French Polynesia’s new President Moetai Brotherson is in Paris for wide-ranging talks with the French government and the organisers of the 2024 Paris Summer Olympics.

His visit involves meetings with a range of ministers and officials to continue cooperation arrangements initiated by his predecessor.

“I’m not here to come begging,” Brotherson said, adding that he wanted to ensure that France was helping to decrease dependence on French financial transfers by developing French Polynesia as a country with its own resources.

He told the news site Outremers360 that he wants any process of self-determination to be arbitrated by the United Nations.

Restating a timeframe of up to 15 years until a referendum on independence, Brotherson said that it was not utopian.

“[French] Polynesia is as big as Europe, and in terms of population, it is [the size of] Montpellier”, he said, referring to the southern French city with its 300,000 inhabitants.

He said time needed to be taken to prepare, and by seeking independence “we will be able to take decisions with full responsibility”.

By contrast, he said the preceding pro-autonomy governments had the reflex to say that in the end, if they did not make the right decisions, they would turn to “mother” France.

Support for seabed mining ban
Brotherson met the State Secretary for the Sea Herve Berville who reconfirmed the French government’s support for a seabed mining ban.

Berville also reconfirmed that such a ban would also apply to French Polynesian waters.

Brotherson again expressed his unwavering support for next year’s Olympic surfing competition to be held in Tahiti.

After flooding in the area last month, French Polynesian Sports Minister Nahema Temarii cast doubt on Tahiti being able to go ahead with the competition.

However, the site manager of the Paris Olympics organising committee, as well as Brotherson, said the event would go ahead as planned.

After becoming President last month, Brotherson will this week officially relinquish his seat in the French National Assembly, to which he was re-elected last year when his pro-independence Tavini Huira’atira for the first time won all three available Paris seats.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

New Caledonia’s rival pro- and anti-independence factions both say they are satisfied with the week of separate talks with French government ministers in Paris.

After the rejection of full sovereignty in three referendums and the expiry of the 1998 Noumea Accord, a new statute for Kanaky New Caledonia needs to be created.

While the pro-independence parties want Paris to give a timetable to full independence, the anti-independence parties want Paris to realign the territory with France.

The discussions will be continued in Noumea in June when French Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin plans his next visit.

His ministry said he would go to the United Nations in New York in May to discuss the situation in New Caledonia.

The territory has been on the UN decolonisation list since 1986, based on the Kanak people’s internationally recognised right to self-determination.

After this week’s talks in Paris, Victor Tutugoro of the pro-independence Kanak and Socialist National Liberation Front (FLNKS) told the AFP news agency all points raised by his side had been accepted for the negotiations in June.

FLNKS accepted invitation
The anti-independence parties expressed satisfaction that the FLNKS accepted the French invitation for this week’s bilateral discussions after shunning a dialogue in France since the third and last independence referendum in 2021.

The pro-independence side largely abstained from the third vote because of the pandemic and refuses to recognise the result as the legitimate outcome of the decolonisation process.

The anti-independence parties want the June talks to be trilateral after the pro-independence parties insisted on negotiating only with France about a path to sovereignty.

The president of the Southern Province, Sonia Backes, said Darmanin’s visit would make sense only if the pro-independence parties joined the anti-independence parties for discussions.

On key points, the two sides remain far apart.

The pro-independence parties say the restricted rolls for provincial election, which define New Caledonian citizenship and are enshrined in the French constitution, must stay.

The anti-independence parties want France to open the rolls for next year’s provincial elections to include people who settled since 1998.

They also want a statute preventing any future option for self-determination.

According to a New Caledonian member of the French National Assembly, Nicholas Metzdorf, Darmanin said either time would do the job, or he would do the job.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

By Claire Smith and Jordan Ralph
 
A wonderful icon has been largely destroyed by fire. However, we should not despair.

Part of the reason this loss is so upsetting is because we are immersed in a Western way of thinking that equates authenticity with preserving the original materials used to create an object or building.

But not all societies think like this. Some have quite different notions of what is authentic.

Iconic buildings such as the Catherine Palace in Russia and Japan’s historic monuments of Ancient Nara have been successfully restored, sometimes after great damage, and are today appreciated by millions of people.

The preamble to the International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites, (the Venice Charter 1964), states that, “Imbued with a message from the past, the historic monuments of generations of people remain to the present day as living witnesses of their age-old traditions … It is our duty to hand them on in the full richness of their authenticity”.

Liberation’s front page today.

But in our diverse world, the definition and assessment of authenticity is a complex matter. The World Heritage Convention guidelines state that properties may be understood to meet the conditions of authenticity if their cultural values “are truthfully and credibly expressed”.

Accordingly, a building’s authenticity is determined in relation to its location and setting, use and function, spirit and feeling, and well as form and materials.

Japan’s NaraTodaiji. Wikimedia Japan’s historic monuments of Ancient Nara – comprised of Buddhist temples, Shinto shrines and the excavated remains of the great Imperial Palace – provide important insights into the nation’s capital during the 8th century.

These buildings are not less authentic because they were extensively restored after the enactment of the Ancient Shrines and Temples Preservation Law in 1897.

A palace gutted
The Catherine Palace at Tsarskoe Selo (Pushkin), south of Petersburg, was gutted during the Second World War.

When Russian people first saw the damage, they must have despaired.

Nevertheless, the government provided the resources to allow room-by-room restorations.

The restoration of the Amber Room, one of the most famous palace interiors of the 18th century, is a triumph.

Panels that had been looted by the Nazis were recreated over 25 years with an investment of $11 million. Today, the Palace is fully restored, a spectacular icon that attracts millions of visitors a year.

What about the relics and artworks?

The fire at Notre Dame has endangered a vast collection of Christian relics and artworks housed within the building and on its grounds, including the Crown of Thorns.

First responders saved many, but not all, objects. We do not yet know which ones have survived.

Does the argument regarding authenticity also apply to these relics and precious artworks? Well, yes and no.

There are two scenarios. The first is that the relics and artworks are partially damaged by fire, smoke and falling building materials. Within this scenario, the focus will be on restoration – and marvellous things can occur in the realm of materials conservation.

The second scenario is that relics or artworks are virtually, or entirely, destroyed. Within this scenario, the artworks can only be replicated, not restored. Such replication would have a precarious tie to the original works.

From the viewpoint of restoration, there is a crucial difference between portable and non-portable artefacts. Other than those that were part of the fabric of the building, the relics and artworks were not made on site.

The building itself, however, has a continuity of identity and function through being located within a specific landscape.

What now for Notre Dame?
One way forward is to use the Venice Charter (1964) to guide restoration. This would mean that the new materials used in preserving this historic structure would be kept distinguishable from the original construction.

Another way forward would be to restore the structure in a similar manner to that of Catherine I’s palace, in which an untutored eye finds it difficult to distinguish between the old and new parts of the structure.

Given the extent of the damage, this would be the more aesthetically pleasing and less jarring approach. Unlike other places of deep cultural significance, which may be destroyed forever due to commercial development, Notre Dame can be rebuilt.

With modern technology, it is entirely possible for the cathedral to be recreated with near-accuracy to the original. We can do this and keep the previous building’s spirit and feeling.

Dr Claire Smith, Professor of Archaeology, College of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, Flinders University. Jordan Ralph is a PhD candidate in  Archaeology, Flinders University.  Disclosure statement: Jordan Ralph receives funding from an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship and Flinders University to support his research. This article is from The Conversation and is republished on a Creative Commons licence.

• ‘Our lady of tears’ – what the papers say about the Notre-Dame fire
• France mourns, contemplates extent of damage to iconic Notre-Dame