• Starmer’s deal seeks to bolster Labour’s foreign policy while balancing British security interests in the archipelago.
• The UK faces migration and security challenges in Diego Garcia, complicating political and diplomatic negotiations.
• Mauritius and U.S. leadership changes halt Chagos handover, as Trump and Ramgoolam reassess the agreement.

Why is Keir Starmer’s heat level COLD?

Answer: Newly-elected leaders of Mauritius and the U.S. re-opened negotiations after the agreement reached in October.

On October 3rd 2024, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s cabinet announced its decision to transfer the Chagos archipelago and its 58 islands covering roughly 640,000 km² of ocean to Mauritius, effectively ending the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT) nearly 60 years after its creation.

In the context of the Cold War, these islands were detached from Mauritius in 1965 by request of the U.S. to transform the archipelago into a strategic asset co-managed by both allies. To protect the military base established in Diego Garcia, the archipelago’s largest atoll, Chagossians living on the islands were shortly after forcibly relocated to Mauritius and the Seychelles.

Starmer’s agreement guarantees British and American control over Diego Garcia’s base under a 99-year lease and acknowledges the right to return of its former indigenous inhabitants. The decision comes after almost two years of negotiations, starting under Conservative PM Rishi Sunak and reaching a breakthrough under the recently-elected Labour cabinet.

Conversely to the previous cabinet, the deal’s materialisation warmed Starmer’s push for an alternative British foreign policy centred around securing British strategic interests while enhancing cooperation with the Global South.

But unexpected election results in Mauritius and the U.S. have frozen the handover. In the neighbouring archipelago, a last-minute scandal prior to the voting led opposition leader Navin Ramgoolam to victory, while on January 20th Trump officially returned to the White House. 

London currently waits for an official response from the newly elected American executive, while Ramgoolam has expressed reticence and requested an independent review of the deal with the presence of a representative of the newly-elected American administration.

What is changing Keir Starmer’s heat level?

Answer:  The deal’s implementation put Starmer at a crossroads between prioritizing British security autonomy and the transatlantic alliance.

Beijing signed a free-trade agreement with Mauritius in 2021, an event portrayed by right-wing media outlets as proof of the archipelago’s diplomatic drift towards the East.  Across the Atlantic, U.S. Republicans feared that the deal on Chagos threatened military operations in Diego Garcia. 
 

Conversely, improving relations with China is part of Starmer’s alternative foreign policy. For the Labour PM, the security concern is in reality embedded in the archipelago itself. In 2021, 84 Sri Lankan nationals arrived on Chagos, fleeing persecution in a fishing boat. 

When the BIOT commissioner attempted to deport them, they contested the decision in the BIOT Supreme Court. Local authorities withdrew the case, opting to individually assess each protection claim instead. Since then, dozens of migrants have sought asylum in the United Kingdom. 

But Diego Garcia is ill-prepared to receive migrants, driving a humanitarian crisis in the atoll. Self-harm attempts and reports of sexual assault led the former commissioner of the BIOT to request London to accept these migrants. 

Although the previous conservative cabinet claimed that the 1951 Refugee Convention does not apply in the overseas territory, 64 asylum seekers remain stranded amid the legal deadlock three years later. 

For Starmer, handing over the archipelago means closing a potential new backdoor migration route in British soil. However, the current uncertainty over the agreement has only worsened the situation and distress of Chagossians.

What is driving Keir Starmer?

Answer: The agreement is part of Starmer’s alternative foreign policy aimed at appealing to a disenchanted electorate and potential new allies.

For decades, human rights groups have advocated for the right to return of Chagossians, but British authorities have rejected these demands on various grounds, including the prioritisation of maritime security interests or the conservation effort on the Maritime Protected Area (MPA) established in 2010.

The dispute over Chagos is also one of a legal nature. In 2015, the Permanent Court of Arbitration ruled in an inter-state proceeding claimed by Mauritius that the MPA is unlawful as it was not in accordance with the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea. 

Four years later, the International Court of Justice requested the United Kingdom in an advisory opinion to end the BIOT and complete its decolonisation. Finally, the Tribunal for the Law of the Sea added in 2021 that Mauritius held the right to the sovereignty of Chagos. 

For Keir Starmer, the resolution of a pressing international dispute reaffirms his legacy as a human rights lawyer at the European Court of Human Rights and as director of public prosecutions in the UK. Prior to his election, he promised a fundamental shift in British foreign policy, from conservative realism to becoming a proponent of a rules-based order.

In this new role for the UK, Starmer aims to defuse London’s relations with the Global South and foster a commitment to international law. The agreement also comes at a time when the UK is pursuing new alliances. Since Brexit, its increasing isolation has allowed for the international community to back down its support on issues such as the decolonisation of Chagos.

By settling a colonial dispute on the basis of international law, Starmer achieves policy coherence after backlash received by his electorate. The Labour cabinet shall now decide whether to move forward alone prioritising political credibility, or finding a consensus with the Trump administration and risk the agreement’s implementation.

What does this mean for you?

Answer: The geostrategic importance of Diego Garcia for global and regional peace and security puts the agreement under the radar of other rising powers.

American and British personnel police the flow of goods across the Indian Ocean via Diego Garcia. This includes strategic resources such as fossil fuels from the Gulf to Europe and the Pacific, or minerals and technological equipment from Eastern Asia and Eastern Africa.

It also enables a rapid military and humanitarian response to nearby regions such as the Middle East, Southeast Asia and the Horn of Africa, where both countries wield political and military involvement. More recently, the atoll received upgrades to support the transmission of inter-continental intel between allied bases.

Diego Garcia has played a crucial role in military deployment in Iraq and Afghanistan, for example, allowing long-range air strikes with the capacity to return to the island in less than 40-hours. Similarly, its harbour storages state-of-the-art naval weaponry since the Cold War, such as nuclear-powered cruise missile submarines.

Diego Garcia’s functionality puts Starmer’s handover under the radar of major great powers such as India. New Delhi historically opposed the securitisation of the Indian Ocean, condemning the military base’s consolidation as illustrated by the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace. However, the emergent global multipolarity elevates the atoll’s strategic importance. 

Although Sino-Indian relations recently defused, New Delhi now favours American and British presence to counterbalance Beijing’s rising presence in Eastern Africa, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Southeast Asia under trade and investment agreements. Although Starmer emphasized British-American sovereignty over Diego Garcia, it’s uncertain whether in the near future China or other parties could exploit it to undermine its proven geostrategic functionality.