Discussions between the UK government and the United States regarding the contentious transfer of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius are reportedly ongoing, even as uncertainty looms over US support for the agreement. The deal, which aims to cede sovereignty of the islands while leasing back the strategic Diego Garcia military base, has become a focal point of political debate, particularly following recent comments from former President Donald Trump.
Controversial Deal Under Scrutiny
The proposed agreement includes a 99-year lease back of Diego Garcia, which is pivotal for US military operations in the Indian Ocean. Last year, the US expressed its backing for the plan, but Trump’s recent remarks, branding it “an act of great stupidity,” have raised alarm bells within Westminster. The Conservative Party has accused the government of jeopardising national security, citing Mauritius’s growing ties with China as a significant risk factor.
While speaking to reporters during a trip to Beijing, Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer disclosed that he had raised the Chagos issue multiple times with Trump. He asserted that discussions had occurred with the White House over the weekend, indicating that the matter remains a pressing concern for UK officials.
US Position Remains Unclear
Despite Trump’s disapproval, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak maintained that the administration had previously indicated support for the deal, having been given three months last year to review it. However, after Trump’s critical tweet, Downing Street attempted to reassure the public that US backing still existed, a claim that has since been muddied by comments from US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who accused the UK of “letting us down” regarding the islands’ sovereignty.
Officials in the Foreign Office are reportedly more concerned about Bessent’s criticism than Trump’s social media activity, and Downing Street has refrained from reiterating its belief that the US remains supportive of the agreement. There is apprehension in Whitehall that the US might formally alter its stance in the future, which could complicate the negotiations further.
Historical Context and Legal Hurdles
The Chagos Islands have been under British control since 1814 and were designated as an overseas territory in 1965. Mauritius has long contested this arrangement, asserting it was coerced into relinquishing the islands. A United Nations ruling in 2021 determined that the UK holds no sovereignty over the territory, which has propelled recent negotiations.
The deal stipulates an annual payment of approximately £101 million for the lease of Diego Garcia. However, sources indicate that the Trump administration was never entirely enthusiastic, merely acquiescing to the proposal. David Lammy, the former Foreign Secretary, previously warned that if Trump opposed the deal, it would not proceed.
Moreover, any final agreement would require modifications to a 1966 treaty between the US and UK, a matter that remains unresolved. Foreign Office minister Stephen Doughty confirmed that UK officials are in daily contact with their US counterparts, yet did not clarify whether the treaty could be amended unilaterally by the UK. Those involved in the negotiations expressed concern over the potential oversight of this crucial legal aspect.
Political Opposition Intensifies
The deal’s trajectory now depends on parliamentary approval, but a scheduled debate in the House of Lords was postponed due to concerns about the implications of the 1966 treaty. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has voiced strong opposition, stating the agreement does not serve the interests of either the UK or the US. Reform UK also opposes the deal, with party figures claiming Nigel Farage has discussed it directly with prominent US officials, including Trump and Bessent.
Why it Matters
The fate of the Chagos Islands deal encapsulates broader geopolitical tensions and raises significant questions about the UK’s foreign policy strategy in an increasingly multipolar world. As discussions continue, the potential implications for national security, historical justice, and UK-US relations remain profound. The outcome will not only affect the strategic landscape in the Indian Ocean but could redefine the UK’s standing in global affairs amidst shifting alliances and emerging threats.
