{"id":42148,"date":"2025-01-25T07:12:15","date_gmt":"2025-01-25T03:12:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/?p=42148"},"modified":"2025-02-03T16:03:25","modified_gmt":"2025-02-03T12:03:25","slug":"the-proposed-deal-is-good-for-mauritius-the-uk-and-the-us","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/the-proposed-deal-is-good-for-mauritius-the-uk-and-the-us\/","title":{"rendered":"“The proposed deal is good for Mauritius, the UK and the US…"},"content":{"rendered":"

… it does not risk expanding China\u2019s sphere of influence or put British interests at risk”<\/span><\/h3>\n

<\/p>\n

Interview: <\/u>David Snoxell, Coordinator of the All-Party Parliamentary Group<\/u><\/span><\/h4>\n

\"\"<\/u><\/span><\/h4>\n

* \u201cIf President Trump opposed the deal, there is a possibility that the UK would not feel able to sign the Agreement”<\/strong><\/span><\/h2>\n

* ‘Mauritius could propose a defence alliance with the UK and US and other partners such as India, France and Australia’<\/strong><\/span><\/h2>\n

In an interview with the BBC this week, Robert Wilkie, head of Donald Trump’s Pentagon transition team, expressed scepticism toward the Chagos deal, suggesting that the Trump administration would likely oppose both the initial agreement and the renegotiated version. Wilkie criticized the deal as lacking “long-term vision,” labelling it “calamitous” and “hasty.” He further stated that “this could be an early test of the defence relationship between Trump and the British government.”<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

In this week’s interview, David Snoxell, Coordinator of the All-Party Parliamentary Group and former British High Commissioner to Mauritius, delves into the negotiations between Mauritius and the UK, examining their broader strategic implications within the global geopolitical landscape, especially in relation to US interests. He also provides valuable perspectives on the challenges facing the revised Mauritius-UK deal and discusses potential paths forward in resolving this longstanding issue.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Mauritius Times: Mauritian Attorney General Gavin Glover, head of the Mauritian team that negotiated the revised Mauritius-UK deal with British authorities in London, recently stated that the deal has been finalized but awaits the response of the new American administration. Doesn\u2019t this suggest that the agreement is still incomplete? <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

David Snoxell:<\/strong> I should first say that I am not privy to what has been happening in the negotiations and where the agreement now stands. I can only infer from what both sides have informed the media and Parliament as to what has been agreed.<\/span><\/p>\n

In answer to your question, the UK Government has confirmed the Agreement has been referred to the new Trump Administration for consideration. It is normal for an incoming government to want to study a recent agreement in which the US has a national interest even though President Biden and his Administration said they strongly supported it. This was also PM Ramgoolam\u2019s position when he took office. He commissioned a review of the Agreement which had been negotiated with his predecessor, as he was entitled to do.<\/span><\/p>\n

It is possible that President Trump\u2019s Administration will take a different view and ask for changes as did Dr Ramgoolam.<\/span><\/p>\n

* It is possible that the UK government\u2019s \u201chaste,\u201d as described by Mauritian Prime Minister Navin Ramgoolam, to conclude the deal reflects an apprehension within the Starmer administration itself about how the Americans might respond to the revised Chagos deal. This urgency could indicate a desire to pre-empt any possible disruptive intervention, particularly from the incoming Trump administration. What’s your take on that?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

From when it became clear that Trump would win the election, the Starmer government was keen to hasten the deal. The closer we got to the President\u2019s inauguration on 20 January, the more obvious it became that signing the Agreement would have to be postponed until after the incoming Administration had had the chance to consider it.<\/span><\/p>\n

* Sir Keir Starmer has nevertheless demonstrated a willingness to address a long-standing historical injustice, honour international legal rulings, and respect Mauritius’s sovereignty claims. While he commands a parliamentary majority to pass the Chagos deal, it seems unlikely that he would act counter to American preferences. How do you view this balancing act?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Within 19 days of taking office, Sir Keir Starmer met PM Jugnauth in the Foreign Office on 23 July to affirm his intention to resume the negotiations speedily, which had been initiated by the Conservative Government in November2022 and had lasted for nearly 2 years.<\/span><\/p>\n

I noted in my MT article (The new British Government is set to negotiate a settlement with Mauritius, 2 August 2024) that hopefully there would be progress to announce before the US presidential election on 5 November. Achieving a signed agreement by both parties before the US election was an obvious target.<\/span><\/p>\n

However following the Mauritian election on 10 November, the new Prime Minister decided to review the agreement. Inevitably this meant delay and renewed negotiations which went on until last week.<\/span><\/p>\n

Labour has a substantial majority in Parliament which will vote for the deal, but it is uncertain how PM Starmer would react if there were presidential opposition. It would depend on the level of opposition and its context within the bilateral relationship (aka Special Relationship). The Government could still go ahead with the Agreement though there could be a significant downside.<\/span><\/p>\n

* Considering Donald Trump\u2019s impulsive decision-making style, as seen in his first-day Executive Orders this week itself, and the stance of US Defence-related agencies, do you remain optimistic about the deal’s successful finalization under his administration?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

I am caught between optimism and pessimism.<\/span><\/p>\n

It is down to the two governments to persuade the new American Administration that the Agreement is in the strategic and defence interests of the US and that Mauritian governments and authorities can be fully relied on.<\/span><\/p>\n

The UK and Mauritius may wish to consider a joint demarche.<\/span><\/p>\n

* Right-wing UK politicians opposing the Chagos deal have portrayed it as a \u201ccapitulation\u201d rather than a pragmatic resolution, citing fears of China\u2019s influence in Mauritius via a free trade agreement. Given that both U.S. and UK intelligence agencies are likely aware that these fears are unfounded, could it be that this narrative would be purely politically motivated? <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Some have described it as a \u2018surrender\u2019 but that is all part of the rhetoric, hype and misrepresentation that goes on in politics. The proposed deal is good for Mauritius, the UK and the US; it does not risk expanding China\u2019s sphere of influence or put British interests at risk. It will do quite the opposite, ensuring that Mauritius remains a valued partner of the western alliance and that there is no means by which China can secure a foothold in this part of the Indian Ocean.<\/span><\/p>\n

A perceived Chinese threat makes it all the more necessary for the UK and Mauritius to have an agreement which is in the interests of both countries.<\/span><\/p>\n

* While details of the “finalized” Chagos deal, as mentioned by Gavin Glover, remain undisclosed, what additional measures do you think could the Mauritian government propose to balance its sovereignty claims with Western strategic interests?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Annual payment for leasing Diego Garcia appears to be agreed. There may be one outstanding issue, which is the suggestion of a 50 instead of a 99-year lease. It is not clear where that idea has come from. It could be a problem for the US who will want longer security.\u00a0<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

Mauritius could propose a defence alliance with the UK and US and other partners such as India, France and Australia. Mauritius could become a port of call for US vessels, refuelling, supplies, tourism and Rest and Recreation (R&R) given the number of hotels and golf courses there are.<\/p>\n

* The ongoing debate surrounding the Chagos deal reveals how geopolitical concerns about China\u2019s rise influence decisions about Mauritius’s sovereignty over the Chagos and the future of Diego Garcia. What is the position of the All-Party Parliamentary Group, of which you are the Coordinator, on this issue, and how could it help advance the revised Chagos deal?<\/strong><\/p>\n

I think most members of the APPG know that the China threat is deployed as a supportive counter argument in the campaign to derail first the negotiations and now the Agreement.<\/p>\n

The Group has its 99th meeting on 28 Jan. It will probably discuss progress towards the APPG\u2019s purpose which is \u201cto help bring about a resolution of the issues concerning the future of the Chagos Islands (BIOT) and of the Chagossians\u201d.<\/p>\n

* How do you perceive the intersection of the Chagos issue with broader global concerns about Chinese expansionism in the Indian Ocean region?<\/strong><\/p>\n

I don\u2019t think there is an intersection. Although China is an economic and technological threat to the West, I have seen no convincing evidence that the Chinese want to expand in the Indian Ocean and nor would India want that.<\/p>\n

There is a provision in the Agreement to ensure that foreign forces do not occupy any of the Outer Islands to which Mauritius has agreed.<\/p>\n

* Is there a risk that delaying the Chagos deal might undermine Mauritius\u2019s long-standing sovereignty claims and leave the issue unresolved for yet another generation?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Yes. If President Trump opposed the deal, there is a possibility that the UK would not feel able to sign the Agreement. It would remain on the back burner for another four years until Trump leaves office for good, having served two terms.<\/p>\n

It would be difficult for Mauritius to keep up the pressure at the UN and in other international organisations and courts for its sovereignty claim to be implemented, although the Chagossians may be able to keep up the pressure on the UK to allow them to return.<\/p>\n

* Could greater transparency about the provisions of the revised deal, particularly regarding the Diego Garcia base, help build broader international and domestic support for its ratification?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Confidentiality while negotiating sensitive and complex agreements is vital if progress is to be made.<\/p>\n

When all is agreed I would expect there to be a large measure of transparency except for financial, security and defence issues.<\/p>\n

* What is there to lose if the agreement fails?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Without an agreement Mauritius will not receive substantial payments, the Archipelago will not be returned to Mauritian sovereignty, the decolonisation of Mauritius will remain incomplete, the US base will lack security and legitimacy and western defences weakened, the UK will remain in breach of international law and human rights and the Chagossians will not be able to return to their islands or receive compensation.<\/p>\n

Discussions on the future of the Chagos Islands between Mauritius and the UK go back to 2001 with a meeting in the Foreign Office between the Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and Deputy PM Paul Berenger. It is time to bring negotiations to an end.<\/p>\n

\n

Mauritius Times ePaper Friday 24 January 2025<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

… it does not risk expanding China\u2019s sphere of influence or put British interests at risk”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":19153,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[32,6],"tags":[50708,50716,50707,50713,50724,50733,120,50719,1993,50730,50717,50710,50729,50721,25739,50727,50720,50734,50496,866,50732,665,17611,50711,50703,50712,36,50726,4238,49,11680,50704,50494,50728,4134,50722,50706,50715,50709,1175,967,21856,50307,50705,50725,50723,50731,50718,50714],"class_list":["post-42148","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-interviews","category-latest-news","tag-american-preferences","tag-annual-lease-payment","tag-bilateral-relationship","tag-capitulation-rhetoric","tag-chagossians-return","tag-chagossians-return-delayed","tag-china","tag-chinese-expansionism","tag-david-snoxell","tag-decolonisation-stalled","tag-defence-alliance-proposal","tag-defence-interests","tag-defence-issues","tag-delays-risk","tag-diego-garcia-base","tag-financial-issues","tag-foreign-forces-prohibition","tag-historical-context","tag-historical-injustice","tag-indian-ocean","tag-international-law-breach","tag-interview","tag-jack-straw","tag-joint-demarche","tag-mauritian-attorney-general-gavin-glover","tag-mauritius-reliability","tag-mauritius-times","tag-negotiation-confidentiality","tag-parliament","tag-paul-berenger","tag-pm-ramgoolam","tag-revised-mauritius-uk-deal","tag-right-wing-opposition","tag-security-issues","tag-sovereignty","tag-sovereignty-claims","tag-starmer-administration-urgency","tag-strategic-benefits","tag-strategic-interests","tag-tourism","tag-transparency","tag-trump-administration","tag-trump-opposition","tag-uk-government-haste","tag-un-pressure","tag-unresolved-issues","tag-us-base-insecurity","tag-us-vessels","tag-western-partner"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/David-Snoxell.jpg?fit=1074%2C600&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p8QzSF-aXO","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42148","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=42148"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42148\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":42196,"href":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42148\/revisions\/42196"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/19153"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=42148"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=42148"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=42148"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}