;)
New Caledonia 2025, after the insurrectional crisis of May-July 2024, what future? by F.Angleviel
Hello everyone,
The APROFED association is coming back to you this weekend to forward to you the latest work, dated this year, by Frédéric Angleviel, honorary university professor of contemporary history, specialist in colonization and French-speaking Oceania, entitled: Nouvelle-Calédonie 2025, après la crise insurrectionnelle de mai-juillet 2024, quel avenir ?, in which he proposes as a solution to the Caledonian problem, the solution of dual federalism (internal and external).
You can purchase his book, in French, at the following link: New Caledonia 2025 – Calédo Livres . The bookstore still has some in stock.
You can also find a presentation of his book through an interview, in French, with Alexandre Rosada at the following link: Angleviel Frédéric author of New Caledonia 2025. The future after the chaos of 2024?
F.Angleviel, like the association, thus joins the long list of personalities (university professors in history or law, former high commissioner, former vice-rector, former minister, local and metropolitan elected officials) who believe that the only solution concerning the future of New Caledonia is dual federalism.
In this respect, the association also recommends that you read the last two editions (Nos. 44 and 45) of the legal, political and economic review of New Caledonia, which focus on the theme of federalism and are accessible at the following links: Revue Juridique Politique et Economique de NC – Accueil . Its editor, R. Bertram, summarises the notion of federalism in the territory well, namely that federalism in New Caledonia has succeeded in pacifying political struggles for 36 years. The recognition of federal action appears generally positive.
The association nevertheless regrets that some proponents of this notion for New Caledonia have gone astray in recent years, moving from a dual federalism to a simple internal federalism (Sonia Backès) for purely political reasons so as not to say the same thing as her political opponent, P. Gomès. Others go so far as to propose a triple federalism of the community, ethnic, so-called personal type like P. Bretegnier, aiming to grant full sovereignty to the first people over the reserve lands that they still currently occupy, namely less than 30% of the Caledonian territory. And finally, to finish, those proposing on the model of hybrid states, between unitary state and federal state, described as regional as in Spain or Italy, to transform the country into the “Autonomous Community of New Caledonia and Kanaky” (CANCK) through JY Faberon and P. Frogier, which would make future Caledonians, in view of the acronym above, future dunces, which we think will not please them too much. This community, aiming to eliminate the current Congress and government of the Caledonian territory, to distribute their powers among the 3 provinces and leave it to them to choose the link they would like to have with France (federated or associated), bringing without saying a possible partition of the country as mentioned among others by the Minister of State, Mr. Valls, or an apartheid regime, as underlined by the deputy E. Tjibaou.
As mentioned in a previous article (see the MAGRAS Senate report and the intervention of MP TJIBAOU on 04/02/2025 – APROFED ), the association regrets that former senator P.Frogier has distorted an intention of the French Parliament considering implementing a differentiated development policy for each overseas territory, by wanting to apply this differentiation between communities within the same territory that is New Caledonia. It remains to be seen whether this proposal actually came from his own person or from the institution itself, namely the French Senate.
These various deviations around the notion of double federalism, which suit the French State which does not want it, are all the more distressing as the Kanak independence activists, as recalled in several of our articles, are not opposed to this concept , because they operate under this model at the tribal and political level within the FLNKS, the latter having even proposed in the 1980s a preliminary draft of a federal-type Constitution of Kanaky and in 2003, the desire within the Spearhead group, in the Solomon Islands, to create, once independent, the federated states of Melanesia.
Although F.Angleviel’s book sometimes seems a little harsh with the independentists, the association recalls and notes, in view of the discussions and negotiations which have taken place so far, that it is the independentists who have made the most concessions , namely:
– be in favor of signing a 3rd agreement,
– be prepared to push back the date of independence by several more years,
– to adjust the electoral body with a view to integrating native speakers,
– to integrate other communities into the reorganized Customary Senate,
– not to be against a federated state, if this allows Kanaky to become a state and the right to self-determination is maintained and fixed through a new date,
– to agree to discuss and negotiate without the president of the FLNKS imprisoned in mainland France,
– to agree to negotiate with 5 people and not just 2, only with the State, including around the table the loyalists, Eveil Océanien and Calédonie Ensemble parties.
What about the concessions made by these other parties? The association points out that they are only useful to the state for one thing: to serve as screens, lightning rods, and pretexts. The state remains the sole puppeteer pulling the strings. Caledonians as a whole are not fooled and know very well who to blame for the May 13, 2024, uprising.
What about the concessions of the State, which although having proposed the adoption of a fundamental law (Constitution) and the acquisition of the competence of the competence (internal sovereignty according to Jellinek), it seems that this was only a facade in order to end up proposing only as proposed by Calédonie Ensemble the integration of some Caledonians within the sovereign administrations and the very French creation of various and varied councils and committees on sovereign competences so that the Caledonians can provide only an advisory opinion, in other words a Nouméa Accord bis embellished with a few trifles.
We wish you a good read and remind you that federalism is the only solution to reconcile unity in diversity.
The APROFED association