forests and labour would be used. This creates a contradiction: the rulers rely on people while restricting their freedom. Option A is correct because it captures both dependence and control. Option B is wrong because the Dutch clearly benefited from Kalang expertise. Option C is wrong because rebellion shows that Kalangs did not accept Dutch control completely. Option D is wrong because labour was central to cutting, moving and supplying timber. Step by step: teak policy required skilled workers; Kalangs supplied that skill; colonial authorities imposed rules and control; resentment developed; resistance followed. Thus local labour was useful but politically threatening to colonial power. Memory cue: colonialism often needs local workers while denying them autonomy—“use their skill, control their lives.”