In 2015, a group of American and Canadian tourists arrived in Addu, the southernmost atoll in the Republic of Maldives, seeking to visit some of the most remote islands in the world – Peros Banhos atoll in the Chagos archipelago, 250 miles away. But they never made it. 

Within a few hours of sailing south, the adventurers found themselves surrounded by helicopters and military vessels. The Maldives National Defense Force (MNDF) escorted the group back to Addu, accusing them of “activities that could harm the Maldives’ interests and reputation abroad.” At the time of this ill-judged journey, the tourists’ boat had been heading into U.K. waters, known as the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT), home of the secretive U.S.-U.K. base on the island of Diego Garcia. 

Last month, as a group of British visitors attempted to make the same journey – this time setting out from Sri Lanka – they headed into even murkier waters. But they were no day-trippers. The four U.K.-based Chagos Islanders sailed into a region now legally recognized as belonging to Mauritius, and contested by the Maldives, in order to reach Île du Coin, the island they had been forcefully evicted from more than half a century before. This time, the visitors reached Peros Banhos, waving flags of the United States and the BIOT while sporting “Make Britain Great Again” baseball caps. They have vowed never to leave again.

The group were soon followed by the U.K.’s Reform Party leader Nigel Farage, who flew 6,000 miles to stand on the Addu shoreline and accuse the U.K. of blocking his journey down to the Chagos while railing against what he considers its “surrender” of the territory. As the Île du Coin islanders unpacked amid the gravestones and decaying churches of their ancestors, U.S. President Donald Trump took to Truth Social to offer some gentle advice to U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer: “DO NOT GIVE AWAY DIEGO GARCIA.”

Justice Delayed…

The BIOT had been created in 1965 as the U.K. sought to accommodate U.S. military ambitions in the region while winding down its colonies “East of Suez,” including its base in Addu. As British officials negotiated with Mauritian leaders prior to the country’s independence in 1968, the Chagos archipelago – 1,300 miles from the Mauritian capital of Port Louis – was carved off, with compensation of 3 million pounds and the promise it would be returned when no longer needed for defense purposes. With worldwide support for self-determination growing, the U.K. lied to the United Nations, saying the 2,000 Chagossians were not permanent inhabitants, just contract laborers in the atolls’ copra plantations.

By the early 1980s, with the United States firmly ensconced at Diego Garcia on the southeast of the atoll, Mauritius began to raise legal objections to the arrangement, suggesting it had been forced to cede the territory under duress. Meanwhile, the Chagossian diaspora, scattered across the U.K., Mauritius, and Seychelles, lobbied for their right to return. This pressure culminated in an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 2019, soon backed by the U.N. General Assembly, that the U.K. should return the Chagos Islands to complete the decolonization of Mauritius. After insisting it was not obliged to follow, and denying Mauritian sovereignty claims, the U.K. entered into bilateral negotiations in 2022 to resolve the issue while securing continued use of the base. 

The final treaty, announced two years later, agreed upon the return of the Chagos Islands to the Government of Mauritius, with the U.K. taking out a 99-year lease on Diego Garcia that will allow the U.S. military presence to continue. For this, the U.K. agreed to pay Mauritius around 100 million pounds a year. For the Chagossians, 40 million pounds was granted to a Mauritian-administered trust fund. Having already expressed regret, without apology, for the brutal eviction of the islanders, the U.K. said Mauritius was free to begin resettlement on any island but Diego Garcia, though the deal does not include the legal right to return long demanded by Chagossians. 

Mauritian Prime Minister Navin Ramgoolam hailed the deal as one that “completes the process of decolonization.” His U.K. counterpart Keir Starmer said it was needed to guarantee the future of the base while avoiding a potentially binding legal judgement in the future. The text specifies that the U.S. and U.K. will maintain unrestricted access to the entire archipelago and that the U.K. will make joint decisions on the presence of third-country security or maritime installations there. Though the U.N. has altered its maps to reflect Mauritian sovereignty and the Universal Postal Union has cancelled its BIOT stamps, the treaty has yet to receive parliamentary approval in either nation required for final ratification.  

“A Big Mistake”?

Despite negotiations having begun under a Conservative Party administration, the U.K. political opposition has attacked the deal on financial and legal grounds. It has accused the Labor government of exaggerating the BIOT’s legal jeopardy, saying the agreement will allow China to ramp up spy operations in the Chagos. The right-wing think tank Policy Exchange has suggested the treaty will create a “vacuum” allowing China to build on its growing economic influence in Mauritius. Opponents of the deal have also accused Mauritius of “weaponizing” Chagossians to secure a deal that will almost double the cash-strapped country’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ).

Despite this criticism, the United States had appeared satisfied with the treaty, which last year received the blessing of the U.S. State Department in spite of reports that U.K. opposition – including Farage – were lobbying Trump against the handover. Having previously indicated support for the deal, Trump’s failure to annex Greenland in January, along with his preparations for war with Iran, led him to turn against it, describing it as an “act of great stupidity” and “a big mistake.” 

His open objections followed the U.K.’s initial reluctance to allow Diego Garcia to be used for the legally questionable attack on Tehran. Trump complained that Diego Garcia would be needed to support operations in the Middle East, as it was during the 2003 invasion of Iraq. He suggested that the U.S. would continue to use the base regardless of who was claiming sovereignty.

Just as Trump’s outburst re-energized opponents of the deal in the U.K., back in the Maldives, President Mohamed Muizzu has seized on the controversy to push disputes both old and new. The Maldives had previously taken a neutral view on the question of Chagossian sovereignty, with its main concern being the delimitation of its maritime border with Mauritius. Muizzu had already vowed to revisit the 2023 ruling by the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) but has added an unprecedented claim for Maldivian sovereignty over the Chagos Islands. As he sent the MNDF to patrol waters the ITLOS awarded to Mauritius, Port Louis announced it was suspending diplomatic ties with the Maldives. 

Chaos in the Chagos

The repercussions of Trump’s intervention are yet to be fully realized. The immediate cause of his ire – Starmer’s refusal to allow the U.S. to use Diego Garcia for operations in Iran – has receded as the U.K. reframed operations against Tehran as defensive in nature. 

The Labor government appears to have paused the legislation required to enact the treaty with Mauritius, while the opposition maintains the U.K. is under no legal obligation to formally hand over the territory. As Chagossians await a High Court decision on the legality of the deal, for which they say they were not consulted, the diaspora will recall how the launch of the U.S. “war on terror” more than two decades ago canceled out previous legal progress made toward resettlement, as described by Philippe Sands in his book “The Last Colony.” 

For security in the Indian Ocean, Trump’s blunt assertion that nobody can physically prevent the U.S. from using its own base makes it clear that continued U.S. military presence is not in question. Paranoia surrounding Chinese encroachment in the region is hard to quantify – its Belt and Road Initiative has resulted in significant investment in both Mauritius and its new rival, the Maldives, but India remains a major counterbalance that small island states are only too happy to exploit. Of note, India has long supported Mauritian sovereignty alongside the U.S. base.

Opponents of Mauritian sovereignty suggest China’s “maritime militia” – civilian vessels passing information to the People’s Liberation Army Navy – will gain access to the Chagos Islands or that more curious “tourists” could infiltrate Diego Garcia. India has already made arrangements with the island nation to help patrol its expanded EEZ. 

For the ongoing process of decolonization, these 11th-hour threats to the treaty expose the limits of international law, particularly in the face of a U.S. president who seems intent on tearing up the rules-based order upon which smaller actors rely. Despite overwhelming legal opposition to the BIOT’s existence, some opponents of the deal have suggested the U.K. use get-out clauses in the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea. Others feel the U.S. could veto the deal via its original agreement with the U.K. Both arguments would be fiercely challenged, but could be used to justify the status quo should the embattled Starmer abandon his ideological commitments in favor of political pragmatism. 

For the beachhead of settlers on Île du Coin, tired of relying on abstract legal arguments or geopolitical theories to secure their return, they currently await the decision of the U.K. courts, which have temporarily blocked the government from evicting them all over again. Undoubtedly aware of their exploitation by larger powers, all Chagossians will be hoping that renewed public focus on their 60-year fight for justice can overrule the ruthlessness of realpolitik.