The recent agreement between the United Kingdom and Mauritius regarding the Chagos Islands has reignited discussions of historical injustices and the rights of the Chagossian people. This agreement, which allows Mauritius to regain sovereignty over the islands, while the UK maintains control of Diego Garcia—home to a critical military base—has been heavily scrutinised by human rights advocates and the affected communities.

According to a panel of independent experts appointed by the UN Human Rights Council, the ongoing presence of the UK military base on Diego Garcia fundamentally obstructs the Chagossian community’s ability to exercise their cultural rights. This assertion stems from the traumatic history of forced displacement when the UK cleared the islands in the late 1960s to establish the military facility, an operation that saw roughly 2,000 Chagossians forcibly removed to Mauritius and Seychelles, or relocated to the UK. The panel urged for a suspension of the current agreement, emphasising the need for a new negotiation that prioritises the rights of those displaced.

The recent deal, inked on October 3, 2024, following years of legal battles and international pressure, provides Mauritius with sovereignty over the islands, but controversially excludes Diego Garcia from this transfer. Human Rights Watch has detailed inadequacies in compensation for the displaced Chagossians, many of whom yearn to return to their ancestral homes. Critics argue that despite purported progress in the negotiations, such as provisions for environmental protection, the deal perpetuates a cycle of injustice by failing to guarantee the right of return to those who were removed from their lands decades ago.

Reactions from Chagossian communities have been overwhelmingly negative. As highlighted by representatives of Chagossian Voices, a group advocating for the rights of the exiled islanders, there is significant disappointment that their perspectives were not adequately represented during negotiations. Their calls for full inclusion in the treaty drafting process reflect an ongoing struggle for recognition and restoration of rights that were stripped away in the 20th century.

While the UK government has attempted to justify its military presence on Diego Garcia by citing security concerns and strategic interests in the Indian Ocean, there is considerable apprehension over how this agreement may influence regional geopolitics. Some critics suggest that the concessions to Mauritius—though seen as steps towards rectifying colonial wrongs—could inadvertently increase Chinese influence in the region, due to Mauritius’s growing ties with Beijing. This has triggered backlash not only within the UK but also amongst international allies, who may view the deal as destabilising.

Historically, the Chagos Islands were separated from Mauritius in 1965 when they were ceded to Britain by France, setting off a series of legal and political battles for sovereignty that continue to this day. The case exemplifies the complex interplay of colonial history, international law, and human rights in the context of decolonisation and awaits further discourse as the rights and grievances of the Chagossian people remain largely unaddressed.

The recent announcements have undoubtedly introduced renewed hope for some in the Chagossian community, but others remain sceptical, questioning how genuine the commitment to their right of return truly is. As the narrative unfolds, the situation serves as a poignant reminder of the sacrifices borne by the Chagossians, whose identity and heritage have been deeply intertwined with the islands from which they were forcibly removed.

📌 Reference Map:

Source: Noah Wire Services