Elite settlements in island territories: The road to a binding political status referendum in New Caledonia and Puerto Rico

Abstract

New Caledonia and Puerto Rico are two non-sovereign island territories of France and the United States respectively. Both territories have historically centered their political debate on the definition of their political status and have done so by implementing numerous referendums. Of the two territories, however, only New Caledonia has managed to establish a binding referendum on political status. This raises the following question: How has New Caledonia managed to obtain a binding referendum on its political status while Puerto Rico has failed to do so? One variable present in New Caledonia, but not in Puerto Rico, was the convening of both the metropolitan and territorial political elite with regards to the territory’s change in political status as well as the definition of each status option. While elite theory has been used as a theoretical framework to explain democratization, this article discusses the role of elite settlements with regards to changes in political status among non-sovereign island jurisdictions. I focus on two key events in both case studies. In New Caledonia, I focus on the signing of the Matignon and Nouméa Accords, 1988 and 1998 respectively, while in Puerto Rico I focus on the Plebiscitary Process of 1989-1991.

Canada and Comparative Territorial Politics

“…Power imbalances are always present in territorial politics but, despite some claims of “internal colonialism” (Hechter, 1975), nationalist and regionalist movements, at least in liberal democracies, rarely have to confront states that have practised race-based discrimination and excluded communities from citizenship and rights regimes. There are partial exceptions (such as Puerto Rico and other “non-independent territories”), but most of these communities do not experience significant settler colonialism (New Caledonia is one exception; see Burgos-Rivera, 2023). The second is that Indigenous politics presents a different configuration of territory since Indigenous peoples are typically not concentrated in one part of the state as a result of colonialism.…”

“…Les déséquilibres de pouvoir sont toujours présents dans les formes territoriales du politique, mais, malgré certaines allégations de « colonialisme interne » (Hechter, 1975), les mouvements nationalistes et régionalistes, du moins dans les démocraties libérales, sont rarement confrontés à des États qui ont mené une discrimination fondée sur la race et exclu des communautés de la citoyenneté et des régimes de droits. Il existe des exceptions partielles (comme Porto Rico et d'autres « territoires non indépendants »), mais la plupart de ces communautés n'ont pas connu de colonialisme de peuplement significatif (la Nouvelle-Calédonie est une exception; Burgos-Rivera, 2023).…”