The Chagos Islands scandal

As current events progress to a potential climax, it seems possible that future history books - if any are to be written, let alone printed and read - will record that the Chagos Islands were the starting point of the Third World War.

Why would one of the most remote locations in the world suddenly assume such an importance?

Perhaps you would like to know a little more about it?

The Chagos Islands is a group of seven atolls comprising more than 60 islands in the Indian Ocean about 500 kilometres south of the Maldives archipelago. All are low-lying, save for a few extremely small instances, set around lagoons. The Chagos Archipelago was uninhabited when first visited by European explorers, and remained that way until the French established a small colony on the main island of Diego Garcia, composed of 50–60 men and "a complement of slaves" in 1786. The slaves came from what are now Mozambique and Madagascar via Mauritius. Others arrived as fishermen, farmers, and coconut plantation workers during the 19th century. The Chagossians (also known as Ilois) are a mix of African, Indian and Malay descent and spoke Chagossian Creole, a French-based language. Chagossian Creole is still spoken by some of their descendants in Mauritius and the Seychelles.

The French surrendered Mauritius and its dependencies (including the Chagos) to the UK in the 1814 Treaty of Paris. The British Government abolished slavery in 1834, and the colonial administration of the Seychelles (which administered the Chagos at the time) followed suit in 1835, with the former slaves apprenticed to their former masters until 1839, at which time they became freemen. Following emancipation, the former slaves became contract employees of the various plantation owners throughout the Chagos.

Into the 20th century, there existed a total population of approximately one thousand individuals, with a peak population of 1,142 on all islands recorded in 1953. In 1966, the population was 924. This population was fully employed. Although it was common for local plantation managers to allow pensioners and the disabled to remain in the islands and continue to receive rations in exchange for light work, children after the age of 12 were required to work.

The island was also attractive for a number of entirely different reasons: it boasted a natural harbour, was big enough to host a sizeable military presence (including a large airstrip), and was situated roughly equidistant between East Africa and Southeast Asia. In short, Diego Garcia was the perfect place in which to add to a chain of military bases being set up by the “Free World” to threaten countries in Asia and the Middle East. But as the Mauritius-born scholar Jean Houbert later wrote:

There were two problems, however: the Chagos belonged to Mauritius, and they were inhabited.

Firstly, Britain dismembered the colony of Mauritius by making the Chagos Islands part of the new colony of the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT) in November 1965, an entity that would remain firmly under the control of London. Secondly, the UK falsely labelled the Chagossians, whose ancestral links to the territory went back to the late 18th century, as “transient workers” to attempt to avoid breaching International Law. An internal Colonial Office memo read:

The Colonial Office is at present considering the line to be taken in dealing with the existing inhabitants of the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT). They wish to avoid using the phrase "permanent inhabitants" in relation to any of the islands in the territory because to recognise that there are any permanent inhabitants will imply that there is a population whose democratic rights will have to be safeguarded and which will therefore be deemed by the UN to come within its purlieu. The solution proposed is to issue them with documents making it clear that they are "belongers" of Mauritius and the Seychelles and only temporary residents of BIOT. This device, although rather transparent, would at least give us a defensible position to take up at the UN.

And so from 1965 to 1973, the UK and US forced the entire Chagossian population from all the inhabited Chagos islands, not only the main island Diego Garcia but also neighbouring Peros Banhos and Salomon. Consequently, on 30 December 1966, the United States and the United Kingdom executed an agreement which permitted the United States armed forces to use any parts of the Chagos Islands for “defence” purposes for 50 years, until December 2016, followed by a 20-year optional extension to which both parties had to agree by December 2014. But only the atoll of Diego Garcia was subsequently transformed into a military facility.

It was to play a central role in the US/UK’s terrorist “defence” wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and even today, as I write these words, it is being substantially geared up to do the same in Iran: the Pentagon has just sent 6 of its B2 bombers to Diego Garcia, 30% of its entire fleet. The B2 can deploy both nuclear weapons and the largest US bunker-buster bombs, which are reportedly capable of reaching Iranian underground facilities. In the event of any such attack, Iran has threatened a massive response which would destroy neighbouring oil industries, and it has already demonstrated that it can penetrate Israel’s air defences with ease….

What is this all about? Iran had been bullied into agreeing with the United States that it would not develop nuclear weapons, and signed an agreement as such, although as a free independent state I do not see that it shouldn’t if it wants to. I have also seen it said that under Islamic law, it is forbidden from doing so (though Pakistan pays no attention if that is so). Well Trump tore up the agreement during his first term but now wants to renegotiate it, perhaps offering concessions on the sanctions. I don’t know. Negotiations are ongoing as I write. Iran however may well consider that agreements with the US are worth less than the paper they are written on.

But none of this is really about the US, of course, it is Israel that is central to the whole issue and Israel that is the driving force. Trump has just said that Israel will take the lead in any military action. If this runs along its present course, expect to pay $200 a gallon for your gasoline, if you can find any, as oil will then cease to be exported out of the Persian Gulf. Interesting times.

But I digress.

On 3 April 1967 the British government bought all the plantations of the Chagos archipelago for £660,000 from its owner, the Chagos Agalega Company. The plan was to deprive the Chagossians of an income and encourage them to leave the island voluntarily. The Colonial Office head Denis Greenhill wrote to the British delegation at the UN:

The object of the exercise is to get some rocks which will remain ours; there will be no indigenous population except seagulls who have not yet got a committee. Unfortunately along with the Birds go some few Tarzans or Men Fridays whose origins are obscure, and who are being hopefully wished on to Mauritius etc.

Dead racialist English git Denis Greenhill, later “Baron” Greenhill of Harrow. May you rot in hell.

Greenhill was a minister in the supposedly socialist government of Harold Wilson, to which I hitherto retained some fragment of historical respect, but that has now totally evaporated. These people ensured that the entire Chagossian population were driven from their homes with no resettlement assistance whatsoever. The expelled Chagossians were ultimately removed to Mauritius and the Seychelles, others settled in the town of Crawley, south of London, and the Chagossian community there numbered approximately 3,000 in 2016, which increased to 3,500 by 2024. Manchester also has a Chagossian community.

The entire population of the Chagos Archipelago was now either prevented from returning or forcibly removed by the United Kingdom. Beginning in March 1969, Chagossians visiting Mauritius found that they were no longer allowed to board the steamer home. They were told their contracts to work on Diego Garcia had expired. This left them homeless, jobless and without means of support. It also prevented word from reaching the rest of the Diego Garcia population. Relatives who travelled to Mauritius to seek their missing family members also found themselves unable to return. Many Ilois people testified to having been offered a visit to Mauritius, of having been tricked into leaving Diego Garcia by being offered a free trip. The British government also decided to cut off the food imports that were necessary to supplement the home grown crops.

The Ilois on Diego Garcia were moved first to Peros Banhos and Salomon islands. Some 800 people then lived on these two small islands for two years. Further injustice was done to the Ilois by the refusal to let them stay on these smaller islands, both of which are over 100 miles from Diego, and which are not required for military purposes. The Pentagon is thought to have insisted on a clean sweep of the area, and again the Ilois had no choice but to leave. In 1973 the British government decided it was time to complete the final evacuation of the Ilois from the smaller Chagos islands.

The main removal of Diego Garcia’s population had taken place in July and September 1971. The United States was now free to build Naval Support Facility Diego Garcia, the main island in the group, on land leased from the UK military. Since 1971, only the atoll of Diego Garcia has been inhabited, and only by employees of the US military, including American civilian contracted personnel. In March 1971, United States naval construction battalions arrived on Diego Garcia to begin the construction of the Communications Station and an airfield.

In 1972, the British Government allocated £650,000 for compensation to the 426 families displaced to Mauritius. This money was given to the Mauritian government for distribution which, however, withheld the money until 1978.

The Minority Rights Group reported at the end of 1975 that at least half the islanders were unemployed and most were either sharing a house or sleeping rough. Some of the poorest were being cared for by the Sisters of Mother Theresa. Commenting on the plight of the Ilois, one of the nuns said: 'They are poorer than the poor of Mauritius. They don't have enough food and some of their children are undernourished. They need some more medicine and they lack especially clothing.' Two other local organisations, the Institute for Development and Progress and the Church World Service also helped - the latter by paying the bus fares of Ilois children. The Mauritian government also helped to relieve some of the worst distress, paying small amounts of public assistance to 74 families, family allowances to 70, and old age pensions to 57 Ilois. But the assistance was small and only marginally relieved the Ilois' plight. A survey by the Comite Ilois Organisation Fraternelle, gave grim individual details of the despair of the Ilois. The survey documents:

Eliane and Michele Mouza: mother and child committed suicide.

Leone Rangasamy: born in Peros, drowned herself because she was prevented from going back.

Tarenne Chiatoux: committed suicide, no job, no roof.

Voifrin family: Daisy Voifrin - no food for three days, obtained Rs 3 (about 20p) and no more as Public Assistance. Died through poverty.

Josue and Maude Baptiste: poverty - no roof, no food, committed suicide.

The document lists 9 cases of suicide and 26 families that had died together in poverty after 1 to 12 months stay in Mauritius. 'The causes mostly are unhappiness, non-adaptation of llois within the social framework of Mauritius, extreme poverty, particularly lack of food, house, and jobs. It says the main cause of the sufferings of the Ilois was the lack of a proper plan to welcome them in Mauritius. 'There was no rehabilitation programme for them.' It also speaks of the large number of women and young girls “some of them aged only 13, 14 and 15” who left their husbands or their parents to lead a prostitute's life in order to earn a living.

This was the suffering that the British government had inflicted on a minority, not during the old days of conquering an Empire, but in the middle of the 1970s. The government, having washed its hands of the matter, disclaimed all knowledge about deaths of Ilois. A Foreign Office official says in a letter dated 16 August 1976: 'Although we have no information, some deaths are no doubt bound to have occurred among the islanders in the normal course of events'.

https://minorityrights.org/app/uploads/2023/12/download-138-diego-garcia-a-contrast-to-the-falklands.pdf

In 1975, David Ottaway of the Washington Post wrote and published an article titled "Islanders Were Evicted for U.S. Base" which related the plight of the Chagossians in detail. This prompted two U.S. congressional committees to look into the matter. They were told that the "entire subject of Diego Garcia is considered classified".

In September 1975, The Sunday Times published an article titled "The Islanders that Britain Sold". That year, an English teacher and Methodist lay-reader in Kent, George Champion, set up a support group for the Ilois, the 1966 Society for Diego Garcians in Exile. Incensed by Britain's treatment of a powerless minority group, Champion (who assumed the name 'Chagos' to identify himself with the Ilois cause) felt that if support among the British public was mobilised then the government would not be allowed to get away with its treatment of the Ilois. Once a month he mounted a vigil outside the Foreign Office, bearing a placard with the words 'Diego Garcia'. This continued until his death in 1982. People often asked Champion, 'who is Diego Garcia?' Once they knew, they supported the cause. He also briefed journalists and, with an increasing flow of information coming from Mauritius, kept up a constant barrage of letters to the Foreign Office which often punched large holes in their argument, especially about the status of the Ilois before 1965. Through Champion's exposure of the Ilois case, the Methodist Church in Britain also took up the Ilois cause; the Methodist Church Fund for Human Need began to make financial donations to the Ilois.

In 1978, at Bain Des Dames in the capital of Mauritius, Port Louis, six Chagossian women went on a hunger strike, and there were demonstrations in the streets mainly organised by the Mauritian Militant Movement over Diego Garcia.

In 1979, a Mauritian Committee asked for more compensation. In response to this, the British Government offered £4m to the surviving Chagossians on the express condition that all Chagossians sign a "full and final" document renouncing any right of return to the island. All but 12 of the 1,579 Chagossians eligible to receive compensation at the time signed the documents. The document also contained provisions for those that could not write, by allowing the impression of an inked thumbprint to ratify the document. However, some illiterate islanders say that they were tricked into signing the documents and that they would never have signed sincerely had they known the outcome of their signatures.

The Minority Rights Group reported further that entering at least their sixth year of exile, the Ilois began to mount a series of hunger strikes. From September 1980 to March 1981 many of the exiles - especially the Ilois women - squatted, sang and went hungry to try to obtain better terms from the British. The culmination of the strikes came on the morning of the 16 March 1981 when several hundred Ilois women demonstrated in front of the British High Commission. Having tried in vain to get in touch with the High Commissioner, a group of Ilois occupied the entrance hall for several hours and then moved to the Government House where they staged a sit-in. A clash with the police resulted and several Ilois women were arrested. Their arrest triggered off an immediate reaction within the Ilois community. Eight Ilois women decided to go on an unlimited hunger strike in the 'Jardin de la Compagnie', facing the offices of the British High Commission. Among them was an old woman aged 77.

At that time, the Mauritian government commissioned a report into the living conditions of the Ilois. Written by Herve Sylva, who had worked as a teacher with the Ilois for 10 years, the report was the most thorough survey of the Ilois that had been carried out. Its most important finding was that 77% of Ilois adults wished to return to Chagos. Only 11 % wanted to stay in Mauritius; others either did not know or wanted to go to the Agalega islands, dependencies of Mauritius and about 1,000 km north. The Sylva Report made grim reading. It found that only 65 out of 942 Ilois householders are 'owners of land and houses' and 'have satisfactorily remunerated jobs'; 439 households 'have applied for houses, 177 of them indicate this need as a first priority'. Housing, concluded Sylva, was the most pressing problem the Ilois faced. He found one case of 31 people living in 3 rooms, another of 21 people in 2 rooms and one case of 14 people including a lame man living in 1 room. The report speaks of Ilois living in old and leaky houses with curtains and sheets as a roof over their beds as a protection from rain. 'It is obvious that these conditions give rise to family squabbles; neighbours and landlords .... look down upon them and press them to move on to other places. Ilois are now found scattered all over Mauritius and some of them are living in ramshackle houses in dire conditions.' Over 40% of adult males did not have a job.

The Sylva Report dispelled any notion that the British government had that the Ilois did not want to return home.

In 2000 the British High Court granted the islanders the right to return to the Archipelago. However, they were then not actually allowed to return, and in 2002 the islanders and their descendants, now numbering 4,500, returned to court claiming compensation, after what they said were two years of delays by the British Foreign Office. On 10 June 2004 the British government made two Orders in Council under the Royal Prerogative forever banning the islanders from returning home, to override the effect of the 2000 court decision. On 11 May 2006 the British High Court ruled that the 2004 Orders-in-Council were unlawful, and consequently that the Chagossians were entitled to return to the Chagos Archipelago. On 23 May 2007, the UK Government's appeal against the 2006 High Court ruling was dismissed, and they took the matter to the House of Lords. On 22 October 2008, the UK Government won on appeal, the House of Lords overturned the 2006 High Court ruling and upheld the two 2004 Orders-in-Council and with them the Government's ban on anyone returning. On 29 June 2016, this decision was upheld by the UK Supreme Court, by a 3–2 majority.

In 2005, 1,786 Chagossians had made Application for a Trial of the issues with the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). On 11 December 2012 (what kept them?), the court rejected on the Application's request for a trial ruling that the BIOT did not come under the jurisdiction of the ECHR, and that in any event, all claims had previously been raised and settled in the proper national, that is British, courts.

In 2007, Mauritian President Sir Anerood Jugnauth threatened to leave the Commonwealth of Nations in protest at the treatment of the islanders and to take the UK to the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

Chagossians march in Crawley in 2008

As of May 2010, some of the Chagossians were still making return plans to turn Diego Garcia into a sugar cane and fishing enterprise as soon as the defence agreement expired, which some thought would happen as early as 2016 as had been set out in the original 50 year agreement.

On 5 March 2012, an international petition was launched on the now-defunct We the People section of the whitehouse.gov website in order to ask for the Chagos case to be considered: The U.S. Government Must Redress Wrongs Against the Chagossians. The request was brushed aside.

It emerged in 2014 that for three decades, in violation of environmental rules, the American navy had dumped hundreds of tonnes of sewage and waste water into a protected lagoon on Diego Garcia. In response to the revelations, the chair of the Chagos Refugees Group UK Branch, Sabrina Jean, noted:

When we Chagossians lived on our islands, the seas and lagoons were pristine.…For many years we have been pressing BIOT to conduct an environmental audit of the effects of the US occupation. This has been consistently refused, with the explanation that the impact of the occupation is minimal. We can now see that throughout this period there have been no controls on the pollution.

A series of judgements against the UK’s stance have been issued in recent years by various world authorities.

1. One of the ways in which the UK had sought to prevent the return of the Chagossians was to set up a marine reserve — the world's largest — which while not impeding the military use, would make it difficult to repopulate the islands. On 1 April 2010, the Chagos Marine Protected Area (MPA) was declared to cover the waters around the Chagos Archipelago. However, Mauritius objected, stating this was contrary to its legal rights, and on 18 March 2015, the Permanent Court of Arbitration ruled that the Chagos Marine Protected Area violated international law under the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea, as Mauritius had legally binding rights to fish in the waters surrounding the Chagos Archipelago. The tribunal upheld Mauritius' sovereignty claims, rejecting the UK's argument and affirming its binding commitments on fishing and mineral rights.

2. On 16 November 2016, the UK Foreign Office restated the ban on repatriation of the islands. In response, the Prime Minister of Mauritius expressed his country's plan to advance the sovereignty dispute to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). On 23 June 2017, the UN General Assembly voted to refer the Chagos dispute to the ICJ, which began hearings in 2018.

Peros Banhos native Liseby Elyse testified over a video link, telling the stunned court how, on a single day, she saw something she’d never seen on her island before. There were about 400 people living there — and she saw a white man! The white man came up to her and said, “Madam, you will have to leave tomorrow and you’re allowed to take one suitcase. The island is being closed.” She was then crammed onto the eviction ship while four months pregnant and had lost her baby on arrival in Mauritius.

Liseby Elyse

In 2019, the ICJ issued a non-binding advisory opinion stating that "the process of decolonization of Mauritius was not lawfully completed when that country acceded to independence" and that "the United Kingdom is under an obligation to bring to an end its administration of the Chagos Archipelago as rapidly as possible. The British government rejected any jurisdiction of the court to deliberate these matters.

3. On 22 May 2019, the United Nations General Assembly debated and adopted a resolution that affirmed that the Chagos archipelago “forms an integral part of the territory of Mauritius.” The resolution demanded that the UK "withdraw its colonial administration ... unconditionally within a period of no more than six months." 116 states voted in favour of the resolution, 55 abstained and only 5 countries (Australia, Hungary, Israel, Maldives, United States) supported the UK.

4. On 28 January 2021, the United Nations International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) confirmed the International Court of Justice ruling and ordered Britain to hand over the Chagos Archipelago to Mauritius. The ITLOS Special Chamber affirmed that “it is inconceivable that the United Kingdom, whose administration over the Chagos Archipelago constitutes a wrongful act of a continuing character and thus must be brought to an end as rapidly as possible, and yet who has failed to do so, can have any legal interests in permanently disposing of maritime zones around the Chagos Archipelago by delimitation”.

5. October 21, 2024 Human Rights Watch declared that the abuses committed against Chagossians, as individuals and as an indigenous people, to be serious violations of international human rights law and international criminal law, that the violations were committed against those forced to leave their homes more than 50 years ago and continue against them and their descendants today who are denied their right to permanently return. Human Rights Watch found that the continuing forced displacement of the Chagossians, the prevention of their permanent return to their homeland, and their persecution on racial and ethnic grounds amounted to crimes against humanity.

On 3 November 2022, the British Foreign Secretary James Cleverly had announced that the UK and Mauritius had decided to begin negotiations on sovereignty over the British Indian Ocean Territory, taking into account the recent international legal proceedings. Both states had agreed to ensure the continued operation of the joint UK/US military base on Diego Garcia. Whereas these talks included the resettlement of expelled Chagossians, Cleverly's successor as British foreign secretary, David Cameron, later ruled out a return of the islanders.

In October 2024, the British government announced it would hand over sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius subject to finalisation of a treaty. The Chagossian people living in the UK criticised the deal for not having included their community in the decision-making process. A segment, particularly those with British citizenship residing in the UK, favoured continued British sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago, expressing concerns that their interests may not be fully safeguarded under Mauritian administration. However, many Chagossians, including those in Mauritius, support Mauritian sovereignty. The Chagos Refugees Group, the largest Chagossian advocacy organization, has been a leading voice for this position. Its leader, Olivier Bancoult, described the UK's decision to return the Chagos Archipelago to Mauritius and allow Chagossians to resettle on the outer islands as a significant step and an acknowledgment of past injustices. These, presumably are the Peros Banhos and Salomon islands. Please note, then, that this will restore the situation to what it was 52 years ago, and all that has happened since NEED NEVER HAVE HAPPENED.

British media reported that Britain will cede sovereignty of the Chagos Islands and pay Mauritius around $116 million a year for 99 years to lease back Diego Garcia and allow the military base to remain, with an option to extend the lease for another 40 years. The deal was at first put on hold following the 2024 US presidential election to allow consideration from the incoming administration. On 2 April 2025 it was reported that the deal was being finalised. Finally, some justice for that monstrously persecuted people.

On 27 February 2025, speaking in the Oval Office alongside Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, U.S. President Donald Trump had stated that he was willing to support the agreement to transfer sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius. Speaking to British lawmakers last month, Starmer said a deal was vital to secure the future of the US military base:

“This is a military base that is vital for our national security.”

Pardon me? The security of the British state depends upon a military base in the Indian Ocean? Has he ever looked at a map? The distance between the UK and the Chagos Islands is roughly 9,600 km. From the USA, about 15,000 km, almost halfway around the world.

Starmer is an imbecile who simply epitomises the insanity in which Western nations have become embroiled as they slowly sail into the sunset.

……………………………………………………………………..

The Chagos Refugees Group (the “CRG”) is an association established in 1983 with the object of defending the rights and interests of all Chagossians.

https://thechagosrefugeesgroup.com/about-us/

Chagossian Voices was formed in 2020 by well-established Chagossian community campaigners based in the UK, Mauritius and the Seychelles.

https://chagossianvoices.org/