The chagos agreement

[Sephiroth]

I think that this topic merits a thread of its own.

The British press have cooked up a potential threat of the UK being sued by Mauritius for billions of GBP should the Chagos deal collapse.

"Amusing" in terms of Starmer that this prospect might be, the Agreement seems to me, at least, watertight against liability if the deal collapse. Highlighted text in the quotes are mine.

Agreement

between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of the Republic of Mauritius concerning the Chagos Archipelago including Diego Garcia

London and Port Louis, 22 May 2025

[The Agreement is not in force]

Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs by Command of His Majesty May 2025

ARTICLE 18

Entry into Force
This Agreement shall enter into force on the first day of the first month following the date of receipt of the later note by which the Parties notify each other that they have completed their respective internal requirements and procedures necessary for the entry into force of this Agreement, unless the Parties agree otherwise.

From the Letter proposing payment rules (from UK to Mauritius)

c. each annual payment for the first (1st) thirteen (13) years shall be in respect of a twelve (12) month period commencing from the date of the entry into force of the Agreement or its anniversary, as applicable;

https://assets.publishing.service.go...ego_Garcia.pdf

So, you can see that the Agreement is not in force and there is thus no legal basis for a claim against the UK (in my opinion, at least). It may be that Mauritius will see it differently and that an International Court could side with Mauritius because they hate the UK.

So - there's plenty of fun yet to be had.

[Carth]

I'll be honest here, I've taken no real interest in whatever is happening with these islands.

Am I right in thinking we're handing them over and then paying some kind of 'rent' to continue to use them?

Why would we want to rent something that *according to the experts* will be 4ft underwater in the next few years

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Carth

I'll be honest here, I've taken no real interest in whatever is happening with these islands.

Am I right in thinking we're handing them over and then paying some kind of 'rent' to continue to use them?

Why would we want to rent something that *according to the experts* will be 4ft underwater in the next few years

no no no it's been underwater since the 90s or so we were led to believe

[Carth]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

no no no it's been underwater since the 90s or so we were led to believe

aah, so those rumours of the secret underwater nuclear facility with massive submarine (or UFO) base and fallout shelters for the rich and famous aren't just social media rantings then

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Carth

aah, so those rumours of the secret underwater nuclear facility with massive submarine (or UFO) base and fallout shelters for the rich and famous aren't just social media rantings then

no, i live in an underwater house, due to rising sea levels I've been underwater for decades

One thing I don't understand is that the reason we keep these islands is because of the American base located there, so why don't we hand it over to them entirely and let them worry about it?

We don't have to deal with the issue anymore. Trump gets more land.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by Damien

One thing I don't understand is that the reason we keep these islands is because of the American base located there, so why don't we hand it over to them entirely and let them worry about it?

We don't have to deal with the issue anymore. Trump gets more land.

Trump would go for that deal 'if he ever found out about the rich oil and mineral deposits under the islands' . . . ooops, I've let it out now, sure hope the AI bots don't spread that around.

[Sephiroth]

Mauritius to sue Britain over Chagos delay
Island nation’s prime minister ‘exploring legal avenues’ over perceived hold-up of deal in latest setback for Starmer

Mauritius is planning to sue Britain over delays in ratifying the Chagos Islands deal.

Navin Ramgoolam, the island nation’s prime minister, said his government had begun consulting international law firms while they await the formal transfer of the Indian Ocean territory.

If ratified, the controversial deal will see the UK hand over ownership of the Indian Ocean territory to Mauritius and lease back the Diego Garcia military base on the archipelago.

“We are exploring legal avenues in the Chagos case,” Mr Ramgoolam told Defi Media, a local newspaper.

Mr Ramgoolam held ministerial talks earlier this week over the perceived delay in implementing the agreement. The meeting raised concerns that “there is no visibility as to when this [ratification] would occur”.

Mauritius is planning to sue Britain over delays in ratifying the Chagos Islands deal.

Navin Ramgoolam, the island nation’s prime minister, said his government had begun consulting international law firms while they await the formal transfer of the Indian Ocean territory.

If ratified, the controversial deal will see the UK hand over ownership of the Indian Ocean territory to Mauritius and lease back the Diego Garcia military base on the archipelago.

“We are exploring legal avenues in the Chagos case,” Mr Ramgoolam told Defi Media, a local newspaper.


The delay has unsettled Mauritian officials because the treaty formed a central element of their diplomatic strategy and economic planning.

The deal was thrown into confusion last month when Hamish Falconer, a foreign office minister, said Britain was “pausing” the process during discussions with the US.

The Government denied this was the case, but the deal is still undergoing ratification in the House of Commons and is under intense scrutiny following Donald Trump’s criticisms this week.

The US president told The Telegraph he was “very disappointed” in Sir Keir Starmer for blocking the US military from using the Diego Garcia base on the Chagos Islands to launch his strikes on Iran

Under the proposed agreement, the UK would provide an initial annual fee of around £170m to Mauritius, and total payments would amount to £35bn in cash terms over the next century, which Mauritius is planning to use to prop up its ailing public finances.

“We will have to find Rs 10 billion (£170m). We are exploring all possible avenues, but clearly the 2026-27 budget will not be an easy one,” said Mr Ramgoolam.

A senior Mauritian foreign affairs official told The Telegraph: “There is no doubt there has been, and there still, is an inordinate delay in the finalisation of the treaty after the signature of the agreement last May.

“Mauritius has always been on the right side of the law and consistently played according to the rule of law, hence the declaration of the PM.

“Small states like Mauritius have only international law and multilateral organisations to fall back on and have always favoured the diplomatic avenue to resolve issues. We are respectful of the law and will always abide by it notwithstanding provocative remarks.”

Last month, The Telegraph revealed that UK government officials expected Mauritius to launch a legal challenge if the deal collapses entirely under pressure from Mr Trump.

Ministers are concerned that Mauritius may attempt to immediately recoup much of the £35bn to be paid under the terms of the deal over the next century.

The island nation has previously successfully sued the UK over the Chagos Islands at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), using Sir Keir’s friend Philippe Sands KC as legal counsel.

The Mauritius move is the latest push-back to the Prime Minister’s plans to cede sovereignty of the islands.

The legal threat follows similar threats from the Maldives, which on Saturday told The Telegraph it was “exploring options” for a legal challenge to the Chagos deal.

The Maldives asserts a territorial claim over the archipelago, which it believes supersedes the claim made by its Mauritian neighbours.

A Maldives foreign office spokesman said that Britain’s plans were not “adequately grounded in international legal principles”.

The formal legal challenge would be most likely to be made at the International Court of Justice, Maldivian officials said.

It is the latest stumbling block for the Prime Minister’s plans, which now hang in the balance after Mr Trump said the Chagos Islands “should not be taken away from the UK”.

The US president has previously called Britain’s plans an act of “great stupidity”, although he has changed his stance on the issue on several occasions.

It is understood the UK cannot go ahead with the deal without the blessing of the US, which operates the Diego Garcia military base jointly with Britain.

As with the current conflict in the Middle East, the US needs approval from the UK before launching any attack from Diego Garcia.

Native Chagossians are also attempting to establish a permanent settlement in their ancestral homeland on one of the archipelago’s uninhabited islands.

Misley Mandarin, the Chagossian first minister and three other islanders currently based there will be able to stay on Île du Coin until at least March 13.

On paywall at https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-ne...paign=DM847822

[Carth]

Just hand the keys over for nothing, let Trump deal with them about the air base.


. . . alternatively hand them the islands with the proviso it's used to house our unwanted immigrants

[Sephiroth]

Yes - the "alternatively" would be a reasonable compromise.