Political guest on 7:30 p.m. on NC the 1st Sunday, November 17, Palika spokesperson Charles Washetine confirmed the withdrawal of his FLNKS movement, denouncing a loss of credibility of the independence front. “The FLNKS no longer meets its missions and is falling into populism,” he declared, while recognizing the historical importance of this organization for independence.
Charles Washetine, spokesperson for Palika, political guest on 7:30 p.m., Sunday November 17, clarified the position of his movement. He confirmed the withdrawal of Palika from the FLNKS bodies, a significant turning point in the political landscape of New Caledonia. Charles Washetine also detailed Palika’s vision for the institutional future of the territory, while denouncing the current excesses of the Front.
Asked about the current position of the Palika, Charles Washetine confirmed: “To the extent that we have not appointed anyone to the political bureau of the FLNKS, we consider that we are effectively in retreat.”
For the spokesperson, the FLNKS no longer fulfills its historic missions. He criticizes methods considered outdated and a growing populism which taints the credibility of the Front.
The FLNKS is no longer credible in the eyes of its interlocutors.
Charles Washetine, porte-parole du Palika
However, Charles Washetine does not deny the historical importance of the FLNKS in the recognition of the Kanak people and the decolonization process initiated several decades ago. However, he believes that a reorganization is necessary to respond to current challenges. Like the UPM, the Progressive Union in Melanesia, the Palika offers the alternative of the UNI, the Independent National Union. They both consider this movement more “legitimate” than the FLNKS.
Despite this withdrawal, Palika remains committed to the pursuit of decolonization. In a context marked by the French parliamentary visit, Palika reaffirms its objective of “full sovereignty in partnership”. A position that he distinguishes from the concept of “shared sovereignty” advanced by Gérard Larcher and Yaël Braun-Pivet.
This can be interpreted as extended autonomy, but we take this opportunity to move forward within the framework of decolonization.
Charles Washetine, porte-parole du Palika
Charles Washetine recalled that four sovereign powers – such as justice and defense – remain to be transferred as part of the Nouméa agreement.
It defends a model of full sovereignty which is based on partnership agreements with the French state, while breaking with current economic dependence. “It is urgent to build a model that benefits all Caledonians. Today, a fifth of the population lives below the poverty line. This shows that our current system is running out of steam.”he declared.
The schedule promises to be tight with provincial elections scheduled for November 2025.
We have little time to find a comprehensive agreement, but I remain optimistic. We must accelerate discussions on the institutional future.
Charles Washetine, porte-parole du Palika
The withdrawal of the FLNKS does not signify a renunciation, but a desire to find new ways to realize independence aspirations.
In light of the claims by the UNI movement regarding their legitimacy, how do both Palika and UPM perceive the role of new political alliances in shaping the future of New Caledonia’s governance and independence efforts?
Welcome, political guests Charles Washetine and Jonathan Johns. Thank you both for taking the time to speak with us about the recent withdrawal of the FLNKS movement by your party, Palika.
Charles, can you explain the reasoning behind Palika’s decision to withdraw from the FLNKS and what you believe are the current shortcomings of the independence front?
Jonathan, as a representative of the UPM, what do you think about the UNI movement’s claim as a more “legitimate” alternative to the FLNKS? How does the UPM plan to address the ongoing decolonization process in New Caledonia?
Charles, despite withdrawing from the FLNKS, Palika remains committed to pursuing decolonization. Can you elaborate on what you mean by “full sovereignty in partnership”? How would this model differ from the “shared sovereignty” advocated by Gérard Larcher and Yaël Braun-Pivet?
Jonathan, with the upcoming provincial elections in 2025, and the ongoing political tensions in New Caledonia, how do you envision the future of institutional reorganization leading up to self-determination? Does the UPM have a clear vision for the territory’s independence?
Both of you, do you believe that the current political climate in New Caledonia is conducive to finding comprehensive agreements on the institutional future? How can all stakeholders work together to move forward and achieve a mutually beneficial outcome?
