Handover of UK’s Chagos Islands Raises Concerns about Sovereignty and Security
The upcoming Chagos handover will represent the first territorial cession by the UK since the handover of Hong Kong in 1997, signaling a shift in how Britain deals with disputes stemming from its colonial past.
An agreement between the UK and Mauritius to transfer the Chagos Islands has sparked concerns among experts and policymakers regarding its potential implications for other disputed territories like the Falklands and Gibraltar.
After extensive negotiations, the Chagos Islands, also known as the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT), are slated to be transferred to Mauritius.
Hillary Briffa, from the Centre for Defence Studies at King’s College London, recognized the UK’s successful negotiation for a 99-year lease on the Diego Garcia base but cautioned that the Chagos deal might provoke calls for decolonization and spark debates over the precedents it establishes.
Related Stories
These repercussions extend to UK allies, from France to Australia, according to Briffa.
Scrutiny on Falklands and Gibraltar
The UK justifies its hold over the Falklands and Gibraltar based on the principle of self-determination.
Similarly, Spain disputes Gibraltar’s status, despite multiple referendums where residents chose to remain under UK sovereignty.
Last October, Argentina’s former Foreign Minister, Diana Mondino, lauded the Chagos Islands agreement, calling it a positive step and a move away from outdated practices.
He emphasized that surrendering Chagos out of fear of potential international judgments might embolden Spain to rally support for its claim and encourage similar claims from other regions.
Lammy also clarified that the Governor of the Falklands Alison Blake stressed the differences in historical context between the Chagos Archipelago and the Falklands.
Diego Garcia, the largest island in the Chagos Archipelago and site of a major United States military base in the middle of the Indian Ocean leased from Britain in 1966. File Photo
Importance of Self-Determination
The Chagos Archipelago was once home to 2,000 Ilois workers who were forcibly relocated to Mauritius and the Seychelles in the 1960s.
In 2019, the ICJ declared the UK’s claim to the islands unlawful, demanding their return to Mauritius and underscoring the impacts of Britain’s colonial past.
This ruling came after a UN referral made by Mauritius in 2017, representing a diplomatic setback for the UK amid Brexit tensions.
While the legal contexts differ—for instance, the Falklands’ claim relates to settlement and self-determination, whereas Chagos involves the illegal detachment of land—the broader principle of settling territorial disputes through international consensus could gain prominence.
Carl Patrick Stephen Hunter from the Council on Geostrategy highlighted that while self-determination guides British policy, it was not properly implemented in the British Indian Ocean Territory settlement.
“Islanders would value it more today, given their tragic expulsions,” he noted, pointing out that this inconsistency might weaken the UK’s defense of self-determination in other territories.
Nevertheless, analysts remain wary of Mauritius obtaining sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, highlighting concerns about its treatment of the displaced Chagossians.
David Blagden, from the University of Exeter, criticized Britain’s treatment of the Chagossian people as “atrocious” but cautioned against granting sovereignty to Mauritius, which restricts dissent over their status.
Paul Mason, an associate fellow at the Council on Geostrategy, echoed the need for more active consultation with the Chagossians but doubted the deal’s ability to set a precedent.
Strategic Implications Involving the US, China, and Others
It has been confirmed that Donald Trump’s administration will be consulted before finalizing the deal, which is expected to be signed after Monday.
Puri expressed concerns about China leveraging the decision to create commercial ports in the region, potentially challenging India for economic and strategic dominance. However, he clarified that this issue should be monitored long-term, irrespective of the UK’s decision on Chagos.
Euan Graham, a senior analyst at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, suggested that expediting the deal’s finalization could help the UK mitigate political risks.
“The BIOT has unfortunately become a net liability for the UK, and the dispute with Mauritius distracts from the positive partnerships the UK has in the Indo-Pacific region,” he commented.
Sam Goodman from the China Strategic Risks Institute opined that Beijing likely views the deal as evidence of the UK’s waning influence in the Indo-Pacific and heavy reliance on US policies, particularly through the Diego Garcia base.
“The decision’s alignment with the broader vision of the UK’s role in an increasingly unstable geopolitical world remains uncertain,” he concluded.
A negotiating delegation from Mauritius is expected to continue talks following the Cabinet’s withholding of approval for the agreement.
Once finalized, this handover will signify the UK’s first territorial cession since the handover of Hong Kong in 1997.
