NC: The search for autonomy, or the myth of Sisyphus

The APROFED association is contacting you again this week following an article published in the Journal de la Corse on February 11, 2026, entitled – New Caledonia: the elusive agreement and the specter of a rupture (cf. New Caledonia: the elusive agreement and the specter of a rupture – Journal de la Corse ) one of the paragraphs of which summarizes well the problem regarding the negotiations on the institutional future of the territory.

He notes that as soon as the word “independence” is uttered, it acts as a trigger for deadlock […] lines harden, accusations of refusing dialogue fly back and forth, and the political process grinds to a halt. Each side accuses the other of intransigence, while the social landscape continues to fragment.

However, as another article, this time from the corsicainfurmazione website, points out, the Kanaky agreement project does not aim for immediate independence but a structured process towards sovereignty (see “State lies, Kanak truth: the FLNKS sets the record straight” ).

It should also be remembered that independence was never a leitmotif for the indigenous people until the idea was suggested to them by the French state itself in the 1970s.

Indeed, in the aftermath of World War II , the adoption of the Constitution of the Fifth ^Republic allowed each overseas territory to choose between:

– to retain its special status as an Overseas Territory within the French Republic,

– to become a French department,

– or leave the French Republic by becoming a member state of the Community (cf. Overseas Territory (France) — Wikipedia ).

New Caledonia then chose to remain an overseas territory and thus stay within the French fold.

This choice is then “rewarded” by granting greater autonomy to local elites in managing their skills.

Unfortunately, the State’s insincere proposal and broken promises regarding the Community, a sort of French Commonwealth, led a large number of former colonies (African and Asian) to demand their independence. Faced with this wave of emancipation supported by the new great powers, the United States and the Soviet Union, France decided to reclaim the autonomy granted to New Caledonia.

Since then, the Kanak people have consistently sought to regain this autonomy. However, believing that it could be a step towards independence, France has consistently rejected this proposal, leaving the Caledonians with only two options  : integration through departmentalization or leaving the Republic through independence . It is this latter option that was chosen in the mid-1970s, an option that France has continued to oppose ever since.

Thus, if independence is a source of deadlock , it is important to remember that this proposal originated from the French state itself, not from the Kanak people. The latter have never rejected their ties with France, only asking for the return of the autonomy granted in the 1950s and confiscated in the 1960s. However, while the term “autonomy” itself seems to be a source of tension , perceived as a hypothetical stepping stone to independence—yet again implemented by France—it is worth asking what Caledonians can expect, if not integration, forced assimilation, a return to colonial status where all decisions would be made in Paris—something no one desires, yet this seems to be the path being pursued by the French state through the Bougival and Élysée-Oudinot agreements.

While other solutions have been proposed and partially implemented , such as those of an associated state (or independence-association) and a federal organization, through the Matignon-Oudinot Accords (1988) and the Nouméa Accord (1998), it is once again apparent that the French state is unwilling to fully commit to the process , thus reversing nearly 40 years of progress aimed at restoring New Caledonia’s autonomy. This deliberate backpedaling, which pro-independence activists call a ” yo-yo policy,” clearly demonstrates the insincerity of successive metropolitan governments regarding the pursuit of consensus, with the goal of improving the lot of these overseas populations for the benefit of their own economic and international interests.

Caledonians in their search for autonomy are condemned to relive the same events from generation to generation (1878, 1917, 1984, 2024) just like Sisyphus in Greek mythology whom the gods (France) punished for eternity to repeat the same action.

Wishing you a pleasant read and reminding you that federalism is the only solution to reconcile unity in diversity.

L’association APROFED