Chagos deal cost is ‘going rate for best defensive real estate', says ex-FO boss

Independent

8 hours ago

Britain is paying the 'going rate as a tenant for… the best defensive real estate in the whole Indian Ocean', a former Foreign Office chief has said as he backed the Chagos Islands deal that is set to cost the taxpayer billions of pounds.
Hitting out at critics who argued the UK should ignore a legal ruling to hand over the archipelago to Mauritius, Lord McDonald of Salford argued this was what 'the powerful and unprincipled do', such as Russia.
The independent crossbencher, a former ambassador who headed the Foreign Office from 2015 to 2020, spoke in support of the agreement in the face of strong objections at Westminster, with opponents branding it a 'surrender' and 'gross folly' funded by the public.
The deal signed last month after long-running negotiations, started under the previous Tory administration, returns sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, but will see Britain lease back the strategically important military base on Diego Garcia.
It follows a 2019 advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice, which said the UK should cede control.
As well as establishing a £40 million fund for Chagossians expelled from the islands, the UK has agreed to pay Mauritius at least £120 million annually during the duration of the 99-year agreement, a total cost in cash terms of at least £13 billion.
The Government, however, estimates the bill will be lower at around £101 million a year, while critics argue it will be much higher.
The deal could also be extended in the future for an extra 40 years, provided agreement is reached.
In a recent report, the House of Lords International Agreements Committee (HLIAC) said although 'not perfect', the treaty must be ratified to avoid legal challenges that could threaten UK control of the military base.
Its members warned Mauritius was 'likely' to resume its campaign to secure a binding judgment on sovereignty against Britain unless the agreement was approved and concluded the Government 'cannot ignore' the risk of an 'adverse ruling' putting Britain's right to run the joint UK-US site in jeopardy.
Speaking at Westminster as peers debated the controversial accord, Lord McDonald said: 'The most damaging blow to any country's international reputation is a justified charge of hypocrisy.
'The United Kingdom stands for the rule of law in all circumstances. We lose credibility when we seek exceptions to this principle for ourselves.'
He added: 'Opponents dislike the expense of the deal.
'Well, we're paying the going rate as a tenant for a base in the wider Indian Ocean, somewhat more than the French in Djibouti, but we're getting more for more.
'Diego Garcia is the best defensive real estate in the whole Indian Ocean.
'Even though £101 million per year is a lot, it's a lot less than the Americans pay to run the base.
'It's a joint base, and we're paying our way in the joint effort.'
Lord McDonald also disputed the agreement would bolster China's presence in the Indian Ocean, arguing that 'our partner in Delhi looms much larger in Mauritian calculations than our challenger in Beijing'.
He went on: 'Confronted by a charge of double standards, some opponents of this agreement shrug their shoulders. They think they can get away with it, tough it out. But that is what the powerful and unprincipled do. That is what Russia does.'
The peer added: 'It gives the UK and our American allies a secure presence in the archipelago for the next 140 years.
'It enhances our security and restores our reputation as a country respecting international law, even when inconvenient and costly.'
But Tory shadow foreign minister Lord Callanan said: 'This agreement amounts to a retreat, a surrender of sovereign territory that serves as a linchpin of our defence architecture at a time when authoritarian threats are rising and alliances matter more than ever.
'Handing control to a government who align themselves ever more closely with Beijing – a regime that actively undermines international norms and our national interests – is not only unwise, it is positively dangerous.
'To compound the error, the British taxpayer is being made to foot the bill.'
He added: 'This whole affair has been a gross folly. There is no strategic gain here, no credible guarantee for the future of Diego Garcia and no reassurance for our allies.
'Instead, we send a message to adversaries and allies alike that British sovereignty is indeed negotiable. It is capitulation and we must reject it.'
Pointing out the Tories in office had opened negotiations to cede sovereignty, Liberal Democrat Lord Purvis of Tweed said: 'The treaty is a consequence of now completing the previous Conservative government's policy.'
Foreign minister Lord Collins of Highbury said the agreement secured the future of the military base and had the support of key allies.
He told the chamber: 'This deal will protect the safety and security of the British people for generations, making sure that the United Kingdom retains the unique, important capabilities we need to deal with a range of threats in the months and years ahead.'
Peers rejected by 205 votes to 185, majority 20, a Tory attempt to get the House to oppose the treaty's ratification, which would have forced the Government to make a statement on why the deal should still be approved.