By Chagossian First Minister Misley Mandarin.
On May 22, the United Kingdom signed an agreement with Mauritius that would transfer sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago. For my people, the Chagossians, this decision was taken without our consent and against our clearly expressed wishes.
I am a British Chagossian. My family comes from these islands. Like thousands of others, my ancestors were forcibly removed during the Cold War so that a joint United States and United Kingdom military base could be constructed on Diego Garcia. We have lived in exile ever since.
Today, we face the prospect of being erased once again, this time not by expulsion but by diplomatic fiat.
A survey conducted in early December, overseen by the House of Lords International Relations and Defence Committee, recorded overwhelming opposition among Chagossians to the transfer of sovereignty to Mauritius. A clear majority of Chagossians worldwide stated that they wish to remain British and do not trust Mauritius to safeguard their rights, culture, or future.
That opposition is grounded not only in history but in law. In a statement issued earlier this month, a United Nations committee reaffirmed that the Chagossian people possess a right to self determination and noted that this right has been undermined by arrangements reached without our participation or consent. Despite this, Prime Minister Keir Starmer is determined to proceed with the handover of our islands despite overwhelming opposition.
That is why Chagossians have taken an unprecedented step. Following an independently organised and verified process thanks to the Great British PAC, families forcibly evicted from the islands between 1967 and 1973 have declared the formation of a Chagossian government in exile to assert our right to self determination and to make our voice heard internationally. I was elected interim first minister to represent that cause.
To most Americans, the Chagos Archipelago is known as the site of Diego Garcia, one of the most strategically important military installations in the world. From there, the United States projects power across the Indian Ocean, protects vital trade routes, and underwrites regional stability.
For us, it is home.
We do not oppose the base. On the contrary, Chagossians have long supported the United States presence and see Diego Garcia as central not only to global security but to our own future prosperity. We seek to return to our islands as British Chagossians, loyal to the Crown and committed partners of the United States.
Keir Starmer’s new agreement would put that stability at risk.
It is not built on durable consent and it is not insulated from political change. Opposition to the deal already spans multiple political parties in the United Kingdom, several of which have said publicly that they would seek to revoke or “stop paying the rent” if they enter government. That means the future of Diego Garcia would rest on a fragile legal and financial arrangement, vulnerable to shifts in domestic politics in London.
Under the terms reported publicly, continued access to the base depends on long-term UK payments to Mauritius. Any future disruption, delay, or dispute over those payments could place both British and American access at risk. Once sovereignty has transferred, enforcement would lie entirely outside Western control.
This matters because it would give Mauritius decisive leverage over one of the most important military facilities on the planet.
Mauritius is a small state operating in a region of intense great power competition. It has cultivated relationships with multiple external powers, including China. While no one can predict future alignments, transferring sovereignty over Diego Garcia introduces a strategic uncertainty that does not exist today.
There are also unresolved legal questions. Mauritius is a signatory to the African Nuclear Weapon Free Zone Treaty, known as the Pelindaba Treaty. Mauritian officials have stated that this will not affect Diego Garcia, but the treaty framework allows for future reinterpretation or policy change. Once sovereignty has transferred, such decisions would no longer be made in London or Washington.
For the United States, whose undersea deterrent and broader Indo-Pacific posture rely on secure, predictable access to Diego Garcia, these uncertainties are not theoretical. They go to the heart of long-term force projection and strategic stability.
There is a better alternative, one consistent with American values and interests.
The Chagossian people should be recognised as possessing the right to self determination, a right acknowledged by the United Nations but effectively bypassed by the current agreement. A resettled Chagossian community exercising that right while remaining under British sovereignty would remove lingering legal challenges, stabilise the status of the base, and anchor Diego Garcia firmly within a democratic framework aligned with Western interests.
We are ready to build that future. We envision a renewed Chagossian presence on the outer islands, economic participation in base operations, and a partnership that strengthens both justice and security. Over time, Chagossians could play a direct role in supporting base operations and related services, further embedding legitimacy and stability.
President Donald Trump has often said he opposes bad deals. This is one. America has an opportunity to help correct it, not by undermining allies, but by encouraging a settlement that respects the rights of an exiled people while safeguarding a vital strategic asset.
Supporting Chagossian self determination would reflect the best of the American tradition, standing with a small nation seeking freedom while protecting the security architecture on which so much depends.
Misley Mandarin is interim First Minister of the Chagossian government in exile. www.BIOTChagos.com
I don’t know how, but this awful deal with Mauritius must urgently be stopped, or if ratified, then it must be rescinded.