|
Audacity
of Hope
In the
60-minute interview given to CBS, President-elect Barack
Obama was unequivocal about the fact that the United States
should regain its moral stature on the world scene. Yes it
can and yes, the election of Mr Obama has implications for
Mauritius especially in the context of the unlawful excision
of the Chagos Archipelago.
In our dispute with the
UK on the Chagos issue, the Americans have so far skilfully
avoided the issue, reassuring Mauritius that they are mere
lessees and it was up to the Brits to come up with a
solution. In the Judgment of the House of Lords, it
transpired that the US position was not exactly that of the
innocuous night nurse. They have in three letters addressed
to the UK authorities advised that the military base of
Diego Garcia would be at risk should there be permanent
civilian population on the other islands forming part of
Chagos Archipelago. The letters dated 1 June 2000, 16
November 2004 and 18 January 2006 respectively were clearly
intended to strengthen the case for the UK government before
the House of Lords.
In the first letter, its
author, the Assistant Secretary for the State for
Political-Military Affairs, described the central defence
role played by Diego Garcia and the advantages of its
strategic location and isolation, and then argued that
“the settlement of a permanent civilian population on the
islands of the Chagos Archipelago, even those at some
distance from Diego Garcia, would seriously diminish that
isolation and as a consequence erode the island’s nearly
unparallel strategic importance”. He referred to “the
alarming prospect of the introduction of surveillance,
monitoring and jamming devices that have the potential to
disrupt, compromise or place at risk vital military
operations”, arguing that “in Western Europe or the
United States, efforts to introduce surveillance, monitoring
and jamming devices carry a considerable risk of discovery
“if only because of the large number of people in the
surrounding area’.
He referred to “the
introduction of settlement on the outlying islands as
putting Diego Garcia more easily within potential reach of
hostile states or terrorists operating by boat”, to “a
risk of diversion or resources involved in ensuring the
safety of any resident population in the event of an attack
on the Chagos Islands”, to the “inability of Diego
Garcia to serve as a back airport, in the unlikely event
that an international airport were built on one of the outer
islands to support limited touristic activities, and to the
“absence of other sources of back up supplies and services
for the nearby civilian population as one of the most
telling factors distinguishing the situation of the military
facility on Diego Garcia from US bases in the United
Kingdom”. Finally, the author of the letter observed:
“The United States might in “currently unforeseeable
circumstances” require the use of the outer Chagos Islands
for defence purposes”.
The letter of 16 November
2004 was written five months after the making of the BIOT
Order 2004. It referred to discussions “over the past
several months” and said that, post 11 September 2001, the
considerations explained in the letter of 21 June 2000
“have become even more cogent”, that “an attempt to
resettle any of the islands of Chagos Archipelago would
severely compromise Diego Gargia’s unparalleled security
and have a deleterious impact on our military operations”
and that “we appreciate the steps taken by Her Majesty’s
Government to prevent such resettlement”.
The letter of 18 January
2006, was written at the request of representatives of the
United Kingdom government and no doubt again intended for
use before the court. It went on to say that “although
vessels routinely pass within close proximity of Diego
Garcia” (i.e. on the high seas, outside it appears a three
mile territorial limit), “the low density and irregularity
of such vessel transits afford military operators the
opportunity to identify and closely monitor their movement
and activity”. However it argued that “the same level of
tracking and surveillance would not be possible if the
volume or density of the outer islands on a routine basis
increased due to repopulation of the islands”, and that
the United States was moreover seriously concerned that
repopulating the outer islands “would provide terrorists
the cover and concealment to establish permanent operating
bases from which they could monitor island operations with
minimum risk of counter detection”.
Lord Bingham, who
together with Lord Mance dissented from the majority, found
the letters as highly imaginative, written by American
officials to strengthen the case of the British government.
There
are two valid reasons why Mauritius should formally review
its strategy and open parallel discussions with the US
government. The first one being Barack Obama. The second
one, 2016, year in which an arrangement was made with the US
to operate a base on the “islands of Chagos
Archipelago”.
Barack
Obama is known for his progressive values and his strong
commitment to human rights. It is a question of how accurate
a version he has been given of the plight of the Chagossians
and the circumstances of the unlawful excision of Chagos.
The second reason concerns the 1966 arrangement. The
arrangement provides that the islands shall remain available
to meet the defense needs of the two governments and the
arrangement shall last for an initial period of 50 years and
continue for another period of 20 years unless not more than
two years before the end of the initial period either
Government shall give notice of termination. The two issues
are closely interlinked.
The
US, having opted to jump in the arena before the House of
Lords, cannot now carry on pretending ignorance of the
unlawful excision of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritian
territory. By 2014, they will have to decide whether they
want an extension of the arrangement to operate a military
base. Mauritius should therefore position itself as from now
and use the 2014 deadline as a basis for a significant
political and diplomatic move. The arguments advanced by US
officials under the Bush-Blair axis is known to be a pack of
lies. The “Let them Return campaign” has clearly demonstrated in a
well-documented report that the settlement of civilian
population over the outer islands is possible without in any
way jeopardizing the security of the military base at Diego
Garcia. The UK authorities did not see any security
impediment to Diego Garcia when the islands of Aldabra and
Farqhuar were returned to the Seychelles. There is no doubt
that the arguments advanced in the letters were contrived
for the purpose of the case. They will carry little weight
before the International Court of Justice.
By
getting himself elected as the first African-American
President of the United States, Barack Obama has inspired
not only American citizens but the whole world. He had the
audacity of hope -- so should we.
R.V.
|
