"Imposing federalism without preparation could lead to ethnic clashes," says Malagasy Tonga Saina leader. Elected in a constituency considered a federalist stronghold during successive crises in 1991 and 2002, the MTS leader has much to say on this form of state. Interview. Midi Madagasikara: After 1991 and 2002, the federalism debate resurfaces a quarter century later. Roland Ratsiraka: "Before debating federalism, let us ask ourselves an essential question: what diagnosis do we make of our country? It is clear that Malagasy political leaders do not share the same analysis of the national situation. We all observe the same result: persistent poverty, economic and social decline, and continuous weakening of public services. But our views diverge deeply on the causes of this failure and solutions to address it. It is in this context that debates on decentralization, provincial autonomy, and today federalism resurface." Midi: What is your position? R.R.: "I cannot be opposed in principle to the idea of federalism. Many populations in peripheral regions, particularly coastal areas, have long awaited it, sometimes without precisely knowing how it functions or its consequences. For them, federalism represents above all the end of hypercentralization, better wealth distribution, and the right to locally decide their future. This aspiration is legitimate, but it becomes dangerous if implemented hastily, without administrative, financial, institutional and cultural preparation. As a former mayor for several terms, twice minister and deputy for over twenty years, I observe considerable decline in deconcentration and decentralization in Madagascar. 'Effective decentralization' remains too often a mere slogan. The only truly implemented decentralization primarily concerns communes. Major laws adopted in 1994 and promulgated in 1995, notably law no. 94-008, granted them legal personality, their own budget, resources, fees and competencies they can exercise autonomously." Midi: Is this still progress? R.R.: "This progress has rarely been questioned in principle. However, recent decisions have constituted setbacks, notably when it was decided to further centralize land tax collection. Yet in many countries, these taxes constitute essential commune and city resources. The commune problem is therefore not only lack of autonomy. It also lies in weak resources, insufficient administrative capacity, and sometimes mismanagement. In several major cities, notably Antananarivo and Toamasina, massive recruitments motivated by political considerations have increased operating expenses, making salary payments difficult. Legal autonomy exists, but it does not automatically produce development when poorly administered. Conversely, Fort-Dauphin benefited from significant resources linked to QMM mining activities. Similarly, communes affected by the Ambatovy project should experience considerable development through royalties owed them. Provided these are actually paid without blockage or confiscation by central power." Midi: What about public investment projects in regions? R.R.: "In regional public investment projects listed in ministry budgets, achievements often fall far short of announcements. Regional budget conferences give hope, but voted credits are not always committed or executed on the ground. The budget becomes an intention document rather than a true development instrument. Even when laws recognize local authority autonomy, instructions from central state continue to violate this spirit. In certain administrations or public companies, one must still await a decision from Antananarivo to buy a simple lightbulb or urgent equipment needed for service continuity. I was also scandalized when the territorial planning ministry wanted central administration to manage Miami market contracts and stall rights in Toamasina. This competency should have primarily belonged to the local authority. These are not mere administrative dysfunctions. They reflect a form of distrust."