Chagos Conundrum: Britain's last African Colony

Despite all else going in, it will not have escaped attentions that ten days ago the UK said it will cede sovereignty of Chagos to Mauritius. Why does this matter?

Sensationally described as ‘Britain’s last African Colony’, the Chagos saga brings together captivating themes of post-colonial justice and Anglo-American power projection in the Indian Ocean. 

I reflected on the UK’s announcement on 3 October to cede sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago to Mauritius in a short piece for Chatham House. I encourage you to read it. Entitled ‘The UK must focus on how the Chagos decision is implemented to gain its benefits and minimize risks’, my piece concludes: 

‘The decision on Chagos shows that the UK government understands a need for new thinking on how to preserve the more remote outposts of British influence…even as attention now swiftly turns to the details of the agreement, the safeguarding of the base at Diego Garcia, and the long-term welfare of the Chagossians.

To ensure the implementation of the agreement is carefully handled, the UK should work with Mauritius to consult the different parts of Chagossian society over their needs and wishes to return [and] the UK must adequately resource its threat assessments around Chinese activity in the Indian Ocean, so that strategic implications are fully understood.’

There is a tricky balance being struck between matters of colonial justice, international law, and strategic power. 

Critics of the deal in the UK (and there have been many) focus on the apparent blow to British prestige (that ship had long-since sailed over the Chagos issue). The critics also draw a mental comparison with Chinese influence building activities in the distant South China Sea and South Pacific. 

But when it comes to the Indian Ocean, surely we should be monitoring and responding to  future  Chinese activity anyway? The Chagos sovereignty decision itself does not change the long-term strategic equation.

In this much less Western-dominated era, it is not only Chinese but also Indian power that will play increasing roles in these regions. Hence, the long-term view of the UK as a parter to India in the Indian Ocean is also part of the equation.

Pretending time can be frozen is the bigger strategic liability.

The Chagos saga

In a modern history defined by European maritime empires, Mauritius kept changing hands. It passed through Portuguese, Dutch and French phases, the latter starting in 1710 when it became known as ‘Isle de France’. 

A century later, British imperial forces evicted the French in 1810. Four years later, it officially became a British colony at the Treaty of Paris (May 1814), during the twilight of the Napoleonic Wars. It ceased being Isle de France and became Mauritius. 

This was all part of Britain’s nineteenth century consolidation of power in the Indian Ocean. The British were happy to grab Mauritius, from where France had launched naval raids against British merchant shipping.

In addition, the tiny Chagos Islands, as well the Seychelles (also grabbed from France), were administered by Britain as dependencies of Colonial Mauritius. So it remained into the 20th century.

By the time the fabulously named Sir Hilary Randolph Robert Blood was the colonial administrator of Mauritius in the 1950s, the British were still confident of consolidating their colonial rule in Africa, even if colonies elsewhere were slipping out of its grasp. But by 1965, the British colonial illusion in Africa was over. Mauritius gained its independence that year.

And here is where the modern scandal begins. In concert with the US, the UK prised the Chagos islands apart and kept them, rather than give them to newly-independent Mauritius. Chagos was now ruled as the ‘British Indian Territories’. 

The strategic prize was the military base the UK now ran with the USA on Diego Garcia, one of the Chagos atolls. Here is a archive picture (courtesy of Getty Images) of US military aircraft using the Diego Garcia airstrip during the 9/11 wars. The base will now be leased from Mauritius under the deal, so it is not going anywhere.

Which brings us to the parallel saga that has unfolded for decades, of a displaced people, a colonial remnant, and a strategic military base. 

The Chagossians and legal challenges to the UK

The Chagossians were forced to leave by the British and ended up scattered, some in the Mauritus and others later in the UK. Although not a vast population, the singularity of the injustice served to the Chagossians is breathtaking. 

The writer and international lawyer Philippe Sands authored a short book entitled ‘The Last Colony’. I listened to the audiobook which was presented rather oddly like a radio play with different narrators. Including one female narrator who liked doing impressions of the world leaders she was quoting.

This aside, I commend to you the book because Sands reviews past cases brought against the UK and successive British responses. Including the initial UK move after 1965 to pay £3 million to Mauritius as compensation for loss of sovereignty over Chagos. In the 1970s,  another £650,000 was made available for ‘the resettlement of persons displaced’, as Sands recounts. The payments were meant to be ‘in full and final discharge of Britain’s obligations’.

Some funds reached the Chagossians in the 1970s and 1980s, including to buy homes for some Chagossians living in Mauritius. So it would be wrong to describe the UK as totally negligent — just as it would be incorrect to ignore the fact that the UK had already worked with Mauritius around the Chagossians, given that last week the UK now committed to a ‘trust fund’ to assist the Chagossians further. 

But the issue never went away, and for many Chagossians, nor did the trauma of their forced eviction and severance of links to their ancestral territory. As Sands points out: 

“over time, feelings of injustice ferment, and channels must be found to direct the energies that are produced. Litigation is one such channel”.

This is good for keeping lawyers in business, but one must hope that the decision to cede sovereignty now brings meaningful material and emotional benefit to the Chagossians. Many of the originally displaced will have died or reached old age, but never underestimate the power of such wrongs to harm future generations. 

World Opinion 

Sands makes a great deal in the latter part of his book around the UK’s international reputation suffering on to the issue in the Global South. The UK struggled to get widespread international support for its position on the Chagos (aside from the USA, Australia, and other close allies). 

In the court of global opinion, time was running out for the UK. In 2019, the UN Genera Assembly delivered this astonishing verdict: 

“The General Assembly adopted a resolution today welcoming a 25 February 2019 International Court of Justice advisory opinion on the legal consequences of separating the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965, demanding that the UK unconditionally withdraw its colonial administration from the area within six months.

By a recorded vote of 116 in favour, to 6 against (Australia, Hungary, Israel, Maldives, UK, US), with 56 abstentions, the Assembly affirmed that doing so… would enable Mauritius to complete the decolonization of its territory as soon as possible. Since the decolonization of Mauritius was not conducted in a manner consistent with the right to self-determination, the Assembly affirmed, the continued administration of the Archipelago constitutes a wrongful act.”

The episode shows how opinion can turn in this Westless era. 

It is incumbent on the still-powerful Western countries to modernise their global stances for the modern age, if for no other reason than the self-interest of acting in harmony with its dominant characteristics. 

For more on these deeper trends

If you haven’t already picked up my book, it is currently on promo at Amazon UK for £16. And do listen to this fabulous podcast I participated in, which has nearly 11k listens: