UK Puts Chagos Islands Deal on Hold to Avoid “Toxic Backlash”
Downing Street has delayed plans to hand over the Chagos Island to Mauritius, amid fears of a “toxic backlash” from Labour MPs over the cost of the multi-billion pound settlement. The Times has the story.
Senior Government sources said an agreement with Mauritius was “ready to sign” after President Trump lifted US objections to the plan in February.
But No 10 has put the deal on hold amid concerns that it will result in a “toxic” political backlash at a time when Labour MPs are being asked to vote for welfare cuts.
Ministers have refused to reveal the final cost of the deal, but the figure is understood to be in the region of £90 million a year for the next century.
At the point at which the agreement is signed ministers will have to publish details of the financial settlement, which aides to Starmer fear will fuel a backbench rebellion over the Government’s welfare reforms.
The Times understands that up to 170 MPs have privately warned ministers that they could vote against the plans or abstain in a vote next month on the measures, which are due to cut £5 billion from the welfare bill.
One source said that senior political figures in Downing Street had successfully argued internally that it was politically “toxic” to sign the Chagos deal while trying to justify the need to cut welfare spending.
“They know that they’re going to be attacked by the Tories and Reform for giving up sovereignty of the Chagos islands but it makes it much worse if they’re also being attacked from their own side,” they said.
“The deal is ready to go but Downing Street is refusing to give it the green light.”
Another source said that the Foreign Office and Starmer’s national security advisor Jonathan Powell, who negotiated the deal, were still pushing for him to sign it but were facing an uphill struggle.
“Everyone on the political side has overreacted to the local election results,” they said.
“There is a huge reluctance to do anything that could be controversial.”
A third source said: “I don’t think we’ll be hearing about Chagos for a while. They want to take the sting out of it.”
Worth reading in full.
Meanwhile, Mauritius has sparked fresh security fears over the deal after announcing it would seek a closer relationship with China. From the Telegraph:
The Chinese ambassador to Mauritius said she supported “deepening full-fledged exchanges and co-operation between China and Mauritius” after a meeting with the country’s Prime Minister on Thursday. …
The Foreign Office says it has no security concerns about leasing the Diego Garcia military base from Mauritius, and insists that the deal will contain security guarantees to prevent Chinese influence.
But the meeting provoked fury from Dame Priti Patel, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, who said it showed Sir Keir had endangered British and American interests by signing away the islands.
“This is exactly what we have been warning the Government of from the very start,” she told the Telegraph.
“Fuelled by their endless sense of shame about our great country, and their Leftist decolonising ideologies, Labour have rushed to surrender our own sovereign territory, with zero consideration of who might benefit from this shameful giveaway.
“It is clear Labour are far more concerned with kowtowing to Beijing to recognise the threat that China poses to our interests, and this shoddy affair is yet another example. When Labour negotiates, Britain loses.”
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Can someone remind us why they are so desperate to offload these islands? They look quite a nice place to take a seaside holiday from the photo? Is it to tick a ‘former empire disassembly’ box or something equally stupid?
A so-called international court has decreed that the former French colony Isle de France (conquered during the 7 years war) which has absolutely no ties to these islands ought to get them because they’re presently British. As the transbrit Charmless and his gang of lawyers want British people to believe in the fiction called “international law”, ie, reject the notion of sovereign states and especially, that of a sovereign United Kingdom, they must obey this decision to remain in character.
For an amusing extra-twist, the remnants of the native population who got ethnically cleansed away for “security” of the military installations are still trying to get the permission to move back there. There are no plans to ever allow this to happen. As they’re not a country, the can’t sue the UK in so-called international courts and hence, Charmless & gang couldn’t care less about their petty desires.
This is a deal which really falls through in every aspect: The UK loses a valuable territory, pays a principally hostile foreign power for this privilege and intentionally avoids righting a historical wrong because this is not about justice but just about trampling on England.
Valuable territory – I wonder? Looks more like a sitting duck to me! It’s a relief to hear that at least some Members of this mindlessly naïve government are at last waking up to this massive confidence trick being played on them by the Chief Dalek. This tiny island, stuck way out in the middle of a huge open sea – does he really imagine that an enemy determined to neutralize this minuscule piece of real estate would be completely unable to eliminate a military base there? The fashionable meat-grinder form of warfare has become entirely obsolete in today’s high-tech form of conflict. Get real, Starmer. Why do you think that President Trump decided to let this moronic ‘deal’ go through? Or is thinking not one of your strong points? (Answers on a postage stamp, please) It would only take a single successful penetration of its defences by a hypersonic nuclear missile (from swarm of them, if necessary), and the whole place would become Extaaarminated, permanently uninhabitable, a real maritime White Elephant. Its sole legacy and purpose would be to ensure that its derelict but legally permanent remains entitle its absentee landlord, Mauritius, to the permanent annual hand-out of millions… Read more »
Can you please wake me once Putin has transformed himself into an AI and thus, managed to win the war in Ukraine because computers just think better and much more modern than people? Or maybe, when the stupid buzzword hypersonic has managed to devise a meaning for itself which anyhow different from supersonic?
And even if we were minded to offload them, why pay to get rid of real estate. And why to Mauritus which has no historic connection with the islands and it is unable to defend them.
Even worse, Mauritus is best mates with a potential adversary in China.
Instead of a holiday resort, how about a camp for illegal immigrants. We could keep ours there pending return to their places of origin and cover the (low) costs through charges to other nations which also want to house their illegals offshore.
The latitude of the islands suggests a mild climate so no need for wind farms or solar panels (although both might do well there for intermittent high power output). Simple structures and minimal need for security. One island for the Sunnis and one for the Shiite. Another for all the rest.
Win – win.
What about letting the Chagos Islanders return – as British subjects – and telling the US military that it’s high time that it gets to grips with the existence of native people in some other way than a desire to relocate them elsewhere by force?
Brilliant idea!
I thought the logic of paying Mauritius was so that they could sustain a population on the Chagos Islands as it’s unlikely that such a place would be self sustaining. If none of the ex-islanders (or anyone else) is going there, I have no idea why we’d give them any money.
“the figure is understood to be in region of £90 million a year for the next century.” WTAF? Can I get in on some of this? Of course not – we’ll just be the ones it’s extorted from. FFS.
The only reason I can think of is Communist Starmer thinking of new ways to drain the lifeblood out of Britain: “The Marxist Redistribution of Wealth” to the Third World, who never did anything to deserve it.
Also, no one seems to have noticed that Starmer is ILLEGALLY trying to shackle British Taxpayers into
paying Ukraine FOR A WHOLE CENTURY, and shackle us into
paying Mauritius FOR A WHOLE CENTURY,
in outrageous violation of the law which states that:
NO PARLIAMENT CAN PASS ANY LAW BINDING A FUTURE PARLIAMENT.
He has NO RIGHT to lay such a tax burden upon our children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren for the next 100 years!!!
He really has gone off the deep end.
“Toxic backlash”???
Starmer has NO RIGHT to give away British Territory, and NO MANDATE FROM THE PUBLIC to do so!
It’s just the same insanity as if he decided to give Wales away to Russia, and pay Russia £billions to take it.
So why are we exactly paying them money?
Someone needs to get Powell out of Downing Street, He is behind all this.