In recent discussions surrounding the future of the Chagos Islands, the deputy prime minister of Mauritius, Paul Bérenger, has expressed concerns that negotiations with the United Kingdom are stalled due to financial disagreements. The context is rooted in an original agreement announced in October, in which the UK agreed to transfer sovereignty of the Chagos archipelago to Mauritius while retaining a longstanding 99-year lease on Diego Garcia, a strategically significant site featuring a major military airbase operated jointly by the UK and the US.
With a new government now in power in Mauritius, there have been calls for alterations to the previous agreement. This shift in governance has led to renewed scrutiny and criticism of the deal, particularly from the opposition Conservative Party in the UK, which has labeled the situation a “monumental failure of statecraft.” As discussions move forward, both Mauritian leaders and their UK counterparts emphasize the importance of finalizing a treaty that secures Mauritius’ sovereignty over the Chagos Islands while ensuring the operational integrity of the base at Diego Garcia.
The deal was initially celebrated by key figures from both nations, including UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and former Mauritian Prime Minister Pravind Jugnauth, who referred to it as a landmark moment that underscored a mutual commitment to resolving disputes lawfully and peacefully. This agreement aimed to close the chapter on years of contention over the archipelago, which has been marred by narratives of forced eviction and colonial ambitions.
Despite the initial positivity surrounding the agreement, Deputy Prime Minister Bérenger highlighted concerns regarding the financial elements attached to the deal during a public address. Recently, he mentioned that although the UK government promised financial assistance to help mitigate some economic challenges faced by Mauritius, the specifics of the financial package appear to be unsatisfactory. The sentiments reflect an underlying national pride where Bérenger remarked on the significance of the territory to the nation. He confronted the complexities of patriotism, saying, “This base existed on our land, on our territory… but not only it is [about] our sovereignty.”
Adding to the discussions, Prime Minister Ramgoolam voiced urgency to finalize the agreement before the inauguration of Donald Trump, whose administration could impact the negotiations when he took office on January 20. There are also indications that Trump’s choice for Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, viewed the deal with skepticism, calling it a possible threat to U.S. security.
The critiques of the deal have been voiced within the UK as well, where officials such as Shadow Foreign Secretary Dame Priti Patel have raised concerns about national security implications and the welfare of the Chagossian population, who were forcibly removed from the islands in the 1960s and 70s. Patel questioned the financial liabilities that could arise, emphasizing accountability regarding taxpayer money over the impending 99-year lease.
Conversely, Foreign Office Minister Stephen Doughty maintained that the agreement would ultimately bolster UK security by safeguarding operations at Diego Garcia. Recent affairs also highlight the increasing diplomatic isolation of the UK as international bodies, including the United Nations, present a unified stance on advocating for Mauritius’ claim over the British Indian Ocean Territory, which many now refer to as the “last colony in Africa.”
The history of the Chagos Islands is fraught with complex issues of colonial legacy, national sovereignty, and the quest for reparative justice. The government of Mauritius has long contended that its prior agreements with the UK, resulting in relinquishing control over the islands in exchange for independence, were coerced and illegitimate. As such, current discussions present an opportunity for these longstanding grievances to be acknowledged and addressed, with the future of Chagos and its people hovering at the forefront of diplomatic dialogues.
