The situation, now, in the island of Mayotte,
poses a moral dilemma to the French government. Let us
recall the facts : Mayotte is an island which is parto of
the archipelago of Comoro, in the Indian Ocean. When
Comoro, a French colony, became independent, the
population of Mayotte refuses the new statute, probably,
for fear of the predominance of the other islands of the
archipelago and obtained, thanks to a poll in 1976, the
right to remain in the bosom of the French republic. On
the other hand, the Comoro republic claims Mayotte as
belonging to it. The claim is supported by the African
Unity Organization, non-aligned countries and United
Nations General Assembly, which hampers the French
Government's exterior policies, just because of the
statute of an island with a population of 47.000, but,
even in a case like this, moral political principles are
involved.
It is easy to understand that French leaders are
trying to find an honorable means to have Mayotte join
the Comoro republic. But, it is not easy ; in 1976, the
polls were 99.40 % for remaining inside the French
community.
The population is to be consulted again, in 1984,
about its choice, and the problem would be solved for the
French government if the Mayotte population were willing
to change opinion and vote in numbers for joining Comoro
State. Actually it can be foreseen that this will not be
the case. The three prominent parliamentarians are
strongly opposed and vigorously denounce the plans they
consider intolerable for unity with Comoro.
This explanation of the situation of Mayotte is an
example of the difficulties that arise when the
principles recognized by states are to be carried out,
while, at the same time, what the populations want is to
be respected. We have to remark that the ideas about the
freedom of populations to self choice, with the addition
of moral considerations, have been subject to great
variations, with the passing of time. If we lived in the
Middle Ages, it would seem natural that the King of
France should sell Mayotte to Comoro to be paid back by
th use of a military base (this has been discussed, now)
without worrying about the population's opinion, as
Mayotte and its inhabitants would be the King's property.
If we were living in the times of Emperor Napoleon III,
it would seem natural that, like what was done for Italy
or Germany, help would be given to Comoro to become a
state, Mayotte included. As we live now in an era of
post-desalinization and self-decision, it seems logical
that Comoro be independent, but as rational that the will
of the people of Mayotte be respected.
The principles which have ruled States and peoples in
their dealings with each other - if we do not consider
dictatorships and conquests still numerous - have thus
varied with time. Nowadays, the absolute sovereignty of
States, not with landing the fact that the so-called
absolute sovereignty is an illusion as to facts, is still
in fashion. It could be imagined that Mayotte could
become independent. Some Polynesian or West Indian
islands have been given independence and their population
was under 100.000. Where will this absurd partition into
small, inimical states, what was called "balkanize", stop
?
Actually, the States of the World, from the smallest
to the biggest, all are interdependent, particularly in
the economic field. It would be rational for them to join
to form large communities, following the principles of
federalism : territorial, political unity, with a regard
for minorities, etc.. Then Mayotte could join the Comoro
State, having become a federation respecting the
personality of each of the islands.
To this aim, States have to accept the transfer of
some of their powers on behalf of organizations that will
foster the future federations. If we want some order to
reign between states, the populations to accept that
order, the habit of absolute sovereignty has to be
changed so that the new order of interdependence and
close federations may come about.
