The socio-economic consequences of France’s policy regarding its overseas territories and Paris’s approach to these regions have been analyzed in an article published in the newspaper Le Monde.
Sea-news.az reports that an op-ed by Elizabeth Landi, a historian and teacher in Fort-de-France, the capital of Martinique, titled “Overseas territories: the French state risks becoming both a universal culprit and an indispensable guarantor,” was published in Le Monde on September 16.
The author points out one of the main contradictions of France’s overseas policy: official Paris seeks to preserve the strategic advantages provided by these territories—such as vast maritime space, military presence, and global influence capabilities—while simultaneously attempting to limit the expenses required for their socio-economic support.
The article presents the situation in Mayotte as an example of this policy. It states that the French state faces severe challenges in meeting fundamental needs such as water supply, schools, housing, healthcare, security, and infrastructure. While accepting that migration pressure is a real issue, the author emphasizes that it should not overshadow long-term investment deficits, inconsistent state policies, and the mismanagement of demographic processes.
The article also highlights the risk of a security-driven agenda replacing development policy.
According to the piece, France has no intention of relinquishing its overseas territories. On the contrary, Paris’s primary approach is to maintain sovereignty and strategic interests while offloading more responsibility onto local authorities.
The author warns that “autonomy” unsupported by sufficient funding, production capacity, and state solidarity could effectively turn into the “decentralization of helplessness.” Against this backdrop, it is noted that the goal of bridging socio-economic disparities between mainland France and its overseas territories risks being gradually replaced by accepting those disparities as a permanent reality.
The article specifically analyzes the situation in Martinique. An aging and declining population, youth emigration, a weak production base, reliance on imports, and the potential reduction of state funding are listed among the key structural problems.
In the author’s view, autonomy will not solve these problems without a shift in the economic model. Transferring responsibilities to local authorities without accompanying resources could further worsen the situation. In this context, it is emphasized that Martinique finds itself “too tied to France for true sovereignty, yet not receiving sufficiently equal treatment to believe in the Republic’s promise of equality.”
The article also refers to the recent report by the Regional Court of Auditors of Martinique. The report describes the financial condition of the Territorial Collectivity of Martinique (CTM) as “critical” and characterized by a “structural financial imbalance.”
It states that CTM’s debt has increased by 28 percent since 2021, reaching 977 million euros, while payment delays have stretched to 131 days instead of the legally mandated 30 days. Between 2022 and 2025, while the collectivity’s current revenues grew by only 1 percent, its expenditures rose by approximately 12 percent.
According to the report, subsidies and financial transfers allocated by the French state to Martinique dropped by 7.4 percent between 2021 and 2024, decreasing from 296 million euros to 274 million euros.
Serge Letchimy, President of the Executive Council of CTM and an advocate for autonomy, stated that this reduction weakens the financial autonomy of local authorities and forces growing budget burdens to be met with limited resources. Additionally, the Regional Court of Auditors noted that the collectivity’s own decisions, including its level of borrowing, have also contributed to the current financial situation.
Francis Carole, an advocate for Martinique’s independence, leader of the Party for the Liberation of Martinique, and one of the co-founders of the International Decolonization Front, described CTM’s financial state as “structurally catastrophic.”
He emphasized that this situation severely weakens the collectivity’s long-term ability to invest and fund public policies.
