Could the UK-Mauritius Chagos Islands Agreement be at Risk of Being Cancelled?
In October, the UK government announced it had finalized a deal to transfer sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, igniting controversy in both the UK and the US.
However, with a new government in Mauritius seemingly opposed to the agreement and the incoming Trump administration in the US firmly against the proposal, it is likely that the UK government may need to reconsider its stance.
The deal has raised eyebrows on both sides of the Atlantic because the Chagos Islands, a remote group of islands in the Indian Ocean that Mauritius has claimed for decades, hold significant strategic importance. The islands host a joint US-UK military base at Diego Garcia, crucial for countering Chinese influence in the region.
Under the deal announced in early October, the UK agreed to transfer complete sovereignty of the islands to Mauritius, including Diego Garcia, while also providing Mauritius with a financial support package. Nonetheless, the agreement stipulated that the UK would be permitted to continue operating its military base at Diego Garcia for an initial period of 99 years.
New Mauritian government expresses doubt
Following elections in Mauritius in November that resulted in a government change, the new Prime Minister Navinchandra Ramgoolam has raised questions about the transfer, stating he requires “more time to review the details with a panel of legal advisors.”
While Ramgoolam has not specified his reasons, he has implied that rushing such a significant deal so close to an election, which his predecessor was likely to lose, was inappropriate. During the election campaign, he accused his predecessor of “high treason” for agreeing to a “sell-out” deal that allowed Britain to maintain its base at Diego Garcia for another century.
However, a British foreign policy expert specializing in African issues, who wishes to remain anonymous due to previous positions in the UK government, suspects that Mauritius may be reconsidering the deal to steer clear of being entangled in geopolitical rivalries.
“The deal was hastily made without any consultation with the Chagossians, who apparently prefer not to see their islands under Mauritian governance. Facing the real costs and responsibilities of administering the Chagos Islands, the Mauritian government now appears hesitant to become enmeshed in US-Chinese tensions,” they explain.
UK’s rationale for the deal faces scrutiny
Proponents of the agreement viewed it as an opportunity to conclude the final vestiges of British colonialism in Africa, with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer stating it would “address historical injustices and demonstrate a commitment from both parties to support the welfare of Chagossians.”
The British government also saw the move as a means to “reset” its relationships with African nations and enhance broader African support for British foreign policy objectives, such as aiding Ukraine in its conflict with Russia.
Nonetheless, many analysts doubt that the Chagos Islands deal would achieve this goal. Alex Vines, who leads the Africa program at the Chatham House think tank in London, believes that “the Chagos Islands do not significantly influence the UK’s bilateral relations beyond the western Indian Ocean, particularly with Mauritius.”
The decision has also incited rage in some circles, with Edward Howell, a geopolitics lecturer at the University of Oxford, stating to African Business that “the choice to hand over the Chagos Islands to Mauritius is beneath contempt and amounts to a disaster for the UK’s foreign policy.”
The former UK government source contends that the Chagos Islands agreement illustrates a misguided approach by the new UK government in addressing African affairs.
“From an African perspective, there is minimal interest in culturally insensitive identity politics or naive gestures that reduce the UK’s effectiveness or influence as a bastion of security and liberal democracy,” they assert to African Business.
“The emerging African educated youth and burgeoning middle class seek relationships grounded in mutual respect, investment, and opportunities—not hollow apologies stemming from post-colonial guilt or signs of geopolitical frailty.”
The source notes that, from a British viewpoint, “reversing the Chagos Islands decision would be a favorable outcome.”
Incoming Trump team demonstrates hostility
Meanwhile, the incoming US administration of President Donald Trump, expected to implement a strongly anti-China stance, opposes the deal.
Critics worry that these strategically important islands could transform into a platform for Chinese influence in the Indian Ocean after the expiration of the US-UK military base’s 99-year lease, especially given Mauritius’ friendly relations with China.
Nigel Farage, a British MP closely associated with the Trump administration, told the House of Commons recently that the Chagos Islands deal would likely face “outright hostility” from the incoming president. Marco Rubio, Trump’s choice for Secretary of State, has also contended that the deal undermines US security.
The former UK government source is highly critical.
“The incoming US Republican administration perceives this as an act of strategic folly from a UK ally that has already faltered in Iraq and Afghanistan, overstepping its bounds and then recklessly dismantling some of the world’s most capable armed forces amid growing global risks.”