Keep the Chagos islands

The Foreign Office establishment tried to persuade Conservative Ministers to give the Chagos islands to Mauritius. David Cameron would not give permission, after James Cleverly had allowed work to be done. Kier Starmer and David Lammy fell for the specious arguments about international law and are desperate to give the islands away.

The International Court gave an advisory opinion that the UK should Ā cede control to Mauritius. Some government advisers have we are told be warning they could take a case and find against the UK in a binding judgement if we do nothing. Last night on GB News I pointed out that the UK expressly ruled out being under the Courtā€™s jurisdiction for any matter involving another Commonwealth country . The advisory opinion stemmed from a UN resolution of the General Assembly. Such resolutions Ā  are not binding. The UK as a member of the Security Council has a veto on Security Council resolutions which would be binding.

Giving away Chagos would be a double disaster. President Trump wants the UK to remain the freeholder of its crucial Diego Ā Garcia base, not Ā pass it to pro China anti nuclear Mauritius. UK taxpayers cannot afford to meet the 100 years of payments Mauritius demands to lease back the base. We hear they want up front early payments of some future annual payments just as the Chancellor needs cuts in spending to reassure markets.

Politics is about choices and priorities. Taxing farmers and cutting benefits for pensioners in order to pay to rent back something we legally own is a very strange and unpopular choice.The Chancellor should say No to any such spending increase in the Ā middle of a spending crisis.

 

 

65 Comments

  1. Mark B
    January 14, 2025

    Good morning.

    I have posted my solution to the problem before so apologies for doing so again.

    Give it to the USA.

    Problem solved and just about everyone is happy.

    Reply
    1. Peter Wood
      January 14, 2025

      Chagos Islands are clearly an important feature of our national security. UK is, de facto, owners of this land, and consequently are responsible to future generations for how it is managed. To consider transferring it into hands of others (plus financial inducements!) that might compromise a militarily sensitive property suggests, at least, our present government does NOT take our national security as seriously as it should. Why is that?

      Reply
    2. Ian wragg
      January 14, 2025

      First Chagos, then Gibraltar and finally the Falklands
      Traitors the lot of them.

      Reply
      1. glen cullen
        January 14, 2025

        95% of the Chagos population (circa 4,000 pers) since the 1970s has been USA military, ….who going to tell them to move, we should give it to them for cheap energy

        Reply
    3. agricola
      January 14, 2025

      A more logical solution, but negotiate the best deal for the Chargosians in the process.

      Reply
    4. Bloke
      January 14, 2025

      Chagos is brilliant location, Mark.
      It’s like having an aircraft carrier with a massive deck and much less cost and maintenance, but our national security is a matter for us: not something to be shrugged off onto a valuable ally to maintain instead.

      Reply
    5. Stred
      January 14, 2025

      Trump should seize Chagos from the Trot-lead British government and offer lucrative terms to the Chagos islanders to become US citizens under a protectorate. The US already doesn’t recognise the ICC , run by another anti western judge, Mr Khan.

      Reply
      1. Ian B
        January 14, 2025

        @Stred – Agreed

        Reply
    6. Ian B
      January 14, 2025

      @Mark B +1

      the have more rights than Mauritius to the Islands – if only from being the economy and the sitting tenants of the Islands

      Reply
    7. Lifelogic
      January 14, 2025

      Far more sensible that the pay Mauritius billions lunacy!

      Reply
    8. Lynn Atkinson
      January 14, 2025

      Iā€™m not happy!

      Reply
    9. IanT
      January 14, 2025

      That’s a lateral thought Mark and one that had not occured to me. I can’t see why it is neccessary to do anything at all. But your solution would be better than giving it to the Mauritians and then paying them rent for the US to use it. I do wonder about Mr Lammy’s logic or the apparent lack of it.

      Reply
    10. Original Richard
      January 14, 2025

      Mark B :

      I’m afraid you don’t understand why they want to give the Chagos Islands away to Mauritius.

      Reply
    11. glen cullen
      January 14, 2025

      Fully agree …..give them to the USA

      Reply
    12. formula57
      January 14, 2025

      @ Mark B “Give it to the USA” – surely you mean “sell”?

      An alert government would offer to sell the islands to China but suggest it might be willing to entertain competitive bids. If someone with enough self-belief and access to funds were around (say an “Art of the deal” author), we could do very well indeed.

      We might be able to offload Scotland to the same buyer too.

      Reply
      1. Ian B
        January 14, 2025

        @formula57 – ‘giving ‘ is cheaper than Starmers paying billions for someone to take what we already own and the have never had

        Reply
      2. Mickey Taking
        January 14, 2025

        Normally when you sell a piece of land the boundary is clarified and one party defends it by putting up a fence, or wall. Neither method usually contain an access point. F 57 – what a good idea you have.

        Reply
  2. Philip P.
    January 14, 2025

    To pay Mauritius vast sums for 100 years, so as to allow another foreign country to use the place as a military base rent-free, would indeed be the height of absurdity. You might have noted, SJR, that the International Court [of Justice] is a UN body. This crisis arose thanks to Foreign Office officials who wish us to follow UN agendas, rather than retaining our national sovereignty.

    Reply
    1. Lifelogic
      January 14, 2025

      Seems so and James Cleverly and now Starmer/Lammey fell for it. Labour are 180 degrees out on everything, but then so were the the Tories under Major right through to Sunak and now Kemi. On net zero, the size of he state, the over regulation of everything, tax levels, free speak restrictions, over regulation, wars on motorists and the self employed…

      Reply
      1. Lifelogic
        January 14, 2025

        Boris and Sunak also on top of all the above got Covid 19 totally wrong – the vastly expensive net harm lockdowns, the Covid origins, the net harm (unsafe and ineffective) multiple covid “vaccines”…

        We are led by a mixture of crooks, people on the make acting for vested interests and deluded fools and zealots.

        Reply
  3. David Andrews
    January 14, 2025

    Agreed 100%. You clearly expose the twisted, flawed thinking that drives this policy. Twisted, flawed thinking infects too much policy of this Labour government and of previous Conservative governments too. That is why neither is fit for office.

    Reply
    1. agricola
      January 14, 2025

      Politics surplants logic, honesty and common sense. It rarely solves anything.

      Reply
  4. James1
    January 14, 2025

    ā€œā€¦ā€¦politics is about choices and priorities. Taxing farmers and cutting benefits for pensioners in order to pay to rent back something we legally own is a very strange and unpopular choice.ā€

    Did we elect a bunch of vindictive clowns to the current government circus, or are they merely clowns of the hopeless and hapless variety?

    Reply
    1. Lifelogic
      January 14, 2025

      Deluded, vindictive, clowns – this vindictive streak can be seen especially in Starmer’s agenda to destroy private schools and to pretend parents are getting a tax brake when actually they will shortly be paying 4 times over.

      They actually deserve a tax break for not using the state system, they are forced to pay for. The same with private medicine.

      Reply
      1. Lifelogic
        January 14, 2025

        And their granny freezing agenda.

        Reply
    2. IanT
      January 14, 2025

      I think that (unfortunately) you can indeed get Clowns that are hopelessly vindictive.

      Reply
  5. Donna
    January 14, 2025

    So why is the Foreign Office Establishment NOT operating in the interests of the British people and is apparently working in favour of foreign governments?

    WHO is “the Foreign Office Establishment?” Name the name/s. And what gives them the right to try and impose their policy on the Government?

    It is so obvious that handing over the Chagos Islands, paying Mauritius a fortune to take them and then paying rent to retain access is NOT in the interests of the British people that attempting to do it is basically treason.

    Reply
  6. agricola
    January 14, 2025

    It is just about the dumbest decision yet from our government. The first consideration , not mentioned in your submission, should be the wishes of the Chargosians. Then it should be the strategic interests of the UK and USA.

    The FO have a track record of getting it badly wrong. I cite the Middle East after WW1 and the Falklands 1982. Now with the supreme diplomat in charge, the FO’s natural instinct for getting it wrong can reign supreme, and their fantasies can enjoy greater freedom. Their next screwup will be our relationship with the USA, followed by that with the EU. Watch this space.

    Reply
  7. Roy Grainger
    January 14, 2025

    If Starmer caves on this then there will be a queue of such cases at the ICJ relating to the Falklands, Gibraltar, Northern Ireland etc. in which they’ll find against the UK and having set the precedent what will Starmer do then ? I suppose Trump may be able to stop this stupidity – the USA has a firm policy of ignoring ICJ rulings.

    Reply
  8. Wanderer
    January 14, 2025

    Your last para really hits home:
    “Politics is about choices and priorities. Taxing farmers and cutting benefits for pensioners in order to pay to rent back something we legally own is a very strange and unpopular choice.”

    We have a government whose main ideologies harm our country and its people, particularly when taken to extremes or ineptly forced upon us, which is what they are doing. We have Net Zero, wokeism, multiculturalism, globalism and keynsian economics pursued zealously by an authoritarian government, aided by the judiciary, media and bureacracy.

    What is depressing is that there are still many citizens who would vote for this government or another like it (Labour, Libdem, Green, wet Tory).

    Reply
  9. Paul Freedman
    January 14, 2025

    The woke left know they are unelectable and so it is futile for them to present their activism for election. Instead they have got into management positions in the civil service and are advancing it that way. We need to drain the swamp.

    Reply
  10. Narrow Shoulders
    January 14, 2025

    Use whatever influence you still have or urge Kemi Badenoch to seek to publish the Foreign office guidance on the matter. And name the authors of the report.

    Let us all decide.

    Reply
  11. BW
    January 14, 2025

    Nothing this government does makes any sense to me at all. Absolutely nothing. Itā€™s as if they are working for a foreign government hell bent on the destruction of everything in the U.K. and doing it openly in front of our very eyes.

    Reply
    1. ChrisS
      January 14, 2025

      You are absolutely right, BW
      Just look at what Theeves, Miliband and Lammy are doing ! And what Mrs Balls is failing to do !

      Reply
    2. Mickey Taking
      January 14, 2025

      You state ‘as if’ …. a correction needed?

      Reply
  12. Rod Evans
    January 14, 2025

    At a time when our financial resources are already challenged, it is very strange to see our government so desperate to give away the family (nation’s) silver. The unbridled urgency of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to gift Mauritius the Indian Ocean Territories (Chagos Islands) looks positively criminal. The matter is even more strange when you note the annual fee being suggested, to rent back something we already own for the next 100 years in order to secure our military base and the American military base there, is reported to be Ā£800million/yr.
    The value of prime real estate in the middle of the Indian Ocean with runways able to land the largest passenger jets going, a place that is extremely well defended with zero crime rate, a place surrounded by white sands and atolls would make an extremely attractive holiday destination.
    Why would any government want to simply give it away?

    Reply
  13. Sakara Gold
    January 14, 2025

    Following hitherto unknown revelations about the Russian spy Anthony Blunt being published on YouTube by a number of posters, the Security Service has been forced to release files on how much the late Queen was told about his treachery. It seems that HM was told very little.

    Those with an interest in Establishment treachery by the Cambridge Five will also have noted that transcripts of Philby’s interrogation in Beirut and other information have also been released.

    Perhaps they will now release the files on Sir Roger Hollis, Director General of MI5 (from 1956 to 1965) etc ed

    Reply
  14. Lynn Atkinson
    January 14, 2025

    No law is authoritative unless enacted by a legitimate representative body and then only over its own territory. In the U.K. that is our Parliament.. the ONLY ONE WE HAVE, at WESTMINSTER.
    We know this is so because Blair exempted himself from the ICCs jurisdiction using the power of Westminster.
    Perhaps Putin and Netanyahu and the Serbs should have done the same!
    Why do Starmer and Lammy desire orders? You would think they were not free men.

    Reply
  15. Ian B
    January 14, 2025

    Some people think it is OK, including those in the UN that they are able to disregard the wishes of the People. No one has asked the Chagos Islanders. If the Islands where to change ownership at the very least the Chagos Islanders should be asked, what if they wanted to retain them? For the UN to say they should be ā€˜returnedā€™ is a contradiction of their own charters ā€“ how many other territories would tumble under the same thinking. Shouldnā€™t then on the same basis the People’s Republic of China (PRC)(mainland China) be handed back to the Republic of China (ROC)(Taiwan) ā€“ why arenā€™t they shouting for that.

    Then you have the situation that at no time in history has Mauritius owned or ruled the Chagos Island.
    The Chagos Islands are around 1200 miles from Mauritius, so the are not even neighbours. They Seychelles and the Maldives are closer.

    The idea that the UK should lease Diego Garcia for 99 years is ludicrous, costly (in more ways than one), and dangerous. Mauritius as close partners of China could still give the Chinese access to the other Islands and waters surrounding the Diego Garcia undermining and threatening its existence. No wonder the USA is to say the least disappointed.
    Another media seeking headline not thought through

    Reply
    1. Ian B
      January 14, 2025

      As reported by the Guido website

      “Starmerā€™s close friend Philippe Sands KC has acted as chief counsel for Mauritius on Chagos since 2010. He spoke to students last year about how great it is that Brits ā€˜celebrateā€™ him for ā€˜humiliatingā€™ the UK in non-binding international courts.”
      https://order-order.com/2025/01/13/revealed-mauritius-chagos-lawyer-campaigned-for-starmer-leadership/
      https://order-order.com/2024/10/03/exclusive-starmers-close-friend-is-mauritius-chief-legal-adviser-on-chagos-islands/

      From that it would appear that TTK is keeping up the rhetoric of hating the UK and its People wishing to denigrate them at ever turn just to be praised by his friends in other places. He has destroyed the office of PM, no longer working for the Country and the People but for personal self-gratification and a two tier State.

      Reply
  16. Linda Brown
    January 14, 2025

    Only fools give up territory which is a national security asset. The previous inhabitants who were moved also have a say in any decision taken so why have they not been included in negotiations? We are not legally bound by any of the decisions taken by these outside bodies so we should tell them to take their hook and be done with it. When are we going to act like a sovereign nation and look after the country, assets and people?

    Reply
  17. Michael Saxton
    January 14, 2025

    This is a huge foreign policy blunder by Starmer and Lammy. Neither have essential experience in foreign policy issues and Iā€™ve no doubt they will come under significant pressure from the incoming Trump administration to reverse course.

    Reply
  18. Lifelogic
    January 14, 2025

    I see that Peter Kyle Labour Science Minister failed to back Tulip Siddiq at the weekend very sensible of him.
    I give her about a week maximum.

    Despite having so many Labour MPs is Peter Kyle really the best they can find to be the science minister?

    Kyle left school, in his own words, “without any usable qualifications”. By the age of 25, he was accepted on his third attempt to become a student at the University of Sussex, where he gained a degree in geography, international development, and environmental studies, and later a doctorate in community development. What a great person to lead up our drive for science! Despite this unpromising beginning he seemed more sensible than most Labour MPs. Needless to say he was a remainer and is pro net zero.

    Starmer seems obsessed with AI currently should sort out our pot holes, NHS, crime levelsā€¦ in no time but how will we compete in this area with energy costs 3-5 times those of the US and intermittent and unreliable energy too. Great plan Starmer/Miliband. It all blowing in the wind as Ed likes to say.

    Reply
  19. William Long
    January 14, 2025

    If the Foreign Office cannot belong to the EU, then the UN must be the next best option: anything rather than act in this country’s best interests, or take responsibility for making their own decisions. Of course, with this Government they are even more in lockstep with their political masters, than they were with the last one.

    Reply
  20. Keith from Leeds
    January 14, 2025

    What could be a more damming indictment of this government and the low calibre of Ministers, from the PM down, that they want to give away the Chagos Islands?
    Let’s hope Donald Trump gives the PM a blast of reality on their first phone call.
    Why do these people hate their own country so much? Pursuing Net Zero will destroy the UK economy, yet MPs of all parties seem wedded to the idea. Although, with the present Chancellor, the economy may be destroyed before we get to the end of 2025.
    Where there is no vision, the people perish!

    Reply
    1. Ian B
      January 14, 2025

      @Keith from Leeds – for TTK to lose face in front of his best mate is the bit forcing his hand “Starmerā€™s close friend Philippe Sands KC” chief counsel for Mauritius on Chagos since 2010. As reported in Guido recently

      Reply
  21. Old Albion
    January 14, 2025

    I don’t remember handing over the Chagos Islands being in the Labour party manifesto ………………..

    Reply
  22. John
    January 14, 2025

    Well said Sir

    Reply
  23. Peter Gardner
    January 14, 2025

    It is sometimes hard to know which, since Starmtroopoer is determined that UK shall not remain a sovereign state, whether he would prefer UK to be governed by the EU, Communist China or North Korea.

    Reply
  24. Original Richard
    January 14, 2025

    There is really only one word necessary to describe this action.

    Reply
  25. Bryan Harris
    January 14, 2025

    Taxing farmers and cutting benefits for pensioners in order to pay to rent back something we legally own is a very strange and unpopular choice.

    Not just strange, irrational beyond comprehension.

    This shows how powerful civil servants are but additionally shows them unfit for purpose along with this crony government.

    What else are they going to give away to foreigners for no reason while doing their best to intimidate and punish the inmates of this lock-up.

    Reply
  26. G
    January 14, 2025

    Many strange choices…

    End is nigh for the chemicals industry – Sir JR proving Sir JR right…

    Reply
  27. Richard1
    January 14, 2025

    It is reported that President Trump is looking for a way to punish Labour for their flagrant interference in the US election. As well presumably as for the absurd and hysterical insults hurled at trump repeatedly by foolish people such as David Lammy.

    I suggest the President forces Starmer into a very public and humiliating U-turn over the Chagos Islands, and insists on the U.K. retaining full sovereignty. This would have the double benefit of punishing Starmer and Labour for their attempts to interfere with US democracy and for their insults to trump, whilst at the same time saving this important strategic asset for the West.

    Reply
  28. sailingby
    January 14, 2025

    How can you say “we legally own” and who made the law? – it wasn’t the chagos islanders

    Next thing is that Trump is only going to be there for four more years, TG – and after that who knows?

    Then why give the islands to mauritius – give them to the decendents of the islanders thats how we got them and while we’re at it have a good look at some of these other outposts we collected along the way and return them as well including the Elgin Marbles. We don’t have to own everything.

    Reply
  29. Michael Staples
    January 14, 2025

    This was probably the most irrational decision made by this Labour Government, and there are many. There are so many angles including the rights of existing Chagossians, the defence aspects, the lack of any real legal interest by Mauritius, the financial costs of paying for something we already own, the protection of the surrounding ocean and allowing Chinese influence into the area.

    Reply
  30. Atlas
    January 14, 2025

    Quite so, Sir John.

    Reply
  31. glen cullen
    January 14, 2025

    260 criminals arrived in the UK yesterday; from the safe country of France ā€¦you didnā€™t hear about that in the news yesterday ???

    Reply
  32. oldwulf
    January 14, 2025

    For what it is worth, there is a Parliamentary petition on this matter.

    Reply
    1. oldwulf
      January 14, 2025

      Subject to our host’s permission, the link to the petition is below.

      https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/702712

      Reply
  33. ChrisS
    January 14, 2025

    The workings of the F&C office are a complete mystery : how can it be remotely sensible to do a deal with Mauritius when the former residents expressily don’t want one, they want to remain British, The US wants us to keep the islands and, Mauritius has never owned or occupied the islands which are more than 1,000 miles away from their territory. Yet Starmer offered a deal which would cost us hundreds of millions while he is cutting heating allowance for our elderly because Theeves says we can’t afford it to our pensioners !
    As you said last evening, it’s crazy, yet Lammy and Starmer are desperately trying to complete a deal before Trump is sworn in. WHY?

    Reply
  34. Kenneth
    January 14, 2025

    It appears to me there has been a campaign to give up Chagos Islands (partially or fully). This campaign seems to stem from a faction in the Foriegn Office.

    The BBC threw its political weight behind the campaign with a series of articles from September 2024 (example: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckdg7jjlx2go )

    The current government seems to have fallen for the propaganda.

    Reply
  35. Original Richard
    January 14, 2025

    Is the FCDO also in negotiations with Argentina to find how much money they need from us to take the Falkland Islands off our hands? And perhaps with Spain for Gibralter?

    Reply
  36. forthurst
    January 14, 2025

    Chagos Islands are 1,680 kilometres from Mauritius. The Seychelles and Sri Lanka are closer. Claiming sovereignty over a territory based on proximity when there is prior valid claim is not how international law works otherwise France could invade the Channel Islands with impunity and Canada not the US could lay claim to Greenland legitimately as Trump has done.

    Reply
  37. formula57
    January 14, 2025

    Mauritian claims to the Chagos Islands seem to rest upon the once common possession by France of both territories. The connection was, therefore, an administrative convenience to suit the French, a convenience that continued when the U.K. seized the territories in 1810, and act ratified by the Treaty of Paris in 1814.

    It does not seem clear that Mauritius has a particularly persuasive claim, despite its demands as supported by the I.C.J., O.A.U. and others.

    Reply
  38. Derek
    January 14, 2025

    I fail to understand why this wretched government thinks GB needs to hand back these islands to anyone. Mauritius has never claimed sovereignty of these islands, over 1300 miles from them, for good reason. They are too far away and too costly to administer. The local folk who are more important than the whims of an apparently low-grade Foreign Secretary have no desire to be controlled by Mauritians and are quite happy with the status quo.
    Furthermore, the Americans have made one island, Diego Garcia, the centre of their military ops for the ME region for decades. It is a leasehold secret base and is protected regionally by Britain, the current land owners and freeholders.
    The incoming POTUS, Mr Trump, will not take kindly to a British Government that releases its responsibilities to a small Nation with known contacts with Red China.
    Is Starmer that stupid to upset our biggest ally as surely such a move will do to our “Special Relationship”. Or does the Labour Government just not care about the USA and wishes to curry favour with Red China instead?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.