Why is this any of my business? My business is about anything that I see as grossly unfair – I couldn’t care less where it’s happening. I briefly touched on the plight of the Chagossians in Shamelessness – a new world order (2013). The situation has grown monumentally more ‘shameless’ for the UK. I feel ashamed to be part of the UK. Apparently we’re now to pay Mauritius upward of £9 Billion in some deal – and nobody knows the full payment! It is very sad indeed that I have to think that the NHS could use a £9 billion cash injection right now at a time when we’re seeing around 14,000 excess deaths in A&E departments. But not everybody is seeing that. Nonetheless, it’s not a great choice: £9 billion to Mauritius or £9 billion to the NHS? For some people – it is an easy choice.
The forced displacement of the Chagossians and ongoing abuses amount to crimes against humanity committed by a colonial power against an Indigenous people. UK colonial rule in the Chagos Archipelago, unlike in most of its other colonies in Africa, did not end in the 1960s, and it has continued at extraordinary cost to the people of Chagos. This colonial rule was built on systematic racism and ethnic and racial discrimination in the treatment of the Chagossians..[..]“Human Rights Watch
Historical Background
The Chagos Archipelago, comprising over 60 islands, has a rich and complex history. In the 18th Century both Mauritius and the Chagos Archipelago were French colonies. The islands became a British possession in 1814 when France ceded both Mauritius and the Chagos Archipelago to the UK in the Treaty of Paris. 1 The UK administered the Chagos Islands as a dependency of Mauritius. This means that while both were under British rule, the Chagos Islands were specifically tied to Mauritius administratively.
The Road to Dispute
- 1968: Mauritius gained independence, but without the Chagos Archipelago, which remained under UK control. However, this cultural heritage was brutally disrupted when the UK, in its pursuit of establishing a military base with the US, forcibly removed the Chagossian population in the 1960s and 1970s 2.
- 1965: As Mauritius was moving towards independence, the UK decided to separate the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius. This was done to create the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT) and allow for the establishment of the US military base on Diego Garcia.
The Chagossian people, primarily descendants of enslaved people brought from Africa and Madagascar to work on coconut plantations, developed a unique Creole culture intertwined with the islands 2. Their expulsion was carried out with a callous disregard for their fundamental human rights. Islanders were deceived, coerced, and ultimately forced onto ships bound for Mauritius and the Seychelles, often with little more than the clothes on their backs [29]. Families were torn apart, livelihoods destroyed, and a vibrant community scattered across the Indian Ocean. This act of forced displacement, condemned by human rights organisations as a crime against humanity 2, left a deep scar on the Chagossian people and cast a long shadow over the UK’s international reputation.
The international community watched in dismay as the UK, a nation that prides itself on its commitment to human rights and the rule of law, engaged in such a blatant act of colonial dispossession. The expulsion of the Chagossians served as a stark reminder of the enduring legacy of colonialism and the vulnerability of indigenous peoples in the face of powerful states pursuing strategic interests.
The American Nexus: Motivating Factors for the UK
The UK’s actions in the Chagos Archipelago dispute have been inextricably linked to the strategic interests of the United States. The desire to secure Diego Garcia as a military base for its American ally played a significant role in shaping the UK’s decisions, including the excision of the islands from Mauritius and the expulsion of the Chagossian people. Several factors highlight the importance of the American nexus in this dispute:
- Cold War Geopolitics: In the 1960s, during the Cold War, the US sought to establish a network of military bases across the Indian Ocean to counter Soviet influence and project power in the region [31]. Diego Garcia, with its strategic location and potential for a large airbase and naval facility, was identified as an ideal location .
- Securing an Unpopulated Island: The US specifically requested an unpopulated island to avoid potential political complications with newly independent countries in the region . This requirement aligned with the UK’s own desire to maintain control over the strategically important Chagos Archipelago .
- Mutual Defence Strategy: The UK and the US shared a mutual defence strategy that relied on close cooperation and the availability of strategically located bases . Diego Garcia played a crucial role in this strategy, providing a vital hub for military operations and intelligence gathering .
- Financial Incentives: The US provided financial incentives to the UK to secure access to Diego Garcia. In 1966, the UK leased the island to the US in exchange for a $14 million discount on the purchase of Polaris ballistic missiles for its submarines . This deal highlighted the transactional nature of the relationship and the UK’s willingness to prioritise American interests.
- Continued US Support: The US has consistently supported the UK’s position in the Chagos Archipelago dispute, even in the face of international condemnation. This support underscores the strategic importance of Diego Garcia to the US and its commitment to maintaining the base’s operation.
The American nexus has been a driving force behind the UK’s actions in the Chagos Archipelago dispute. The desire to accommodate American strategic interests has shaped the UK’s policies and contributed to the injustices faced by the Chagossian people.
The agreement has been met with mixed reactions. While it has been welcomed by Mauritius and the international community as a step towards decolonisation and justice, concerns remain about the Chagossian people’s right to return and the long-term implications of the continued US military presence on Diego Garcia . The US, a key player in this dispute due to its strategic interests in the Diego Garcia base, has expressed support for the agreement, emphasising the importance of maintaining the base’s operation.
Legality of the UK’s Actions
The UK’s decision to separate the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965 has been widely condemned as a violation of international law. Central to this condemnation is the principle of self-determination, enshrined in UN General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 1960, which prohibits the dismemberment of colonial territories before independence 1. The UK’s actions, motivated by the strategic importance of Diego Garcia as a military base, disregarded this fundamental principle 2.
The legal arguments against the UK’s actions revolve around several key issues:
- Lack of Free and Genuine Consent: While the UK asserts that it secured an agreement with Mauritian ministers at Lancaster House in 1965, evidence suggests this agreement was coerced 3. The ICJ, in its 2019 advisory opinion, concluded that the detachment of the Chagos Archipelago lacked the free and genuine expression of the will of the people concerned 4. The Court found that the Mauritian Council of Ministers, under the UK’s authority as the administering power, did not have the authority to consent to the archipelago’s detachment 5.
- Violation of Territorial Integrity: The UK’s actions violated the principle of territorial integrity, a cornerstone of the right to self-determination 4. The ICJ affirmed that respecting the territorial integrity of a non-self-governing territory is an obligation under international law 6. By detaching the Chagos Archipelago and incorporating it into a new colony, the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT), the UK undermined Mauritius’s territorial integrity and hindered its decolonisation process 4.
- The Chagos Marine Protected Area (MPA): Further complicating the issue, the UK established a Marine Protected Area (MPA) around the Chagos Archipelago in 2010 1. Mauritius contends that this MPA infringes upon its territorial integrity and prevents the exercise of its sovereign rights over the area. This action fuelled tensions and strengthened Mauritius’s resolve to reclaim the Chagos Archipelago.
These legal arguments, coupled with the historical context of the Chagossian people’s forced removal, form the basis of Mauritius’s claim and the international condemnation of the UK’s actions.
| Argument | Supporting Snippet ID(s) |
|---|---|
| Lack of free and genuine consent from the Mauritian people | 3 |
| Violation of the principle of territorial integrity | 4 |
| Creation of the Chagos Marine Protected Area (MPA) as a further infringement on sovereignty | 1 |
The ICJ Ruling
In 2017, the UN General Assembly requested an advisory opinion from the ICJ on the legal consequences of the UK’s continued administration of the Chagos Archipelago 4. The Court, in its February 2019 ruling, delivered a resounding condemnation of the UK’s actions. By thirteen votes to one, the ICJ concluded that the decolonisation of Mauritius was not lawfully completed when it gained independence in 1968 due to the unlawful detachment of the Chagos Archipelago 7.
The Court’s legal reasoning was firmly grounded in the principles of self-determination and territorial integrity 4. It found that the UK had an obligation to respect the territorial integrity of Mauritius, including the Chagos Archipelago, and that the detachment of the islands was not based on the free and genuine expression of the will of the people concerned 4. The ICJ declared that the UK’s continued administration of the Chagos Archipelago constituted a wrongful act and that it had an obligation to bring it to an end as rapidly as possible 4.
This ICJ ruling, while advisory, carries significant legal and political weight 8. It has been widely hailed as a victory for Mauritius and a reaffirmation of the importance of self-determination and territorial integrity in international law 8. The ruling also has implications for the Chagossian people, who were forcibly removed from their homes and have been fighting for their right to return 4.
Legal Challenges and Human Rights
The Chagossian people have not been passive observers in this dispute. They have actively pursued legal challenges to their expulsion and sought the right to return to their homeland 9. These legal proceedings, including the series of Bancoult cases in the UK courts, highlight the human rights dimension of the Chagos Archipelago dispute and the Chagossians’ struggle for justice.
The Ongoing Situation
Despite the ICJ ruling and a subsequent UN General Assembly resolution in May 2019 demanding the UK’s withdrawal from the Chagos Archipelago within six months, the UK initially refused to comply 8. This resolution, adopted with 116 votes in favour and only 6 against (including the UK, US, Australia, Hungary, Israel, and the Maldives), demonstrated the strong international support for Mauritius’s claim 8. The UK government maintained its claim of sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago, arguing that the ICJ’s opinion was non-binding and that the matter should be resolved through bilateral negotiations with Mauritius 1. The UK also apologised for the “shameful” way islanders were evicted but insisted that Mauritius was wrong to bring the dispute to the ICJ 1.
The New Deal and UK Motivations
In October 2024, the UK and Mauritius announced an agreement on the exercise of sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago 10. Under this agreement, the UK will cede sovereignty to Mauritius while retaining the right to use the Diego Garcia military base for an initial period of 99 years 11. This agreement, subject to the finalisation of a treaty, represents a significant breakthrough in the long-running dispute 10.
A key aspect of this deal is the financial commitment from the UK. While the exact amount remains unclear, with figures ranging from £9 billion to £18 billion being cited 12, it represents a substantial investment. This has raised questions about the UK’s motivations for such a significant expenditure. Several factors likely contribute to the UK’s willingness to pay:
- Legal and Political Pressure: The UK has faced intense international pressure to cede the Chagos Archipelago to Mauritius following the 2019 ICJ ruling and UN General Assembly resolution 14. Continued defiance of these rulings could damage the UK’s international reputation and strain its relationships with key allies 15.
- Securing the Diego Garcia Base: The base on Diego Garcia is strategically vital for both the UK and the US, particularly in light of growing concerns about China’s influence in the Indian Ocean region 16. By reaching an agreement with Mauritius, the UK ensures the continued operation of the base and avoids potential legal challenges to its presence 17.
- Addressing Past Wrongs: The UK’s expulsion of the Chagossian people was a deeply shameful act, and the payment to Mauritius could be seen as a form of reparation for this historical injustice.
- Economic Considerations: While the upfront cost is high, the UK might be calculating that the long-term benefits of securing the base and resolving the dispute outweigh the financial expenditure 18. The deal could also unlock economic opportunities for the UK in the region, including potential partnerships with Mauritius in areas like trade and investment 11.
It is important to note that the UK government has denied that the deal will cost £18 billion and insists that it will only sign a deal that is in its national interest 7. However, the significant financial commitment suggests that the UK is prioritising the strategic importance of Diego Garcia and its relationship with Mauritius.
The agreement has been met with mixed reactions. While it has been welcomed by Mauritius and the international community as a step towards decolonisation and justice, concerns remain about the Chagossian people’s right to return and the long-term implications of the continued US military presence on Diego Garcia 19. The US, a key player in this dispute due to its strategic interests in the Diego Garcia base, has expressed support for the agreement, emphasising the importance of maintaining the base’s operation 19.
Potential Outcomes and Implications
The Chagos Archipelago dispute is at a critical juncture. The UK’s decision to cede sovereignty to Mauritius marks a significant shift in its position, but the final outcome remains uncertain. The successful conclusion of a treaty and its implementation will have far-reaching implications for both countries, the Chagossian people, and the geopolitical landscape of the Indian Ocean region.
For Mauritius:
- Sovereignty and Economic Opportunities: The agreement represents a victory in Mauritius’s long-standing quest for sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago 20. It will allow Mauritius to exercise control over its territory and potentially exploit the archipelago’s resources, including fishing rights and potential mineral and oil exploration 21.
- Resettlement Challenges: Mauritius will face challenges in managing the resettlement of Chagossians, including providing infrastructure and support for the returning population 22.
- Balancing Relationships: Mauritius will need to carefully balance its relationship with the UK and the US with its commitment to the Chagossian people’s rights 22.
For the UK:
- Resolution of a Contentious Issue: The agreement allows the UK to resolve a contentious issue that has strained its international relations and uphold the international rule of law 10.
- Addressing Past Wrongs: The UK will need to address the legacy of its past actions, including the forced displacement of the Chagossian people, and ensure that the agreement adequately addresses their rights and needs 10.
- Maintaining Strategic Interests: The lease agreement for Diego Garcia allows the UK to maintain its strategic interests in the Indian Ocean region, albeit with potential limitations on its autonomy 23.
For the Chagossian People:
- Prospect of Return: The agreement offers the prospect of returning to their homeland 19. However, the agreement does not guarantee their right to return to Diego Garcia, where the military base is located 24.
- Challenges and Uncertainties: Concerns remain about the extent to which Chagossians will be consulted and involved in the resettlement process and the potential limitations and conditions they may face upon return 25.
Geopolitical and Strategic Implications:
- The Diego Garcia Base: The continued operation of the Diego Garcia military base under the lease agreement has significant implications for the UK, the US, and their allies 26. The base plays a vital role in regional and global security, providing a strategic hub for military operations and intelligence gathering 27.
- Potential for Renewed Tensions: The agreement, while a significant step forward, carries the potential for renewed tensions between the UK and Mauritius, particularly regarding the terms of the lease agreement and the management of the base 22.
- Environmental Concerns: The sovereignty transfer and the continued military presence raise environmental concerns, highlighting the need for sustainable development and environmental protection in the Chagos Archipelago 28.
Implications for International Law:
- Strengthening Self-Determination: The ICJ ruling and the subsequent agreement strengthen the legal framework against colonialism and support the rights of indigenous peoples 4.
- Upholding Territorial Integrity: The dispute highlights the importance of territorial integrity as a fundamental principle of international law and its connection to the right to self-determination.
Conclusion
The Chagos Archipelago dispute is a complex and multifaceted issue with significant implications for international law, decolonisation, and human rights. The UK’s actions in excising the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius and expelling the Chagossian people have been widely condemned as a violation of international law. This act of colonial dispossession, driven by Cold War geopolitics and the strategic interests of the US, cannot be viewed in isolation. It must be understood within the broader context of the Chagossian people’s history, which began with their ancestors’ forced displacement through the slave trade . This initial act of injustice created the conditions that made the later expulsion possible, highlighting the enduring legacy of colonialism and the vulnerability of marginalized communities in the face of powerful states.
The ICJ’s 2019 ruling affirmed Mauritius’s sovereignty claim and called on the UK to end its administration of the archipelago. While the UK has now agreed to cede sovereignty to Mauritius, challenges remain in ensuring a just and equitable outcome for the Chagossian people and addressing the long-term implications of the continued US military presence on Diego Garcia.
The successful resolution of this dispute will require ongoing dialogue, cooperation, and a commitment to upholding the principles of self-determination, territorial integrity, and human rights. The final outcome will shape not only the future of the Chagos Archipelago and its people but also contribute to the development of international law and the pursuit of decolonisation and justice in the 21st century.
References
1. Chagos Archipelago sovereignty dispute – Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chagos_Archipelago_sovereignty_dispute
2. “That’s When the Nightmare Started”: UK and US Forced Displacement of the Chagossians and Ongoing Colonial Crimes | HRW: https://www.hrw.org/report/2023/02/15/thats-when-nightmare-started/uk-and-us-forced-displacement-chagossians-and
3. The Chagos Advisory Opinion and the Decolonization of Mauritius | ASIL – American Society of International Law: https://www.asil.org/insights/volume/23/issue/2/chagos-advisory-opinion-and-decolonization-mauritius
4. Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965: https://www.icj-cij.org/case/169
5. Advisory Opinion of 25 February 2019 | INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE: https://www.icj-cij.org/index.php/node/105778
6. (PDF) ICJ Advisory Opinion on Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago From Mauritius in 1965 (Chagos Advisory Opinion): A Critical Analysis – ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/375746976_ICJ_Advisory_Opinion_on_Legal_Consequences_of_the_Separation_of_the_Chagos_Archipelago_From_Mauritius_in_1965_Chagos_Advisory_Opinion_A_Critical_Analysis
7. Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965 – The Court finds that the process of decolonization of Mauritius was not lawfully: https://www.icj-cij.org/node/105780
8. General Assembly Welcomes International Court of Justice Opinion on Chagos Archipelago, Adopts Text Calling for Mauritius’ Complete Decolonization | Meetings Coverage and Press Releases: https://press.un.org/en/2019/ga12146.doc.htm
9. Still dispossessed – the battle of the Chagos Islanders to return to their homeland: https://minorityrights.org/app/uploads/2024/01/mrg-brief-chagosv2.pdf
10. British Indian Ocean Territory – Written questions, answers and statements – UK Parliament: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-statements/detail/2024-10-07/hcws109
11. British Indian Ocean Territory: 2024 UK and Mauritius agreement – Commons Library: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10115/
12. Sir Keir Starmer defends Chagos Islands deal after Tory leader brands it ‘immoral surrender’: https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/starmer-chagos-islands-deal-kemi-badenoch-pmqs-b1209277.html
13. Government denies claims Chagos Islands deal could cost £18 billion – Yahoo News UK: https://uk.news.yahoo.com/government-denies-claims-chagos-islands-084323662.html
14. UK Offers $11.79 Bn For Chagos Islands | World News | WION – YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_leAOzUU5I
15. The UK must focus on how the Chagos decision is implemented to gain its benefits and minimize risks | Chatham House: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2024/10/uk-must-focus-how-chagos-decision-implemented-gain-its-benefits-and-minimize-risks
16. Mauritius Reclaims the Chagos Islands – PISM: https://www.pism.pl/publications/mauritius-reclaims-the-chagos-islands
17. Starmer: Chagos deal necessary to give legal certainty for Diego Garcia base: https://uk.news.yahoo.com/starmer-chagos-deal-necessary-legal-154510325.html
18. UK-Mauritius joint statement on the Chagos Archipelago, 13 January 2025 – GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-mauritius-joint-statement-on-the-chagos-archipelago-13-january-2025
19. Why is the UK handing the Chagos Islands back to Mauritius? | News – Al Jazeera: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/10/4/why-is-the-uk-handing-the-chagos-islands-back-to-mauritius
20. Mauritius reopens talks with U.K. on controversial Chagos deal – Mongabay: https://news.mongabay.com/short-article/mauritius-reopens-talks-with-u-k-on-controversial-chagos-deal/
21. The Chagos Archipelago – Return of the Chagos to Mauritius – Google Sites: https://sites.google.com/site/thechagosarchipelagofacts/home/return-of-the-chagos-to-mauritius
22. No easy courses for Chagos consensus on sovereignty and security – ISS Africa: https://issafrica.org/iss-today/no-easy-courses-for-chagos-consensus-on-sovereignty-and-security
23. Questions Raised About UK Agreement on Mauritius Base | Arms Control Association: https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2025-01/news/questions-raised-about-uk-agreement-mauritius-base
24. Human Rights Watch statement to the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights 81st Ordinary Session: https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/10/21/human-rights-watch-statement-african-commission-human-and-peoples-rights-81st
25. Will the Chagos treaty address the wrongs of the past? – JusticeInfo.net: https://www.justiceinfo.net/en/138632-will-the-chagos-treaty-address-the-wrongs-of-the-past.html
26. Diego Garcia – Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diego_Garcia
27. Imperialists renew lease on Indian Ocean bombing base – Workers World: https://www.workers.org/2024/11/81872/
28. To Ensure Equitable Resettlement, We Must Rethink the Chagos Marine Protected Area: https://www.stimson.org/2024/to-ensure-equitable-resettlement-we-must-rethink-the-chagos-marine-protected-area/
