The Future of the UK-Mauritius Deal

Editorial

Chagos, Sovereignty, and Geopolitics

The recent statement by US President Donald Trump, signalling his inclination to support the UK-Mauritius agreement on Chagos, could mark a turning point in this decades-long dispute involving the Chagos Archipelago. As Britain prepares to transfer sovereignty of the islands to Mauritius while retaining control over Diego Garcia under a 99-year lease, the final approval rests with Washington. It is to be hoped that Trump would go along with the revised Mauritius-UK deal. If Trump and his administration ultimately reject the deal, the agreement could collapse entirely, leaving Mauritius to continue its legal and diplomatic battle for full sovereignty.

The origins of the Chagos dispute date back to the 1960s when the UK, ahead of Mauritius’ independence in 1968, excised the islands from the Mauritian territory. In doing so, it facilitated the establishment of a military base on Diego Garcia, a key strategic outpost for the United States. This decision came at an immense human cost: thousands of Chagossians were forcibly evicted and scattered across Mauritius, Seychelles, and the UK, their plight largely ignored by successive British governments.

Decades of legal battles and diplomatic efforts led to a historic ruling in 2019 when the International Court of Justice (ICJ) deemed the UK’s continued control over the islands illegal. The UN General Assembly subsequently called for Britain to return the archipelago to Mauritius. While the ICJ ruling is non-binding, it placed significant pressure on London to rectify what has long been seen as a colonial injustice.

Recognizing the legal and diplomatic challenges of maintaining its claim over Chagos, the UK government — both under the Conservative Party and now Labour’s Keir Starmer — has sought to negotiate a solution with Mauritius. The deal reached with former Mauritian Prime Minister Pravind Jugnauth outlined a path for transferring sovereignty while maintaining Western control over Diego Garcia. However, the agreement did not fully recognize Mauritius’ sovereignty over Chagos, prompting Mauritius’ new Prime Minister, Navin Ramgoolam, to renegotiate the terms.

The Strategic Dilemma: Diego Garcia and Global Security

At the heart of the Chagos dispute lies the Diego Garcia military base. Used extensively by the United States for operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and beyond, it serves as a key hub for intelligence, surveillance, and long-range bomber deployments. Given its importance, any transition in sovereignty raises concerns among US policymakers.

Newly appointed US Secretary of State Marco Rubio had voiced reservations about the deal, citing fears that ceding control could weaken America’s strategic positioning and open the door to Chinese influence in the region. Right-wing British politicians, including figures like Nigel Farage and Suella Braverman, have also opposed the deal, arguing that it undermines British interests.

However, these concerns largely ignore the fact that the proposed agreement explicitly ensures that Diego Garcia will remain a functional military base under UK-US control for at least 99 years. Mauritius has also consistently reaffirmed its commitment to Western security partnerships. The claim that Mauritius’ economic ties with China pose a security risk appears to be based on little more than geopolitical paranoia.

Trump’s recent remarks suggesting he is “inclined” to back the deal have introduced a new variable into the equation. While the US President has built his political brand on nationalist rhetoric and an “America First” doctrine, his approach to foreign policy has often been unpredictable.

It remains unclear whether his administration’s final decision will align with his comments or if pushback from figures like Rubio and the Pentagon will lead to a reversal. Historically, Trump has shown a willingness to negotiate deals that he believes serve American interests, even if they go against traditional diplomatic expectations. His transactional approach to foreign policy suggests that, if the deal can be framed as a strategic win for the US, he may endorse it despite opposition from certain factions within his administration.

Mauritius’ Stand: A Just Resolution or a Compromise?

For Mauritius, the recognition of its full sovereignty over Chagos is a matter of national dignity and historical justice. Navin Ramgoolam’s government has adopted a firm and principled stance, making it clear that if Washington blocks the deal, Mauritius will continue its fight for full sovereignty. This position reflects the determination of a country that has spent decades battling for recognition of its sovereignty rights.

However, Mauritius also understands the geopolitical realities at play. The country has sought to balance its demand for sovereignty with reassurances that the Diego Garcia base will not be compromised. The willingness to lease the base for 99 years highlights this pragmatic approach. Yet, critics argue that by agreeing to such terms, Mauritius risks perpetuating a form of neocolonialism, where control remains in the hands of powerful Western nations.

The Broader Implications

In any case, the outcome of the Chagos negotiations will have far-reaching implications beyond Mauritius and the UK. It will serve as a litmus test for how former colonial powers address historical injustices and whether international legal rulings carry any real weight in geopolitical affairs.

For Britain, a successful resolution would signal a willingness to confront its colonial past and act in accordance with international law. For Mauritius, securing sovereignty over Chagos — whether through this deal or continued legal action — would represent a landmark victory in its diplomatic history. For the US, the decision will reflect its broader strategic priorities. Will Washington recognize Mauritius’ legitimate claims while securing a long-term lease for Diego Garcia? Or will it prioritize an outdated colonial arrangement over international legitimacy?

History has long sided with Mauritius on this matter. The question now is whether the political will — both in Washington and London — will finally align with the principles of justice and sovereignty.

Mauritius Times ePaper Friday 28 February 2025