🤔 Chagos Islands

Commons Chamber

🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️

The UK and Mauritius are close to finalizing a deal on the sovereignty of the Chagos Islands, prioritizing the long-term operation of the UK-US military base on Diego Garcia. Despite opposition concerns about the cost and sovereignty, the government insists the agreement secures the base for at least 99 years, ensuring national security and aligning with US interests. The deal has sparked debate over its implications for UK sovereignty and the rights of Chagossians, with assurances that their interests and environmental concerns are being addressed. Parliament will scrutinize the treaty before its ratification, amid ongoing discussions with the new US administration.

Summary

  • The UK and Mauritius are negotiating a deal concerning the Chagos Islands, with a focus on securing the long-term operation of the UK-US military base on Diego Garcia.
  • The UK’s Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, represented by Minister Stephen Doughty, emphasized that the primary goal is to ensure the security and functionality of the military base, which is considered vital for UK and US security.
  • The negotiations aim to protect the base’s operation for the next 99 years, with the possibility of extension, as mentioned by Minister Doughty.
  • There have been concerns raised by Nigel Farage and others about the legal basis for transferring sovereignty to Mauritius, with some arguing that the deal lacks legal justification and could impact UK security.
  • The deal has also stirred debate regarding its potential financial costs, with some speculative figures being dismissed by the government as inaccurate.
  • Environmental concerns were addressed by Minister Doughty, who stated the agreement includes a commitment to uphold international environmental law and establish marine conservation efforts in the region.
  • The Chagossians, the indigenous people of the islands, have been acknowledged in the discussions. The agreement aims to allow them visits and potential settlement on the outer islands, though their interests remain a point of contention among various Chagossian groups.
  • The agreement awaits final scrutiny from the new US Administration, reflecting the importance of the base to the US, and will be subject to parliamentary review once signed.
  • There is strong opposition from some MPs who argue that the deal compromises UK sovereignty and national security, with calls for more transparency and scrutiny.
  • The government asserts that the deal is necessary to put the base on a secure footing for the future, denying claims of rushing the process and emphasizing ongoing engagement with the US and Mauritius.

Divisiveness

The parliamentary session on the Chagos Islands displayed significant disagreement among Members of Parliament, resulting in a rating of 4 out of 5 for disagreement. The session was characterized by sharp exchanges and criticisms of the proposed transfer of sovereignty to Mauritius, highlighting different viewpoints on national security, financial implications, legal basis, and the treatment of the Chagossian community. Here are the key points illustrating the disagreement:

  1. National Security Concerns: Opposition members, notably Nigel Farage and Priti Patel, strongly criticized the deal, arguing that it compromised UK and US security. Farage contested the legal basis for the transfer, claiming there was no binding legal obligation to do so. In contrast, Stephen Doughty defended the deal as necessary for securing the base’s long-term operation.

  2. Financial Disputes: There was significant disagreement over the costs involved. Priti Patel questioned the speculated £18 billion cost and demanded clarity on which budget would absorb it, while Doughty dismissed these figures as speculation and emphasized the necessity of the deal for national security without disclosing specific financial details.

  3. Legal and Sovereignty Issues: Disagreement also stemmed from interpretations of international law and sovereignty. Farage argued that there was no legal basis for the transfer, while Doughty clarified that it was not about an ICJ ruling but about ensuring the base’s future operation. The disagreement extended to what the UK’s sovereignty rights over Diego Garcia would entail post-transfer.

  4. Treatment of Chagossians: Jeremy Corbyn highlighted the historical injustice towards the Chagossian community and questioned the deal’s provisions for their right to return. Doughty responded by outlining measures intended to support Chagossians, showing a willingness to address their concerns but not entirely aligning with the opposition’s views on the extent of support and rights.

  5. Political and Procedural Criticisms: Criticism over the process of negotiation and parliamentary involvement was evident. Calum Miller and others lamented the lack of parliamentary oversight and raised concerns about the timing of the deal relative to Mauritian elections, questioning the government’s transparency and motives.

Overall, the session demonstrated strong disagreements on multiple fronts, with opposition members frequently challenging the government’s stance, leading to a high level of contention and debate.