If it was a very large deposit, then there is always the option of heading to xCAT naming the Agent and Ponant as respondents. Exclusive jurisdiction clauses are not always effective, and if the Agent is Australian, and taken to be the agent of Ponant, then you may succeed against them.It was a very large deposit, the transaction fee was horrendous but of course now, well what can I say.
At the moment there would be a good case against Ponant for deceptive and misleading conduct, given their website (and terms and conditions) are inducing people to book by offering full refunds if they choose to cancel. I would be taking a screen shot of their press release area still up on their website promoting their "Worry free bookings policy". Running a case for deceptive conduct and oppression may take more than xCAT however, and need a lawyer.
Personally, I would be going back to the Travel Agent and suggesting that unless a better outcome is achieved, they will be a party to whatever action you take.
Except that clause 12.9 specifically mentions "suspending and/or amending a trip" - no reference to cancellation., Clause 11,9,on the other hand specifically deals with cancellation, and goes further to state that it applies "no matter the reason for the cancellation".The cruise has been cancelled, the company is relying on force majeure set out in 12.9.