Consistent with the right of peoples to self-determination
February 25, 2019 1:35 PM Subscribe
The International Court of Justice has concluded "that the United Kingdom has an obligation to bring to an end its administration of the Chagos Archipelago as rapidly as possible." 48 years after the small Indian Ocean island group was forcefully depopulated in order to establish a joint UK-US military outpost, the UN high court has "found that the decolonization of Mauritius was not conducted in a manner consistent with the right of peoples to self-determination" (full text pdf)
Although the ruling is non-binding, it adds significant pressure on the UK to return control of the territory to the Republic of Mauritius. The Mauritius government has suggested that it would allow the US military installation to remain, despite evidence of its previous involvement in the Bush-era extraordinary rendition program.
Although doubt over the future for Chagos refugees still remains, Chagossian leader Olivier Bancoult sees hope for return:
Although the ruling is non-binding, it adds significant pressure on the UK to return control of the territory to the Republic of Mauritius. The Mauritius government has suggested that it would allow the US military installation to remain, despite evidence of its previous involvement in the Bush-era extraordinary rendition program.
Although doubt over the future for Chagos refugees still remains, Chagossian leader Olivier Bancoult sees hope for return:
"I dedicate this victory to the entire Chagossian community that is scattered in several countries around the world," he said.Previously
"It is a great victory as all the time we wanted to go gather on the graves of our families that we lost there [on the Chagos Archipelago]".
Is there another island that can serve as an air base?
For enough money the US could probably just lease it back from Mauritius.
posted by BungaDunga at 1:49 PM on February 25, 2019
For enough money the US could probably just lease it back from Mauritius.
posted by BungaDunga at 1:49 PM on February 25, 2019
Is there another island that can serve as an air base?
Not really. Diego Garcia is in the center of the Indian Ocean and is pretty much the only substantial land mass for 1000s of kilometers in any direction.
As such it wasn't settled by anyone until about 1794. The Chagosians were removal started in 1965, about 150 years after they were first brought to the island to work the coconut plantations. The islands were also only attached to Mauritius and/or Seychelles for administrative reasons, while both are about 2,000 km away. With so few people living there it didn't make sense for them to have it's own administration.
posted by jmauro at 2:10 PM on February 25, 2019 [3 favorites]
Not really. Diego Garcia is in the center of the Indian Ocean and is pretty much the only substantial land mass for 1000s of kilometers in any direction.
As such it wasn't settled by anyone until about 1794. The Chagosians were removal started in 1965, about 150 years after they were first brought to the island to work the coconut plantations. The islands were also only attached to Mauritius and/or Seychelles for administrative reasons, while both are about 2,000 km away. With so few people living there it didn't make sense for them to have it's own administration.
posted by jmauro at 2:10 PM on February 25, 2019 [3 favorites]
Unless the US goes full isolationist, they will never give up Diego Garcia. It sits right on top of China's "New Silk Road" to Africa and the Middle East.
posted by Marky at 2:22 PM on February 25, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by Marky at 2:22 PM on February 25, 2019 [5 favorites]
Yeah my flash of hope when I saw this needs that Diego Garcia would be shut down now seems foolish in retrospect.
Still, we can dream.
posted by AnhydrousLove at 2:53 PM on February 25, 2019
Still, we can dream.
posted by AnhydrousLove at 2:53 PM on February 25, 2019
For some background on this I cannot praise John Pilger high enough.
Stealing a Nation.
Pilger on the plight of Chagos' "unpeople".
posted by adamvasco at 3:50 PM on February 25, 2019 [2 favorites]
Stealing a Nation.
Pilger on the plight of Chagos' "unpeople".
posted by adamvasco at 3:50 PM on February 25, 2019 [2 favorites]
They should also give control of the .io domain to the Chagosians and let them extort GitHub and other domain holdersfor all they can.
posted by Space Coyote at 4:55 PM on February 25, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by Space Coyote at 4:55 PM on February 25, 2019 [6 favorites]
It is, I'm sure, entirely coincidental that China and Mauritius recently signed a trade agreement, and is a key part of the Belt and Road Initiative.
posted by Kadin2048 at 7:24 PM on February 25, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by Kadin2048 at 7:24 PM on February 25, 2019 [2 favorites]
Note that this ruling does not say that the Chagosians can return or that they should have self determination, or be compensated, or anything really. It just says that the way the islands were detached from Mauritius was unlawful.
Essentially:
The Court recalls that the right to self-determination of the people concerned is defined by reference to the entirety of a non-self-governing territory. Both State practice and opinio juris at the relevant time confirm the customary law character of the right to territorial integrity of a non-self-governing territory as a corollary of the right to self-determination. The Court considers that the peoples of non-self-governing territories are entitled to exercise their right to self-determination in relation to their territory as a whole, the integrity of which must be respected by the administering Power. It follows that any detachment by the administering Power of part of a non-self-governing territory, unless based on the freely expressed and genuine will of the people of the territory concerned, is contrary to the right to self-determination. In the Court’s view, the law on self-determination constitutes the applicable international law during the period under consideration, namely between 1965 and 1968.
[My emphasis]
So it was against customary international law to detach parts of non-self governing territory between 1965 and 1968.
Given that, I think there are three key points:
1) Were the Chagos islands detached from Mauritius? - Yes, they were.
2) Was Mauritius a non-self governing territory at the time? - Yes it was.
The UK could have argued that the Chagos islands were administered as part of Mauritius but not really part of its integral territory - after all, the Trucial states were administered as part of the Raj at some point but no-one argues that Dubai is part of India. Except that they couldn't do that because their argument for the legality of the removal of the Chagosians was that they were Mauritians who were temporarily living in company accommodation on the Chagos islands. You can't have it both ways.
Obviously the Americans are not going to remove their base, but there are a number of islands, most of which are not in use by the airbase.
Here's what I hope might happen (and is within the realm of possibility):
-Chagosians are allowed to return - this has been investigated before and found to be "possible but challenging"
-Chagosians agree to remain British Overseas Territory, self governing same as the Pitcairn Islands or South Georgia.
-Base stays
posted by atrazine at 3:03 AM on February 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
Essentially:
The Court recalls that the right to self-determination of the people concerned is defined by reference to the entirety of a non-self-governing territory. Both State practice and opinio juris at the relevant time confirm the customary law character of the right to territorial integrity of a non-self-governing territory as a corollary of the right to self-determination. The Court considers that the peoples of non-self-governing territories are entitled to exercise their right to self-determination in relation to their territory as a whole, the integrity of which must be respected by the administering Power. It follows that any detachment by the administering Power of part of a non-self-governing territory, unless based on the freely expressed and genuine will of the people of the territory concerned, is contrary to the right to self-determination. In the Court’s view, the law on self-determination constitutes the applicable international law during the period under consideration, namely between 1965 and 1968.
[My emphasis]
So it was against customary international law to detach parts of non-self governing territory between 1965 and 1968.
Given that, I think there are three key points:
1) Were the Chagos islands detached from Mauritius? - Yes, they were.
2) Was Mauritius a non-self governing territory at the time? - Yes it was.
The UK could have argued that the Chagos islands were administered as part of Mauritius but not really part of its integral territory - after all, the Trucial states were administered as part of the Raj at some point but no-one argues that Dubai is part of India. Except that they couldn't do that because their argument for the legality of the removal of the Chagosians was that they were Mauritians who were temporarily living in company accommodation on the Chagos islands. You can't have it both ways.
Obviously the Americans are not going to remove their base, but there are a number of islands, most of which are not in use by the airbase.
Here's what I hope might happen (and is within the realm of possibility):
-Chagosians are allowed to return - this has been investigated before and found to be "possible but challenging"
-Chagosians agree to remain British Overseas Territory, self governing same as the Pitcairn Islands or South Georgia.
-Base stays
posted by atrazine at 3:03 AM on February 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
Your reminder that colonialism and imperialism didn't end because the empires became "enlightened" or made "progress" or the oppressed peoples "earned freedom" or made "progress".
Remember: colonialism and imperialism didn't end.
posted by Anchorite_of_Palgrave at 9:19 AM on February 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
Remember: colonialism and imperialism didn't end.
posted by Anchorite_of_Palgrave at 9:19 AM on February 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
« Older such a shame | Osprey drops fish in shallow right field, charged... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Is there another island that can serve as an air base?
posted by davebarnes at 1:44 PM on February 25, 2019