Defend Truth


The UK seems ready to return its so-called ‘last British colony in Africa’

The UK seems ready to return its so-called ‘last British colony in Africa’
A group of Chagossians demand to be able to return to their islands in 2019 during Pope Francis’ visit to Mauritius, where they were forcibly transported by Britain (Photo: EPA-EFE / Dai Kurokawa)

Aggrieved Chagossians must be heard in negotiations between the UK and Mauritius about who owns the Chagos Archipelago in the Indian Ocean. The issues hark back to a series of deals involving the UK, Mauritius and the US, where Chagossians were forcibly removed from Diego Garcia island and the archipelago.

Could the protracted dispute over the Chagos Islands in the Indian Ocean finally be drawing to a close? Britain steadfastly insisted for decades that it was the rightful owner of what it called the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT). 

But it did an apparent about-turn on 3 November 2022 when Foreign Secretary James Cleverly announced that the UK had entered negotiations with Mauritius “on the exercise of sovereignty” over the “Chagos Archipelago/BIOT” and that it expected a resolution early in 2023.

The Chagos Archipelago comprises more than 60 islands in the Indian Ocean about 2,000km north of Mauritius – and only about 1,000km south of the Maldives. Yet it was once part of what was then the British colony of Mauritius – until 1965 when departing Britain, in effect, purchased it from Mauritius, just before the latter’s independence in 1968.

London did this to allow the US to build a military base on the largest Chagos island, Diego Garcia. Washington required that not only Diego Garcia, but the whole archipelago, be uninhabited by locals. And Britain obliged – reportedly in exchange for a $14-million discount on US Polaris missiles – by forcibly removing all the Chagossians to Mauritius, Seychelles and the UK. 

Agitating for a return home

Aggrieved Chagossians have been agitating ever since to be allowed to return to their homes. They also want to be financially supported to do so, and to receive reparations for having been deprived of their homeland for more than 50 years. 

A Human Rights Watch (HRW) report published last month accused the UK and US of having committed “crimes against humanity” against the Chagos people. They called on them to launch full and fair investigations of those responsible. 

The report, which calls Chagos “the last British colony in Africa”, notes that the UK has, over the years, made small amounts of compensation to some Chagossians resettled in Mauritius. However it says it hasn’t nearly compensated all the displaced islanders fully for the injustices they suffered – and should do so now. 

Britain has so far been swimming against the international tide. The International Court of Justice on 25 February 2019 and UN General Assembly Resolution 73/295 were clear that the Chagos Archipelago formed an integral part of the territory of Mauritius. Britain rejected the court’s opinion, and the General Assembly resolution demanding it abandons Chagos by November 2019, incurring condemnation from Mauritius, the African Union and others. 

Change of heart?

Now London seems to have had a change of heart, though the contents and progress of the negotiations remain secret. However, many questions remain, mostly concerning possible differences between the interests of Mauritius and those of the Chagossians. 

Mauritian MP Muhammad Reza Uteem of the opposition Mouvement Militant Mauricien told ISS Today he believed the UK planned to hold a referendum among the scattered Chagossians. It would ask them if they wanted the Chagos Archipelago to remain British, to be returned to Mauritius, or to become independent. Mauritius flatly rejected such a referendum, he said, as its sovereignty over Chagos was “non-negotiable”.

Yet he conceded that perhaps most Chagossians would, if offered such a choice, opt to remain part of Britain simply because the UK had more resources to offer. 


Visit Daily Maverick’s home page for more news, analysis and investigations


Milan Meetarbhan, a constitutional expert and former Mauritian ambassador to the UN who was previously part of Mauritius’s legal team arguing this issue, told ISS Today that there had been no official mention of such a referendum. He suggested that the UK might have floated the possibility as leverage in the negotiations.

Nevertheless he did say that Mauritius was reluctant to use the term “Chagos people” – as HRW very explicitly does in its report – as that implied that the Chagossians had a right to independence. Asked if there were significant differences between the interests of Mauritius and those of the Chagossians in this matter, he suggested that there was no single Chagossian interest as the community had become so divided. He said many Chagossians seemed to have settled there. 

Some of those in Mauritius might wish to return to Chagos, but Meetarbhan wondered if this was a viable option. “I don’t really see them parting ways with the government of Mauritius. [Although] this has been a very strong political and emotional issue, I don’t really see this new generation who have lived in a totally different [world] would want to go back and start from scratch, because there is no economic activity at all on the other islands of the archipelago (other than Diego Garcia). But I can understand why they have always been asking for it. It’s a genuine interest.” 

Differences over Diego Garcia

There are also differences between Mauritius and the Chagossians over the Diego Garcia issue. Mauritius has made it clear that if it regained the Chagos Archipelago, it would be prepared to extend America’s lease over its military base. But it has also suggested that though the Chagossians would be allowed to return to the other islands of the archipelago, this would not include Diego Garcia. Those originally from that island have insisted that they should enjoy the right to return there.

Meetarbhan believes the UK may be aiming to resolve the sovereignty dispute with Mauritius as part of a broader security framework for that strategic part of the Indian Ocean. He notes that in his 3 November 2022 statement, Cleverly, for the first time, recognised India’s interest in the issue, also adding a security dimension. He said an agreement would allow the UK and Mauritius to significantly strengthen their cooperation on Indian Ocean security, working with key regional allies.

Wrapping a return of the Chagos Archipelago to Mauritius in this broader security package that includes the US and India could be a face-saving tactic for London to avoid looking like it was backing down, Meetarbhan suggested. And to avoid setting a precedent for similar situations in the Falklands and Gibraltar.

It could also act as a cover for Mauritius having given away territory to the US – and to India, to which Mauritius seems to have secretly ceded the Agalega islands 1,000km to the north – for military purposes. Uteem suggests India is being roped in as an ally of Mauritius to strengthen its claim against the Maldives on its maritime jurisdiction over the waters around the Chagos islands.

It’s clear that the interests of Mauritius and the Chagossians don’t entirely align. So HRW’s insistence that the Chagossians must be fully consulted in the negotiations about the future of their homeland is valid. 

Yet Cleverly’s statement – though mentioning that the aim of the negotiations will be “to resolve all outstanding issues, including those relating to the former inhabitants of the Chagos Archipelago” – also makes clear they are not part of the formal negotiations. 

The putative referendum Uteem refers to may not be the way to seek their opinions. However it’s hard to justify not bringing the Chagossians more formally into the negotiations. They are, after all, the main aggrieved party in this sorry saga. 

Peter Fabricius, Consultant, Institute for Security Studies (ISS) Pretoria.

First published by ISS Today


Comments - Please in order to comment.

  • Ron Ron says:

    I wonder how many Chagossians there actually are – it seems that there would be tourism opportunities that would be quite compelling, but would compromise the US base…

  • Carsten Rasch says:

    The Chagossians are Creoles of African descent, and the government of Mauritius is primarily of Indian descent. The importance of Mauritius – and why it has been colonised by the Dutch, the French and the British – is its strategic geographical position in the Indian Ocean, and who controls the passage of traffic from SE Asia to Europe. Presently it is France (through Reunion) and the US, possible being joined by India, although there is a lot of public opposition – mainly Creole but not only – of the ceding of the archipelago to them. China is chomping at the bit to get a foothold. What happens here is of major geopolitcal importance.

Please peer review 3 community comments before your comment can be posted


This article is free to read.

Sign up for free or sign in to continue reading.

Unlike our competitors, we don’t force you to pay to read the news but we do need your email address to make your experience better.

Nearly there! Create a password to finish signing up with us:

Please enter your password or get a sign in link if you’ve forgotten

Open Sesame! Thanks for signing up.

We would like our readers to start paying for Daily Maverick...

…but we are not going to force you to. Over 10 million users come to us each month for the news. We have not put it behind a paywall because the truth should not be a luxury.

Instead we ask our readers who can afford to contribute, even a small amount each month, to do so.

If you appreciate it and want to see us keep going then please consider contributing whatever you can.

Support Daily Maverick→
Payment options