ASIATODAY.ID, JAKARTA – Britain and Mauritius announced an agreement this week which would cede the UK-administered Chagos Archipelago to Port Louis in exchange for long-term access to the strategic Indian Ocean military base at Diego Garcia. A veteran political observer explains why the outcry coming from some corners of British society over the move is unwarranted.
Five years after the historic 2019 United Nations-backed International Court of Justice ruling that British Indian Ocean Territory control over the Mauritius-claimed Chagos Archipelago is unlawful, London has announced readiness to cede control over the island territory, pending a formal treaty.
“Under the terms of the treaty the United Kingdom will agree that Mauritius is sovereign over the Chagos Archipelago, including Diego Garcia. At the same time, both our countries are committed to the need, and will agree in the treaty, to ensure the long-term, secure and effective operation of the existing base on Diego Garcia which plays a vital role in regional and global security,” the UK and Mauritius said in a joint statement.
Under the deal, Britain would be allowed to maintain control over Diego Garcia – the Chagos’ largest island, for “an initial period” of 99 years, enabling London, which has been in control over the Indian Ocean territory since 1814, to hang on to the joint British-US military base built there in the 1970s following the forcible expulsion of island inhabitants until well into the 22nd century.
Situated in the Central Indian Ocean and now populated by US and British military personnel and contractors, Diego Garcia is a key US foothold between Asia and the Middle East, facilitating naval and air operations from Southeast Asia to the Persian Gulf going back to the Cold War. The island has proved a vital jumping off point in virtually every US-led war in the Middle East going back to 1991, and includes basing for nuclear-capable B-2 and B-52 strategic bombers and, and deep-water port facilities.
In the UK, the proposed Chagos Islands handover has sparked an uproar, with opposition lawmakers putting the blame for the “surrender of Britain’s strategic interests” squarely on Keir Starmer’s Labour government, with Tory former secretary of state for defense Grant Shapps characterizing the plans as “absolutely appalling” and a “weak and deeply regrettable act from this government.”
“Giving up the Chagos Islands is a strategic disaster. Our American allies will be furious and Beijing delighted. Labour are making the world a more dangerous place,” Reform UK leader and MP Nigel Farage suggested.
“Starmer must immediately guarantee that Labour will not surrender any other British overseas territories. I have asked the Foreign Office to urgently confirm this in writing,” Rupert Lowe, another Reform UK lawmaker, urged.
“Get out your maps, get out your atlases, check out the Chagos Islands, see where they are, see where Mauritius is. A long way away,” former prime minister Boris Johnson suggested, accusing Starmer of “unbundling the last relics of our empire,” and pointing to the Chagos’ roughly 2,150 km distance from Mauritius Island (still far closer than the 9,150 km or so the Chagos are from the British Isles).
“It’s taken three months for Starmer to surrender Britain’s strategic interests. This is a dangerous capitulation that will hand our territory to an ally of Beijing,” Robert Jenrick, another senior Conservative Party MP, wrote in a social media post, feigning ignorance of Mauritius’ decades-long policy of geopolitical neutrality, which includes membership in the Non-Aligned Movement.
Your Base Belongs to Us
“The primary consideration in the West is the issue of whether the Americans can continue to use a huge air base,” former Tory and Liberal Democrat MP and retired UK Defense Academy research fellow Matthew Gordon-Banks told Sputnik, commenting on the the Chagos Islands plans.
“The previous Conservative government chose not to make this announcement whilst it was in office, but the new Labour government has got on with the job that was expected. This is not a party-political issue but more [one of] international law; though some in the UK are using it to criticize the government,” Gordon-Banks emphasized, pointing out that negotiations on the islands were underway long before Starmer took the reins.
As for sentiments expressed by the opposition that the Chagos handover amounts to a “surrender” to China, these are overblown, according to Gordon-Banks.
“The idea that this change ‘helps’ China is nonsense. If anything, the effort has been to help the US,” the observer said, pointing to the proposed extendable 99-year base lease agreement, which would allow Britain and the US to continue using the strategic Diego Garcia base for many, many decades to come.
“Without the agreement with Mauritius the future of the US naval base might be in doubt – but the Americans tend to get what they want in circumstances like these,” Gordon-Banks said.
Finally, fears that the Chagos Islands agreement – which has yet to be ratified, could trigger a further retreat by the UK from its other overseas territories, are also exaggerated, Gordon-Banks believes.
“In my view no precedents are being set for matters relating to the Falkland Islands or Gibraltar, which will remain British. However, there are some localized issues relating to Spain and Gibraltar which will be discussed between the two countries from time to time,” the observer said.
Argentinian Foreign Minister Diana Mondino vowed on Friday that Buenos Aires would “restore full sovereignty” over the Falklands, known as the Malvinas by Argentinians, “through concrete actions” in the diplomatic field, and called the Chagos agreement a “step in the right direction.” The UK ruled out any review of the South Atlantic Ocean islands’ status as recently as late 2023, saying the issue had been “settled decisively some time ago” in reference to the 1982 war with Argentina. (Sputnik)
Follow Us at Google News and WA Channel
Discussion about this post