‘Is this going to blow up?’: Britain hands back Chagos Islands to Mauritius
| Updated:
The UK has said goodbye to one of the last remnants of its empire. Could this actually be a risk for Britain, or are conservative politicians making a fuss over nothing?
Listen to this article
In brief…
- Britain is handing the Chagos Islands back to Mauritius after a decades-long dispute.
- It has sparked a Tory backlash, with critics arguing it could leave the UK vulnerable to China
- The News Agents question whether this hits that same nerve for conservative politicians as Gibraltar or the Falklands.
The UK is set to give up its sovereignty of the Chagos Islands, a remote archipelago in the Indian Ocean, handing it back to Mauritius after a long-running dispute.
It had been argued for decades that Britain illegally took the island and should hand it back. Not just argued, but formally voted on by multiple countries at the UN.
But the islands host a military base used by both the UK and the US and is viewed by some as having geostrategic importance.
Britain and America will be able to keep using the base for another 99 years as part of the deal.
“This has been like a long running saw between the UK and Mauritius, but also other countries like India and countries in Africa as well,” says Lewis.
“It's one of the last remnants of Empire,” he adds.
So how significant is the deal? And will it be a good or bad thing for Britain?
What backlash has there been?
Opposition to the deal has mostly come from the right of British politics.
Liz Truss has blamed Boris Johnson for the “surrender” of the island, which critics say could leave the UK exposed to interference from China.
James Cleverly, a moderate Tory and leadership contender, has described the deal as “weak, weak, weak.”
That is despite the fact he was part of talks which led to the agreement during his time in the Foreign Office.
Tom Tugendhat, another moderate Tory leadership contender, said it was “disgraceful” that a Conservative government first entered these talks.
Former Conservative leader Iain Duncan Smith said: “If China gets involved with Mauritius, I cannot see how you can continue to use that place as it is now, or how the Americans can either.”
He added that the decision was a “huge” and “fatal mistake,” arguing it shows a wider failure of the UK’s geostrategic policy.
What’s The News Agents take?
Emily says this could go one of two ways.
She asks: “The question is, does it hit that same nerve for conservative politicians as Gibraltar would or the Falklands would? Is this going to blow up?
“Is this going to become the next thing that the Labour government has got terribly wrong because the Tories think that they've given away sovereignty of our blessed land?
“Or is it going to be something that actually goes away as quick as it came?”
But Lewis points out that this dispute is nothing new.
“This has been going on for decades. I think there have been 11 rounds of negotiations, actually with the previous government,’ he says.
He adds that those who are raising the spectre of what happens in Gibraltar and the Falklands are not “actually confronting the reality” of long-term defence cuts.
“If Argentina invaded the Falklands today, would we be able to defend it? Probably not,” Lewis says.
But Jon argues it doesn’t quite have the geostrategic importance of other territories the UK has handed back over the years - namely, Hong Kong in 1997.
The deal could also be a way of Starmar, a former lawyer, thinking: “Practice what you preach.”
He points out the disputes in the UN about the illegality of Britain’s ownership of the island.
Lewis adds: “If that is what international law says, if we are preaching to Russia and elsewhere and China that they should do the same, then we should do it.”
Listen in full on The News Agents.
