The PALM10 meeting was held exactly two months after New Caledonia, an island nation strategically located close to Australia and a French overseas territory, was hit by riots,threatening to destabilise the region. What triggered the riots and deadly violence in New Caledonia was that lawmakers in Paris approved a constitutional amendment to allow recent arrivals to the territory to vote in provincial elections.
Though the island territory is no stranger to violence, the unrest was alarming and the riots were the worst in four decades. French President Emmanuel Macron flew to New Caledonia in a bid to calm tensions. Why is the island of New Caledonia important and why are Japan and other stakeholders keen to maintain the existing equilibrium in the South Pacific, even as they are worried about the developments in the island nation? The protests over France’s voting reforms were the latest flashpoint in a decadeslong tussle over France’s role in the island. New Caledonia is located in the waters of the southwest Pacific, about 1,500 km (930 miles) east of Australia.
Of the total population of 270,000, 41 per cent are Melanesian Kanaka and 24 per cent are of European origin, mostly French. The archipelago was given its name by British explorer Captain James Cook in 1774. It was annexed by France in 1853 and was used as a penal colony until shortly before the turn of the 20th century. France has realised the strategic significance of the island nation after understanding China’s design. It is one of the five island territories spanning the Indo-Pacific held by France and has emerged as central to Macron’s plan to maintain a firm French foothold in the Pacific. There is an economic dimension to New Caledonia’s strategic importance as well.
It is the world’s third-largest nickel producer and lies at the heart of a geopolitically complex maritime region where the US, China, India, Australia and Japan are jostling for power and influence in security and trade. When many Western powers were in a colonising spree of Asia in the 19th century and before the anti-colonisation movement gathered steam, France officially accepted the status of New Caledonia in 1946 as its overseas territory. New Caledonia’s importance suddenly rose after a nickel boom in the 1970s that drew outsiders. This led to conflicts between Paris and Kanaka independence movements. In 1998, a Nouméa Accord was reached.
This helped ease relations by outlining a path to gradual autonomy and restricting voting to the indigenous Kanaka and migrants living in New Caledonia before 1998. The accord allowed for three referendums to determine the future of the country. In all three, independence was rejected. Why then did tensions explode suddenly in May 2024? Under the terms of the Noumea Accord, voting in provincial elections was restricted to people who had resided in New Caledonia prior to 1998, and their children.The measure aimed to give greater representation to the minority Kanaks, but Paris has since come to view it as undemocratic. Local leaders say the new reform, which still needs a final joint vote of the two houses of parliament in Versailles, will dilute the vote of the indigenous Kanaka.
Pro-independence parties want Macron to scrap the electoral reform. With Japan’s initiative during the PALM10, leaders across the Pacific including New Caledonia held a caucus meeting on the margins to discuss the New Caledonia issue. Indeed, Japan and other stakeholders are concerned about the developments in New Caledonia and are trying to address the issue in order to find solutions. The Cook Islands Prime Minister and Pacific Islands Forum Chair Mark Brown underlined that the issue of New Caledonia was a pressing issue for the PIF. As it transpired, the New Caledonia issue was not just a marginal theme for all PALM participants but an issue in need of PIF regionalism and political leadership.
As the Chief of Staff to the President of the Autonomous Government and Special Envoy of the New Caledonian government, Claude Gambey sought support of the caucus. The PIF agreed to request the French government to conduct a field survey by the General Assembly in Tonga by August-end. This was a major political move. Here, too, the China factor emerges as important. Though China has also held meetings similar to the PALM, the political leadership and the sense of regionalism (despite the fact that only three countries in the Pacific ~ Palau, Tuvulu, and the Marshall Islands ~ continue to support Taiwan, with its half-century old PIF history) ensured it could successfully withstand pressure from Beijing and defy the recent security agreement it had signed with the Solomon Islands.
Thus, Japan accordingly strategized its policy and sought to protect its national interests by promoting the PALM and working with the PIF. Viewed objectively, the PALM10 summit successfully laid the roadmap for Japan to deepen ties with the Pacific Island nations. Japan and the PALM10 leaders affirmed shared values, climate initiatives, security cooperation and a strengthened partnership. The impactful imperial hospitality also conveyed a sense of oneness of Japan with the cause of the Pacific Island nations. The hosting of a tea ceremony by Their Majesties Emperor Naruhito and Empress Masako for the Pacific Island leaders and their spouses at the Imperial Palace on 17 July was more than a symbolic event.
This hospitality and the symbolism implicit in it was an event that celebrated the importance of the Pacific Island nations and their significance to Japan. At the conclusion of the summit, the Pacific Island leaders and Japan issued a Leaders’ Declaration and Joint Action Plan wherein both sides affirmed the importance of shared values such as freedom and democracy. They also underscored the necessity of upholding a “free and open international rules-based order”. Hinting at China, the declaration explicitly expressed strong opposition to “any unilateral attempts to change the status quo by the threat or use of force or coercion anywhere in the world”.
The summit declaration aimed to achieve balanced diplomacy and rebuild trust with diverse countries and regions. Japan proposed seven priority cooperation areas in the Joint Action Plan. These included climate change, disaster resilience, resources and economic development, all of which correspond to the seven pillars of the 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent of the PIF. Prime Minister Kishida unveiled the Pacific Climate Resilience Initiative, centred on disaster relief support. Beijing must be watching these developments keenly.
(The writer is former Senior Fellow at Pradhanmantri Memorial Museum and Library, Ministry of Culture, New Delh)