A heated debate unfolded in the House of Commons as MPs pressed the government over the ongoing negotiations between the UK and Mauritius regarding the sovereignty of the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT), including the strategically vital base on Diego Garcia.
The urgent question, posed by Priti Patel MP, sought clarity on the implications of the proposed agreement for the UK’s security and the rights of the displaced Chagossian community.
Responding to the concerns, Stephen Doughty, Minister of State at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, asserted:
“We are absolutely not damaging our security; we are protecting it through this deal. It protects the base on Diego Garcia to continue operating securely and effectively.”
Doughty emphasised that the treaty includes clear safeguards to prevent foreign forces from establishing a presence near the base, addressing fears of Chinese influence. He further clarified that the UK and the United States would retain full operational autonomy, and the lease could be extended beyond the initial 99 years.
“There has been a warm welcome for this agreement from across the United States security apparatus because it puts this base and our shared operations on a secure footing into the future,” he added.
Patel, however, criticised the government’s approach, calling it a “monumental failure of statecraft” and raising doubts about transparency.
“Why are Labour putting our security at risk, ignoring Chagossians, and letting our standing go into freefall in this world?” she asked, demanding details on costs and safeguards.
Doughty dismissed her claims, pointing to the failure of previous administrations to secure a deal after 11 rounds of negotiations. He stated:
“The treaty will contain clear commitments on robust security arrangements. This government has acted to protect our interests and our operations at the base.”
Derek Twigg MP highlighted the base’s critical role for UK and US military operations, asking if the agreement had caused any concerns among American defence officials.
Doughty confirmed: “As far as I am aware, that is the case. There has been a warm welcome for this agreement from across the United States security apparatus.”
If kier has any sense he will keep this issue in his back pocket and use it as a negotiation with the Donald on trade issues. Easy to go back to Mauritius and tell them their new PM is acting in bad faith trying to change the terms and kick the can down the road until the Donald is gone.
The TDS sufferer gets it all wrong again. This isn’t a Trump issue; this is a national security issue for the Republicans. His entire national security team as well as the Republican controlled US House and Senate are united on this. When the Donald is gone, the UK will most likely have to deal with the J.D. or Florida Ron. There is no kicking the can down the road. Brits tend to forget that there are four US fighter squadrons and a refueling wing stationed in the UK that should be stationed in a NATO country a lot further east or in the Pacific.
If you actually think the UK can win a trade war with the US then you really are delusional.
😀 thank you for your four mighty fighter squadrons guarding Norfolk, without them surely we would all be speaking Russian right now. 😂😂😀
You can keep the Diego Garcia, it will just cost you a little trade deal that doesn’t involve us having to raise the amount of rat feces in our food to US levels.
I know instead of surrendering sovereign territory because a foreign court issued an advisory ruling let’s just tell them to do one!
The islanders want to remain a BIOT despite the raw deal we gave them and settle the other islands in the chain so let’s help them.
What’s the point in giving up land we already have which is costing us nothing and then paying a foreign govt that is in the Chinese sphere of influence multiple millions to lease them back!
Hay ho there’s no money though except when we want to give it away offshore🤬
True. The US frequently takes disputes to the ICJ. If they win, they use the ruling to try and apply diplomatic pressure. If they lose- they ignore the ruling because it’s only advisory anyway. That is the only approach by which interactions with the ICJ are even marginally useful. For Starmer and co to argue that simply ignoring an ICJ ruling somehow puts our sovereignty in jeopardy is utterly disingenuous and is fooling no-one. Nor can they credibly claim to be ‘leading by example’ given that no-one who matters (particularly the Chinese) is following.
Just cede the islands to the United States and be done with.
The US doesn’t want them, they are the one who asked us to do the deal in the first place with Mauritius to win support from India. Donald Trump didn’t even know these islands existed until Farage went to New York.
When u say the USA I assume u mean democrats because I can’t imagine the republicans thinking it’s a good idea to give them away let alone give them away to a Chinese friend and then pay for the privilege
Yes the current US government. Hard to do any deals with America now when there two separate governments that have no cohesive policy. You guys should consider breaking up.
The US would take the islands over China getting them
Wrong! the US does want to keep the base it is an important staging post as well as a harbour!
Why do you think that they agreed to a 99yr lease?Trumps lot however don’t agree as they can see any agreement made can be altered in time by Chinese pressure on the Mauritian govt,an example is what happened with Hong Kong so they want it kept.
Mauritius can smell blood in the water with Starmer and Lammy so they won’t agree to the original deal any bets they want a lot more dosh for a new one?
As I’ve said above why give away territory that has never belonged to Mauritius and then pay for the privilege of leasing it back?
Surely the islanders should have a referendum on this as we would never give up the Falklands and Gibraltar without their agreement!
Factually incorrect. The Chagos Islands belonged to Mauritius as a dependent territory right up to 1965 when it separated off ahead of independence for Mauritius in 1968.
That said, if the Chagossians want independence from Mauritius then support them in reestablishing themselves on the other islands, and retain Diego Garcia as a Cyprus style sovereign base area.
👍
It was the Biden administration that asked the last Tory government to start negotiations after pressure from India.
So if the US didn’t want them why did they agree to a 99 yr lease to use the base surely they would have just walked away?
While we are at it the 48th fighter wing is in Suffolk actually!
Personally, I wouldn’t suggest asking Trump whether he wants the islands. There is a good chance he would say yes, and then the UK would have do backflips to explain why what the pinheads in the FCO legal department say is more important than what the US needs for its security … I just wouldn’t advise raising it, though it may already be too late.
Mauritius has already tried to backtrack on the deal, easy for the UK to walk away.
I’m trying to figure out if they asked for us to give the islands back or we offered to give it back to them and how long ago this was put into motion? pre election or post election, because this isn’t a decision made over night.
Post election. The deal is the idea of Blairite Jonathan Powell, who Starmer put in charge of solving the issue. He’s since become the first politically appointed National Security Advisor. General Gwyn Jenkins was due to be appointed as the NSA but went for a negotiator over a military man….
Negotiations were started under last Tory government following pressure from Biden.
It looks like the new Mauritius PM is not happy with the deal..as the ink is not signed HMG may have to end up walking away from it. Personally I think they should play the islanders card, have an advisory referendum of the islanders and work with that, I very much suspect the islanders would go for overseas territory status at the same level of autonomy as the Falklands. Let them have all the islands back and service the base as a resident population. Then HMG with a popular vote behind it can go tell the UN to jog on.
‘Doughty emphasised that the treaty includes clear safeguards to prevent foreign forces from establishing a presence near the base, addressing fears of Chinese influence.’
How, when you have conceded the central point? Mauritius has been bought by the Chinese, along with others dotted around the Indian Ocean. The U.K. having stepped back the pushing from Beijing via Mauritius is bound to continue. The U.N. is compromised. More than 100 countries have taken the ‘Chinese shilling’. Has anyone checked whether the ‘Chagosians’ actually want to return?
Yes the core should be the views of the Chagosians, that is where the justice and injustice lay. Personally I would give them an offer and a none binding referendum.
1) British citizenship, return to the Chagos Islands and the islands being run as a proper independently governed British overseas territory..jobs on the air base and all the income that comes with.
2) independence from everyone, with an offer of a 99 year lease on the airbase as a foundation for the economy of there new nation.
3) Mauritius takes the Chagos islands..
Hopefully they would chose 1 and HMG can stick one up to the UN with the self determination argument.
I don’t know why HMG are so keen on getting this deal done, the deal being offered as far as I’m concerned is a take it or leave it. If the islands remained BOTs for the next 50 to 100 year it’s better for the UK anyway so the Mauritius PM does not seem keen on the deal, HMG should just walk away.
Look at Starmers Mauritian “friend”. A fellow KC. They have history. Starmer is not a patriotic Briton. Will stop there.