Article from Nouvelles Calédoniennes dated October 25, 2025

Hello everyone,

The APROFED association is getting back to you this week following an article in Nouvelles Calédoniennes published on October 25, 2025, relating to the remobilization of the CCAT (independence supporters) against the Bougival agreement (see “Bougival, it’s a step backward”: in Vallée-du-Tir, the CCAT is trying to remobilize its activists | Les Nouvelles Calédoniennes ).

The association wanted to respond to comments made by an activist who believes that the Kanak people have the right to “demand their freedom,” which he does not want to oppose to the aspirations of other communities. “Those who arrived here during colonization should have the humility to say: ‘Okay, there is a first people, we support them in what they want for this country.’ Then we could do it together.” The victims of history, of European and Asian descent, would thus, according to him, be partly responsible for the fact that the Kanaks do not achieve independence.

The association here recalls that the colonizer is: the French State, and not the populations that it forced to come and settle in New Caledonia.

We also recall, as mentioned in one of our articles (see 4 reasons why France will never grant independence to New Caledonia – APROFED ), that even if a majority of voters were to express themselves in favor of independence, it is not certain that France would grant it. Let us cite the current case of the Faroe Islands vis-à-vis Denmark or that of Bougainville vis-à-vis Papua New Guinea , which despite a majority vote held years ago in favor of independence, these two territories are still not.

Furthermore, if the independence activists have indeed produced numerous written works in order to clarify the contours of what the future State of Kanaky would be, thus reassuring the different components of the population and trying to convince them of the merits of their project, it would seem that this work has not entirely borne fruit, to the extent that it is not so much the interior of the framework that matters but the necessity of the picture itself, namely independence, which appears to many as an outdated idea , even among the Kanaks.

Indeed, in a globalized world, where supranations (federal states) represent the main economic and military powers of the planet , forcing other states to come together (example of the European Union) despite their respective nationalist DNA. It remains surprising that the outdated idea persists, going against the grain, of wanting to isolate themselves and become independent when we also know that the Kanak leaders, once this independence is acquired, would like to create “federated states of Melanesia” (cf. Federalism in debate on the Loyalty Islands, within the FLNKS and in the Melanesian world – APROFED ). This is also why the association supports the broader proposal made by certain Oceanian thinkers of the “United States of Oceania” which would not be limited to just Melanesia but would include Australia, Micronesia and the whole of Polynesia (cf. without France – APROFED ).

Thus, the promotion of this vision rather than a dry independence would certainly have, in our opinion, allowed the adhesion of a number of citizens , notably among the “victims of history” going beyond the borders of the independentists alone and allowing a possible work together towards a common destiny as the CCAT activist wishes. Unfortunately, this is not the communication work that was carried out during the various self-determination elections, to the regret of certain sympathizers of the independence cause of European origin.

The association also questions the defense of a desire to become independent even though at the time of decolonization, particularly French (1945-1965), Kanak leaders were fighting to regain their autonomy and not independence . That the latter was practically imposed on them by Paris in a choice between pure and simple integration into the French fold or departure manu militari with losses and fracas. This is how the Kanak leaders chose the solution of independence proposed by France which it will not honor and will never honor. This notion of independence remains for some (see Interview with Didier Leroux – YouTube ) as a means of pressure in negotiations in the form of power relations with France, in order to always ask for more to have a little less (autonomy).

In order to ease tensions and avoid another dramatic episode like that of Ouvéa, the association calls on the independentists to reclassify their desire for independence as autonomy, as the Polisario Front is currently doing with Morocco , and to return to the discussion table with the following 3 intentions, which are found in the association’s project (see Reminder of the association’s project – APROFED ), which are:

– complete the Bougival agreement in order to recover the powers of Justice and police relating to the powers specific to the Territory in order to pursue the federal status implemented by the Matignon and Noumea agreements, thereby enabling the independence supporters to obtain a sort of “small independence” , by recovering legislative sovereignty, that is to say, in some way, the much sought-after internal autonomy, as well as shared sovereignty with the equal distribution of sovereign powers between the State and the territory,

– set a new date for self-determination set at 2053 , the time to rebuild and assimilate the new skills,

– to study in this 30-year period, the modalities for or against a rapprochement with our Pacific neighbors .

The association also urges the French State , despite the fact that it “does not have a culture of compromise” as some claim, to also move towards this objective in order to avoid a new escalation of tensions and a new Ouvéa bis, which is where the situation today is inexorably leading us.

Because despite the flop of the declaration of independence of September 24, 2025 (see In New Caledonia, the promise of a declaration of independence is a flop ) by the leaders of the FLNKS, they maintained this desire to achieve independence by 2027, drawing attention to the fact that any new forceful move by the State posed a risk and would inevitably lead to an inevitable response from them.

While thousands of law enforcement officers are currently deployed by the State to prevent any overflow, the association reminds the State of certain new elements at the regional level, namely the signing of defense agreements between Australia and Papua New Guinea and soon with Vanuatu , two Melanesian countries and members of the Spearhead group, supporting Kanaky’s independence cause. Not to mention the internal security agreement between the Solomon Islands and China . Thus, while France shares its know-how with the military of Oceania (see VIDEO. In Plum, the French army shares its know-how with the military of Oceania ), what would happen in this game of alliances if the latter were to lend a hand to a new Kanak popular uprising? How would Australia and China and their respective allies, the United States, the United Kingdom and Russia , react ? Without forgetting in the framework of a future defense agreement between Australia and its Indonesian neighbor , which is the largest Muslim country in the world by population. If this scenario remains political fiction, it is nevertheless not inconceivable given the new cold war underway, from which the independentists are keeping their distance for the moment, despite some provocations (GIP Baku) , but until when?

It is also worth reminding the independence supporters that stubbornness and sacrifices do not always pay off. Because many believe that the episode of the Ouvéa cave helped lead to the Matignon and Nouméa agreements. It should be emphasized that the latter closely resemble the Lemoine proposal (see The Waltz of the Statuses – APROFED ), the first solution proposed by the State in the 1980s and yet rejected by the independence supporters and that the latter even went so far as to refuse a possible protectorate status (Pisani status), called independence-association , even more advantageous and which the FLNKS lawyer is now requesting by wishing for New Caledonia, an associated state status or like that of Monaco (see The example of the status of the Principality of Monaco – APROFED ).

In conclusion, the association calls on the parties, the State and the independence supporters, to return to the negotiating table in order to try to make the “Kanaky Agreement” and the “Bougival Agreement” coincide and not to attempt to impose them on one or other of the parties.

We wish you a good read and remind you that federalism is the only solution to reconcile unity in diversity.

L’association APROFED