SHIFTING THE BLAME

Events in New Caledonia, an overseas territory of France, have been at the forefront of global politics in recent weeks. The most evident manifestations of these events are the severity with which France is quelling the anti-colonial liberation movement of the Kanaks, the native population of the Pacific archipelago, and the cynicism with which it is attempting to shift the blame for the unrest to Azerbaijan.

A discriminatory law and disingenuous Macron

New Caledonia became a colony of France in 1853. It was not until 1957, amid the dissolution of the French colonial empire, that Kanaks were recognised as French citizens. The current turmoil in New Caledonia stems from a law enacted by the French Parliament, granting French citizens who have resided in New Caledonia for over 10 years the right to vote in local elections.

This law nullifies the 1998 Nouméa Accord, which allowed for increased political autonomy for New Caledonia and voting rights in local elections solely for those who had resided in the archipelago at that time. Since 1998, approximately 40,000 French citizens have relocated to New Caledonia, and presently, the Kanaks, the indigenous people, constitute merely 40 percent of the archipelago's population of 250,000.

In the trio of referendums on the islands' future conducted between 2018 and 2021, the Kanaks unequivocally voiced their aspiration for independence. In the initial two referendums, a narrow margin of victory for maintaining the archipelago within France was secured solely through the votes of French citizens. The third referendum was boycotted by Kanak political organisations. Nonetheless, this did not deter French President Emmanuel Macron from insincerely proclaiming: "Today France is a more splendid country because New Caledonia has chosen to remain a part of it."

France's approach to its overseas territories, including New Caledonia, has remained largely unchanged since the fall of the colonial empire. Its principal aim is to facilitate exploitation through neo-colonial tactics. Notably, New Caledonia's significance to Paris is primarily due to the archipelago's abundant reserves of nickel, chromium, cobalt, manganese, lead, copper, and even gold and silver. Consequently, the indigenous populace opposes the French strategy designed to militarily, politically, socio-economically, and demographically subjugate the Kanak people.

To quell the ongoing protests, which have resulted in six fatalities (including two gendarmes) and over 300 injuries, France has deployed armed forces, police, and internal troops, instituted a state of emergency, and enforced a curfew. President Macron's visit to New Caledonia, flanked by the ministers of defence, interior, and overseas territories, was intended to lend additional gravitas to Paris's punitive actions.

Incidentally, last year Macron visited Nouméa, the administrative hub of New Caledonia, where he effectively announced the revision of the electoral law. Concurrently, he cautioned those advocating for New Caledonia's secession from France that "the quest for independence, even clandestinely, can culminate disastrously. To seek refuge in silence, isolation, or separatism, is essentially to opt once more, today or tomorrow, for the peril of violence. We say no to that!"

Macron's recent visit reaffirmed France's resolve to crush the Kanak independence movement. He stated that French security forces stationed in New Caledonia would remain in the French overseas territory "as long as necessary to restore peace, serenity, and security." He also indicated that the state of emergency could only be lifted following the dismantling of the roadblocks and barricades erected by demonstrators.

Macron entertained the prospect of formulating an agreement within weeks to address the crisis in New Caledonia. By emphasising that the agreement must align with the French Constitution and that the outcomes of the last referendum, won by adversaries of New Caledonia's independence, are irrevocable, Macron validated Paris's commitment to quash separatism in the distant Pacific archipelago.

Thus, France does not hesitate to employ any means necessary to suppress the Kanak national liberation movement. This reaffirms that violence and homicide persist as constant elements of French policy. Even if its neo-colonial character is masked by ostensibly democratic, yet in practice, only subjugation-promoting methods of administration in the so-called "overseas territories."

Neocolonialism must end

The disturbances in New Caledonia represent another symptom of the crisis of French neo-colonialism. Nations and peoples formerly subjugated by Paris are determined to cast off the shackles of oppression. This endeavour is evident in several African nations, striving to extricate the remnants of French control from the African continent. Presently, unrest stirs among the Kanaks, the native inhabitants of New Caledonia. Their determination to liberate themselves from French governance has compelled France to adopt a strategy of forcible suppression, signalling a stark indication of the impending downfall of Parisian policies, remnants of a bygone era. Particularly in the case of New Caledonia, an archipelago in Oceania, the world witnesses not merely neo-colonial but outright colonial practices of this policy, which seeks to disguise the subjugation of the Kanaks under the guise of "civil" status as "overseas territories."

In light of these circumstances, Paris's allegations against Baku appear ludicrous. French Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin accused Azerbaijan of meddling in New Caledonia's affairs, claiming that "certain separatists have brokered a deal with Azerbaijan." Darmanin failed to elaborate on the nature of Azerbaijan's alleged interference. And he could not, for French attempts to assign blame for the ongoing situation to Azerbaijan lack foundation and are indefensible.

Is it Azerbaijan's fault that French legislators have enacted a law expanding the electoral rights of French settlers on the islands at the expense of the indigenous population's interests? Is it culpable for a law that dooms the local Kanaks, who now constitute less than half of the archipelago's populace, to become a minority in their own land?

The Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry justifiably urged France to concentrate on rectifying its country's flawed policies in foreign regions, reminding of the atrocities committed by France against local populations, the merciless slaughter of millions of innocents under the guise of colonialism pursued by Paris for decades.

It is evident that French criticisms of Azerbaijan concerning the protests in New Caledonia only accentuate Paris's inadequate, antagonistic stance towards Baku.

France must acknowledge that Azerbaijan will persist in championing justice and equity globally, particularly within the international relations framework. Considering France's arbitrary actions, as exemplified by New Caledonia, it is astonishing how France continues to masquerade as a "defender of human rights," so to speak, on an international scale. France is culpable for the harsh suppression of liberation movements in its former colonies and the perpetuation of such practices in its "overseas territories," while simultaneously accusing, for instance, Türkiye of the "Armenian genocide." It resorts to all measures, including the most severe, to combat separatism in New Caledonia, Corsica, and its other holdings.

Yet, while France points fingers, Azerbaijan, having vanquished the occupying forces of Armenia, has effectively quelled separatism within its own borders. Despite this, France, which has enacted overtly anti-Azerbaijani policies at the presidential and governmental levels, as well as through parliamentary resolutions that undermine Azerbaijan's sovereignty and territorial integrity, dares to express indignation over allegations that Baku orchestrated the riots in New Caledonia. Conversely, France, having openly supported separatists in the Garabagh region during its occupation by Armenia, lacks the moral standing to accuse Azerbaijan of backing the Kanak national liberation movement.

The stance of France on the global stage underscores the legitimacy of Azerbaijan's and other nations' calls for a more equitable world order and reforms in the international relations system. Primarily, this pertains to the United Nations, whose effective instruments are employed selectively to benefit a limited consortium of states, including France (whose actual contribution to the triumph over Nazi Germany and its allies pales in comparison to the pivotal roles of the USSR, the United States, Great Britain, and China).

Presently, France represents, in essence, one of the agents of global malaise. This is evidenced by the dire repercussions of its policies, which impose a burdensome yoke on peoples striving to liberate themselves from the neocolonial shackles of French rule. It is against this policy that Azerbaijan, an advocate for the emancipation of nations and peoples from all forms and manifestations of neocolonialism, stands resolute and unwavering in opposition.

The joint declaration issued by the Baku Initiative Group and 14 political movements seeking independence from France's remaining colonies — including Kanak New Caledonia, Maohi Nui (French Polynesia), French Guiana, Martinique, Guadeloupe, and Corsica — merits attention. The statement denounces "the calculated intent of the French state, which proclaims itself a 'nation of human rights' while concurrently infringing upon the Kanak people's right to self-determination, with the aim of expanding its electorate and relegating the Kanak people to a minority status in their ancestral homeland." Furthermore, it calls upon France to cease its colonial practices and permit the Kanak people to determine their own future.

In light of the ongoing transgressions perpetrated by France on Kanak soil, there is an unequivocal necessity to dispatch an international mission, ideally under the auspices of the United Nations, to safeguard the native inhabitants of New Caledonia from the brutality of French security forces. The impunity enjoyed by France must be curtailed, especially considering its brazen attempts to deflect accountability for the fallout of its reprehensible actions onto nations like Azerbaijan, which advocate for the cessation of neocolonialism and any form of subjugation by one country over another.

France must come to the realization that its obstinate and unjust policies will yield no positive outcomes, not only within its "overseas territories." Its conduct towards Azerbaijan, a nation that has neither opposed France nor infringed upon its interests — indeed, one that has endeavoured to fortify amity and cooperation with France — has already precipitated a marked erosion of its geopolitical influence in the South Caucasus. In time, these positions will inevitably diminish further. Nor will Paris's policy in the South Caucasus be salvaged by its military backing of Armenia.

President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan presciently cautioned: "Should we witness a resurgence of revanchist sentiments in Armenia, should France supply Armenia with lethal weaponry, should such armament reach a critical threshold, then let no one get offended at our response. After all, the capabilities of our Army, the steadfastness of our resolve, are well-known. No force shall withstand our might."