LONDON — The ongoing situation surrounding the Chagos Islands, located over 6,000 miles from the United Kingdom, has become a significant challenge for Keir Starmer’s Labour government, showing little sign of resolution. Just three months into taking office, Labour celebrated what they described as a diplomatic breakthrough: the transfer of sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, one of Britain’s last colonial territories, to Mauritius. This transition was intended to secure the future of a joint U.K.-U.S. military base on Diego Garcia. However, the anticipated accolades have been scarce.
The decision to relinquish control of what is often referred to as Britain’s “last African colony” has sparked widespread discontent, distrust, and disappointment across various political and social spectra, including criticism from figures associated with the Trump administration.
Renewed geopolitical concerns
Currently, the British government awaits approval from the White House regarding this agreement, amid expressed apprehensions from some members of President Trump’s team, who argue that the handover could enhance China’s strategic position.
Compounding the situation, opposition Conservatives, who initiated the negotiations in 2022, accuse Labour of jeopardizing Britain’s geopolitical interests by conceding a critical territory. Moreover, following the agreement, the Mauritian government has undergone changes and is now demanding greater financial compensation to finalize the deal, leading to conflicting narratives about the commitments made by both sides.
“We feel powerless,” said Frankie Bontemps, acting chair of Chagossian Voices, a community organization advocating for the rights and self-determination of the Chagossians.
Chagossians sidelined in negotiations
The U.K. reached an agreement last October to grant Mauritius sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago, which consists of more than 60 islands in the Indian Ocean. This decision followed a non-binding ruling from the International Court of Justice, which heightened pressure on the U.K. to facilitate the return of the Chagossians, who were forcibly removed between 1968 and 1973 to establish the U.S. military base on Diego Garcia.
As part of the arrangement, Mauritius is permitted to resettle its citizens on all islands except Diego Garcia, with a “trust fund” allocated for Chagossians. However, representatives of the Chagossian community express feelings of being neglected. Many argue that their distinct historical and cultural identity, separate from that of Mauritians, is being overlooked, particularly concerning the resettlement process.
Bontemps lamented that decisions affecting the Chagossians were made without their involvement. “Every time we asked questions about the ongoing negotiation, they said they can’t reveal anything, because this was being discussed between two governments,” he noted.
Labour MP Peter Lamb, representing a constituency with a significant Chagossian population, criticized the agreement, asserting that the U.K. should not be “bargaining away” the islands. Bontemps, who has a personal history tied to Diego Garcia, reflected on the discrimination faced by Chagossians in Mauritius, emphasizing their desire to escape the treatment they experienced as second-class citizens.
Amidst rising tensions and a sense of betrayal, Chagossian Voices is now considering legal action against the British government to challenge the agreement and assert their right to self-determination concerning their ancestral lands.
As the situation develops, the British government must navigate not only the concerns of displaced Chagossians but also the geopolitical implications of their actions, including the critical U.S. military interests in the region.