By organizing the Congress of Rupture between now and February 28, 2025, the CTM enters into the two contradictory paths opened by the RPPRAC, “total territorial continuity”, assimilationist, and “total autonomy”, anti-assimilationist. Today, like yesterday, the time is not for consistency but for overbidding incoherence. The words independence and autonomy have been replaced by the word rupture. Isn’t that the last word? chat’ en sac called to come in all possible forms of trickery? Immediately begins the Lépine competition for the definition of this rupture.
To all honor, it is a matter of “THE” breakupa determinant which leaves little doubt about the final objective. However, Serge Letchimy wonders: “Are we “really” ready to move towards a breakup? ? But this is only an aesthetic doubt: “I think we have to go,” it’s necessary “major changes”, … “breaking decisions”. Indeed, the boss of the CTM lists the areas of skills he lacks: “health, education, land, agriculture, fishing.” It will then settle, in addition to the question of “food prices”, “the global problem of organized poor development” and that of the “poverty”. A Prévert-style list which looks exactly like the announcement of a total autonomy project. Only the two crutches of sovereign power, the police and justice, seem to escape the list. But the various and varied motions of the CTM are already taking a toll on sovereign power, according to the principle that it is better to be in a position to criticize it than to exercise it. In short, the president of the executive who has made the most favorable gestures towards nationalist movements does not seem ready to be overtaken in terms of radicalism on the statutory level.
For the main opponent, Daniel Marie-Sainte, it is the voice of prudence and orthodoxy of the Martinique independence movement (MIM). He will not take up the word rupture but welcomes the windfall: “Since the start of the crisis, we have, right here, made this proposal”. The congress… is… the only place that is provided so that we can meet and debate, and develop a project for our country.” A statement in the form of a point of order, very unrevolutionary, which would condemn random meetings, organized between dubious participants and in improbable places. As a seasoned trade unionist he is not very “RPPRAC”.
The third break, the one carried by Francis Carole, looks exactly like the verbatim of Serge Letchimy: “we need a disruptive congress”. When the latter “leave the fight for independence for other people”he seems to say “you go-and Francis!”which considers that “the issue of decolonization must also be addressed”. Finally, it is difficult to ideologically oppose the president of the executive and the fractious leader of Palima who appears, at least verbally, as one of the few coherent nationalists in this country. Of the dual demands of the RPPRAC, Mr. Carole retains only one, total autonomy, which he boldly calls decolonization. Especially not the other assimilationist part, that of “consume like Paris at Paris prices”.
But now, coming out of his den, the old lion Alfred Marie-Jeanne brings all these beautiful people together. He brings out from limbo the slogan that he never dared to express when he was president of communities: “a referendum for or against independence”. A binding referendum and not a simple popular consultation, not subject to obligation like that of January 24, 2010. Can Alfred Marie-Jeanne really believe in the victory of the YES in a dry and rushed referendum on independence? Can he prejudge or hope that a massive NO will put a lasting end to institutional demands? Ultimately, Chaben’s revelation may well have no other ambition than to refine his statue of the commander in the face of history.
-In any case, at a time when the word totalitarianism is sometimes used to describe Martinican political life, a question arises in the debate, relating to the functioning of democracy. All the supporters of the break spoke out both in the CTM chamber and on the airwaves and in the press. What about the representatives of voters opposed to this break? Would there be no elected officials either at the CTM or elsewhere to carry their voice, while the omens assure that their number could rise to around 90% of Martinicans? Thus, if these elected officials do not exist today or are too few in number, their voters would indeed exist. Perhaps we should seek them out in a democratic way in order to prevent Martinican democracy from becoming nothing more than an illusion.
This is why it would be appropriate to align the opinion of the population and that of its elected representatives and to prevent a massive majority of voters hostile to the break from being represented by a majority of elected officials who are in favor of it. . It would be enough to put an end to the handkerchief in my pocket policy, in force just during electoral campaigns, which allows candidates to be judged solely on their good looks. Therefore, the referendum desired by Alfred Marie-Jeanne could be organized in 2028, the day after the renewal of the Territorial Assembly of the CTM where the project should find itself at the center of the electoral campaign. Whatever it is, obtained in these conditions of political clarity, the referendum decision could appease Martinican society which greatly needs it.
Fort-de-France, January 5, 2025
Yves-Léopold Monthieux
