Trump Critiques UK’s Chagos Islands Deal After Initial Support

The British government is standing by its decision to transfer sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, despite criticism from U.S. President Donald Trump. Trump described the agreement as “an act of stupidity” in a social media post, questioning the rationale behind the move and highlighting the strategic significance of the islands, particularly Diego Garcia, which hosts a crucial American military base.

In a statement made on October 31, 2023, Trump expressed his concerns about the implications of the agreement, stating that relinquishing Diego Garcia could be perceived as a sign of weakness by nations such as China and Russia. He remarked, “Shockingly, our ‘brilliant’ NATO Ally, the United Kingdom, is currently planning to give away the Island of Diego Garcia, the site of a vital U.S. Military Base, to Mauritius, and to do so FOR NO REASON WHATSOEVER.”

The agreement, which was formalized in May, allows Mauritius to regain sovereignty over the Chagos Islands while the United Kingdom retains a long-term lease on Diego Garcia for at least 99 years. At the time, the U.S. government welcomed the arrangement, asserting that it would ensure the effective operation of the joint U.S.-U.K. military facility located on the island. The U.K. Cabinet Minister Darren Jones affirmed on Tuesday that the deal would “secure that military base for the next 100 years.”

Opposition parties in the United Kingdom have criticized the deal, arguing that it poses a risk to national security and could potentially enhance China’s influence in the region. The Diego Garcia base is home to approximately 2,500 military personnel, predominantly from the United States, and is regarded as an essential platform for security operations in the Middle East, South Asia, and East Africa.

While the British government maintains that the decision is in line with international law and reflects its commitment to decolonization, the backlash from Trump and British opposition parties highlights the tensions surrounding the future of this strategically important location. The outcome of this agreement will likely continue to be a topic of debate, especially given the shifting dynamics of global politics and security.