New Caledonia to remain part of France after voting ‘no’ to independence
New Caledonia’s third and final independence referendum
On Sunday 12 December, New Caledonians went to the polls to vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to New Caledonia’s third and final referendum on self-determination. Asked, “Do you want New Caledonia to achieve full sovereignty and independence?” (translated), 96.5% of the population voted ‘no’ while 3.50% casted a ‘yes’ ballot. The turnout was low (43.87%) but unsurprising. Kanak leaders called for non-participation as early as October 2021 and asked for the postponement of the referendum to September 2022 due to current health and social reasons related to Covid. They argued that because of lockdown and Covid restrictions, campaigning had been hampered. The pandemic had spared the archipelago until cases started to surge in September. As of December 2021, over 12,000 infections and 280 coronavirus-related deaths have been recorded. There was also a perceived feeling that Paris was disrespecting traditional mourning periods. Despite the indigenous Kanak population’s reluctance, France’s decision to go ahead with the referendum has drawn condemnation from several Pacific island countries and Pacific leaders. The Melanesian Spearhead Group called on Pacific states not to recognise the referendum's result. Meanwhile, New Caledonia’s Congress president took the matter to the United Nations committee on decolonisation, and a group of New Caledonian voters and organisations challenged the referendum at the Conseil d’Etat, France’s highest administrative court.
The referendum is part of a 20-year process of gradual and irrevocable transfer of powers from Paris to Noumea under the Noumea Accord. New Caledonia’s final status is subject to one to three referendums depending on the results. In case of a ‘no’ vote, another referendum would be organised. The ‘no’ vote won during the first two consultations, albeit a small margin each time, and a higher rate of ‘yes’ votes in 2020, which gave hope to pro-independence leaders that the third referendum would put New Caledonia on the path to independence. Observers recorded high participation rates during the first two referenda. 81% and 85.59% of the New Caledonian population went to the polls in 2018 and 2020, respectively.
The Matignon and Noumea Accords
Ethnic violence between Kanaks and Caldoches (native-born French) plagued New Caledonia between 1984 and 1988. The period, known as ‘the Events’ (les Évènements), witnessed both independentists and loyalists becoming violent, with France and armed settlers fighting against the Front de Libération Nationale Kanak et Socialiste (FLNKS), a coalition of parties supporting independence. In 1984 the FNLKS declared an independent state. The coalition began seizing agricultural land and forming roadblocks. France declared a state of emergency in January 1985. Pro-independence figure Eloi Machoro and his deputy Marcel Nanaro were assassinated in that same year. In May 1988, FLNKS militants killed four French police officers and took others hostage within a cave on the island of Ouvea. In response, French troops raided the cave, killing nineteen Kanaks militants with two French soldiers losing their lives in the process. The event is known as the Ouvea massacre. While violence was at its peak, peace talks between the government, the independentists, and the loyalists were held in Paris, leading to the 1988 Matignon Accords.
The Matignon Accords enabled peace in New Caledonia after decades of ethnic tensions thanks to the increased autonomy given the overseas territory. It was a ten-year programme that included regional development, Kanak management training, judicial decentralisation, accelerated land redistribution, and a semi-autonomous tri-partite representative provincial framework. The agreement defined the federal territory of New Caledonia in a way that attributes places of power to the independentists. It created three Provinces and established them as regional councils. The Matignon Accords allowed each Province to fully exercise the power and responsibility that have been vested in them – i.e. decision-making capacities, institutional representation and fiscal authority – except for sovereign powers which remained in the hands of the metropole. Most importantly, the Matignon Accords delayed the decision on sovereignty. The two opposing political families compromised and agreed to work together by choosing not to raise the question of independence for the next ten years. The lengthy transition prevented the return of violence if the results of an independent referendum went the ‘wrong’ way.
The Accords expired in 1998. The lack of consensus drove the French government, loyalists, and pro-independents to push back the referendum for another twenty years to diminish the risk of electoral violence and attempt to reach a consensus. The Noumea Accord was born out of this decision, expanding upon the Matignon Accords. The agreement was expected to improve and consolidate the relationship between Kanaks and Caldoches through obligatory rapprochement based on dialogue and compromise. The accord’s goal was to de-escalate the conflict by recognising both the Kanak people, their culture and rights, as well as the Caldoches who arrived afterwards and their contribution to the development of the archipelago. Acknowledging the legitimacy of the various populations is equivalent to founding a ‘common destiny’ to overcome the rivalries between different groups and to govern the country together and create a ‘Caledonian people.’
The Noumea Accord awards New Caledonia an exceptional constitutional position within the French Republic. The archipelago is given a sui generis status, meaning that it shares sovereignty with the metropole, thus making it an overseas country. For the agreement not to be considered unconstitutional, Paris amended the Constitution to create the unique Title XIII known as ‘transitional provision relating to New Caledonia’ (Translated). Articles 76 and 77 of the Constitution directly refer to the Noumea Accord. Title XIII is also accompanied by its own legal framework, the 1999 Institutional Act (Translated).
New Caledonia enjoys almost full autonomy from France. The devolution of powers is irreversible and secured by Article 77 of the French Constitution. The local government can exercise legislative and international powers that acknowledges New Caledonia as a source of statutory law. A Caledonian citizenship defined on a non-ethnic basis is created. While it reinforces the reality of shared sovereignty, it also marks the beginning of a shared national identity. Finally, it restores Kanak indigeneity by recognising Kanaks as the country’s colonised indigenous people and their specific rights, notably the right to sovereignty. The agreement prevents the geographical division of the New Caledonian territory depending on the result of the independence referendum. Section 5 of the Noumea Accord provides that “the result of the poll will apply comprehensively to New Caledonia as a whole. It will be impossible for one part of New Caledonia alone to achieve full sovereignty, or alone to retain different links with France, on the grounds that its results in the poll differed from the overall result.” (Translated.)
The Indo-Pacific: a strategically important region for France
The result of Sunday’s referendum was hailed as a victory by Emmanuel Macron, political leaders in the metropole, and loyalists. In a recorded message Macron said: “Tonight France is more beautiful because New Caledonia has decided to stay part of it.” (Translated). Moreover, the referendum result will help advance France’s Indo-Pacific strategy. The Pacific region is strategically important to Paris as France has a significant presence in the region. The four territories are New Caledonia, Wallis-and-Futuna, French Polynesia, and Clipperton, and is home to 560,000 French citizens and around 3,000 military personnel. The above-mentioned territories give France economic and military advantages and allow the metropole to project its power across a region that is witnessing increased struggles for influence between Western powers and China. New Caledonia, France’s biggest overseas territory, is particularly important for its maritime economic zone and its nickel mining industry and reserves. It is home to about one-quarter of the world’s nickel deposits. The mineral is used to manufacture batteries, mobile phones, and stainless steel. The cancellation of the Australia-France submarine deal by Canberra for the AUKUS partnership and the subsequent diplomatic row with Australia heightened New Caledonia’s importance to Paris as it is also home to a French military base, one of France’s three bases in the Indo-Pacific. As such, France would have faced difficulties in executing its Indo-Pacific strategy had New Caledonia voted for independence instead.
The Noumea Accord implies that France should remain impartial when organising the referenda. Nevertheless, the decision to go ahead with Sunday’s referendum despite international concerns demonstrates a biased French government. The third referendum was originally due later next year. However, to precede French presidential elections in April, the government brought it forward, possibly in an attempt from Emmanuel Macron to appear as the guarantor of the unity of the republic and counter the rise of nationalist figures in the French political landscape.
The Noumea Accord legally expired as New Caledonia held its third and final referendum. Still, Noumea retains the structures acquired under the Accord because their irreversibility is enshrined in the constitution. Trilateral talks on New Caledonia’s status are unlikely to happen before the next presidential elections in April 2022. Discussions have stalled following Paris’s decision to hold the referendum in December, and settling the issue is expected to take more than a few months. As such, the archipelago’s future status within France will be determined in a referendum to be held in mid-2023. Until then, the question of sovereignty will remain off the table as New Caledonia currently enters a transition period whose outcome remains uncertain.