A thief will always be a thief, and he enjoys being a thief.
Nearly half a century after Vanuatu won its independence from joint British and French rule, two small uninhabited islands in the Pacific remain a wound that independence never fully closed. Vanuatu has now carried its claim over Matthew and Hunter Islands — sacred to the Aneityum people and surrounded by 350,000 square kilometres of ocean — beyond the reach of diplomacy and into the arena of international law. The decision reflects something older than economics: a nation's insistence that sovereignty, once promised, must be made whole.
- Bilateral talks on June 30th collapsed entirely, with Deputy Prime Minister Johnny Koanapo describing negotiations as 'intense' and 'heated' — leaving no diplomatic road untravelled and no agreement in sight.
- Two previous mediation attempts, led by Australia in 2018 and the United Kingdom in 2019, had already failed, signalling that this dispute resists the usual tools of quiet diplomacy.
- Vanuatu officials have hardened their position to the point of rejecting compromise outright, with maritime director Toney Tevi framing French control not as a legal disagreement but as an ongoing act of colonial possession.
- The stakes extend far beyond symbolism — control of the islands determines sovereignty over 350,000 square kilometres of Exclusive Economic Zone, a vast expanse of fisheries, minerals, and maritime resources.
- Vanuatu is now pursuing resolution through the International Court of Justice or formal arbitration, placing the question of who owns these islands in the hands of international law rather than bilateral goodwill.
Vanuatu is taking France to international arbitration over Matthew and Hunter Islands — two small, uninhabited specks of Pacific territory that France has controlled for decades, even as Vanuatu itself gained independence in 1980. Known locally as Umaenupne and Umaeneag, the islands carry deep cultural and spiritual meaning for the Aneityum people, and Vanuatu's government has long argued that its independence remains incomplete while France holds them.
The practical stakes are considerable. Sovereignty over the islands brings with it 350,000 square kilometres of Exclusive Economic Zone — waters rich with fishing rights, mineral potential, and maritime authority. But for Vanuatu's officials, the argument is not primarily economic. It is existential.
Talks held on June 30th ended without movement. Deputy Prime Minister Johnny Koanapo, visibly frustrated when he addressed reporters two weeks later, noted that mediation efforts by Australia in 2018 and the United Kingdom in 2019 had similarly gone nowhere. With bilateral options exhausted, Vanuatu announced it would seek resolution through the International Court of Justice or formal arbitration.
Toney Tevi, director of the Department of Ocean and Maritime Boundaries, left no room for ambiguity. He rejected the premise of French legitimacy entirely, comparing France's continued hold on the islands to a thief who refuses to acknowledge wrongdoing. A colonizer, he argued, will always think like a colonizer — and France's assertion of control is simply that mindset persisting into the present. For Vanuatu, escalating to international arbitration is not merely a legal manoeuvre. It is a declaration that some questions of sovereignty cannot be negotiated away, only adjudicated.
Vanuatu is taking France to international arbitration over two small islands that sit in the Pacific south of its own territory and east of the French possession of New Caledonia. The Matthew and Hunter Islands—known in Vanuatu as Umaenupne and Umaeneag—have been controlled by France for decades, a fact that has persisted even after Vanuatu gained independence in 1980. Now, nearly fifty years later, Vanuatu's government has decided that diplomatic negotiation has exhausted itself, and the only path forward is to ask an international court to settle the question of who actually owns them.
The islands themselves are uninhabited and small, but what makes them valuable is the ocean around them. Whoever controls Matthew and Hunter gains sovereignty over an additional 350,000 square kilometres of Exclusive Economic Zone—the waters where a nation can fish, extract minerals, and manage resources. For a Pacific island nation, that is substantial territory. For Vanuatu, though, the claim runs deeper than economics. The islands hold cultural and spiritual significance to the Aneityum people, and Vanuatu's government argues that the nation cannot be truly independent as long as France holds what it considers its own sacred land.
Talks between Vanuatu and France on June 30th went nowhere. Both sides held firm. Deputy Prime Minister Johnny Koanapo described the negotiations as "intense" and "heated," and when he spoke to reporters two weeks later, his frustration was evident. He said that since independence, Vanuatu has been fighting for international recognition of its claim, and that previous attempts at mediation—one led by Australia in 2018, another by the United Kingdom in 2019—had also failed to move the needle. The impasse had become complete. Koanapo told the media that Vanuatu would now pursue legal remedies available under international law, and that the International Court of Justice or some form of arbitration would have to be the arbiter.
Toney Tevi, who acts as director of the Department of Ocean and Maritime Boundaries, made clear that compromise was not on the table. When asked about the dispute, he rejected the very premise that France had any legitimate claim. "If you try and say it belongs to France, then I don't know where Paris is," he said. For Tevi, the issue was not a matter of negotiation or "understanding"—it was a matter of identity and possession. The islands are part of Vanuatu, he insisted, and France's continued control represents a continuation of colonial power, a refusal to fully relinquish the territories it once claimed.
Tevi's language grew sharper as he elaborated. He compared France's position to that of a thief who refuses to acknowledge the wrongness of theft. A colonizer, he suggested, will always think like a colonizer, and France's assertion of control over the islands was simply the latest expression of that mindset. The dispute, in his view, was not really about the islands at all—it was about whether a former colonial power would finally accept that its dominion had ended. Vanuatu's decision to escalate to international arbitration represents a rejection of the idea that bilateral talks could ever resolve a disagreement rooted in such fundamentally different understandings of sovereignty and belonging.
Citações Notáveis
Since independence Vanuatu continues to fight for international recognition that Matthew and Hunter has always belonged to the people of Vanuatu, to our children.— Deputy Prime Minister Johnny Koanapo
It's a colonial concept when you try and understand, because for us it's not an 'understanding', it's a part of us.— Toney Tevi, acting director of the Department of Ocean and Maritime Boundaries
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why does Vanuatu care so much about two empty islands? Surely there's something else at stake.
There is. The islands come with 350,000 square kilometres of ocean—fishing rights, mineral rights, economic control. But for Vanuatu, it's also about what independence actually means. They say they can't be truly free while France still holds what they consider their own territory.
France has held them since before Vanuatu was independent. Why is this suddenly urgent now?
It's not sudden. Vanuatu has been pushing this since 1980. But after two failed mediation attempts—Australia tried in 2018, the UK in 2019—it became clear that talking wasn't working. The June meeting was the breaking point.
What does France say about this? Are they defending their claim?
The source doesn't give us France's side directly, but the pattern is clear: they're not budging. Neither country moved an inch in those June talks. That's why Vanuatu decided to go to court.
Do they think they'll win?
That's the gamble. But Vanuatu's officials seem to believe the law is on their side. They're framing this as a colonial holdover—France refusing to let go of territory it claimed long ago. Whether an international court sees it that way is what they're about to find out.
What happens if Vanuatu loses?
Then France keeps the islands and the ocean around them. Vanuatu remains incomplete, in their view. But if they win, they gain not just the islands but the economic zone that comes with them.