What tools are available for mediation to get out of the crisis?

Hello everyone,

The APROFED association is getting back to you at the beginning of this week to provide you with the response from the AI, which we have once again requested, with the question posed in the title, namely: what tools exist to obtain mediation between independentists and the French State?

Below is the AI’s response:

For mediation between Kanak independence activists and the French state, several tools and approaches can be used:

1. Institutional and diplomatic mediation

• • UN and international organizations : Mediation under the auspices of the United Nations (via the Decolonization Committee) or regional organizations (such as the Pacific Islands Forum) can ensure neutrality.

• • Neutral figures and specialized mediators : Call on diplomats or recognized experts in conflict resolution, in particular experienced mediators who have worked on peace processes.

2. Dialogue and negotiation tools

• • Noumea Accords as a basis for discussion : Building on the achievements of previous agreements while proposing developments adapted to the current context.

• • Joint Commissions : Establish working groups involving all parties to address key issues (status, economy, identity, governance).

• • Citizen consultations : Engage local populations in open discussions to prevent dialogue from being limited to political elites.

3. Legal and constitutional tools

• • Negotiated referendum : Define together the terms of a future vote on independence, guaranteeing conditions acceptable to all parties.

• • Enhanced Autonomy Status : Explore an intermediate solution between independence and remaining within the Republic.

4. Communication and easing tensions

• • De-escalation agreements : Establish temporary measures to avoid violence and promote dialogue.

• • Use of Kanak traditions : Use traditional methods of mediation such as palaver or Kanak customs to anchor the negotiation in local cultural references.

We can thus see certain elements already implemented and desired by both parties, such as the arrival of the FIP in 2024 in New Caledonia, which is due to submit a report following this visit in the course of 2025. As well as the desire of the State and the separatists to discuss on the basis of the Noumea agreement with a view to making new proposals on the way out of the crisis and the development of a possible new agreement.

While the association welcomes the IA’s proposals on legal and constitutional tools aimed at establishing a new self-determination referendum, which we are proposing for our part in 2053, and a status of reinforced autonomy, which we are seeking via a federated state status with the acquisition of legislative sovereignty, we deplore, with regard to the tools for dialogue and negotiations, that citizen consultations have not taken place in order to engage, as the IA mentions, local populations in open discussions to prevent dialogue from being limited to political elites.

While the association also welcomes the resumption of negotiations between the French state and the independence movement, it regrets that these negotiations are not taking place under the auspices of a structure such as the FIP or the UN . The French state considers, as usual, that the Caledonian crisis, like the Algerian one at a certain time, was internal to France. The problem is that France has never been able to negotiate with its colonies in a peaceful manner, and has never been able to offer them solutions other than assimilation or independence.

There is also the problem, as Nadège Meyer, professor at the University of New Caledonia and honorary president of the New Caledonia Mediation Institute (see New Caledonia Mediation Institute ) points out in one of her articles published at the beginning of this year (see Crisis in New Caledonia: in search of a method for the “mediation and work mission” ) , that the French State is both judge and party in this conflict and therefore cannot possibly be an arbitrator and play the role of mediator in the current Caledonian crisis ; role that it gives itself by designating the loyalists, pro-French parties, as the main opponents of the independentists, which the independentists and the entire Caledonian population are not fooled by and which is why the Kanak parties are asking to discuss only bilaterally with the French State with a view to resolving the crisis, believing that the State and the loyalists constitute the same entity , which the association agrees with them on.

To give an image of the conflict between the French State and the separatists, it could be compared to a divorce . Papa TEIN no longer wishes to live with Mama MARIANNE. The Matignon-Oudinot and Nouméa agreements are equivalent to the non-conciliation orders issued by the family court judge. The problem in the Caledonian case is that the wife (Mother MARIANNE) also happens to be the family court judge. Thus, the case should normally be handled by another judge or the president of the bar, which could be played by the FIP or the UN, which France refuses for the time being.

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

The APROFED association