Obviously they had easy access to enslaving Indians because of the Dutch East India company, but they also had ample access to African slaves through their participation in the slave trade and the fact that African slaves were the primary source of slavery in the American colonies. Why did they forego using just African slaves and bring Indian ones instead? And did they do this in the other American colonies as well (ie New Amsterdam)? If not, why the difference between the two? Thanks.
Those Indians & Indonesians were not slaves but contract workers.
When slavery was abolished in 1863 the then slaves were obligated to work another 10 years on the plantations. When that term was passed a lot of the former plantation slaves moved away from the plantations to the capitol Paramaribo. This created a shortage in labor starting in the early 1870's. They tried to solve that with contract workers first from British India recruited with help of the British government. Due to several issues this became problematic in the 1880's. In 1890 they started recruiting in the Dutch East India. These contract workers got a five year contract with the option to be send home after completing the contract. A total of 34000 Indians came and a total of 33000 Indonesians.
New Amsterdam at that time was already New York and part of the USA. The Carabian islands did not have the labor shortage that Suriname had.
https://dbnl.org/tekst/binn011sran01_01/binn011sran01_01_0007.php