Colonialist past hangs over U.K. return of Chagos Islands to Mauritius

Prof. Syed Munir Khasru

Nikkei Asia
September 09, 2024

Link: https://asia.nikkei.com/Opinion/Colonialist-past-hangs-over-U.K.-return-of-Chagos-Islands-to-Mauritius

___________________

The U.K.’s agreement with Mauritius to cede sovereignty of the Chagos Islands in the Indian Ocean serves as a prime example of the ongoing struggle to address colonial legacies. This development, while significant, also highlights the complexities and compromises needed to resolve such long-standing disputes.

Often overlooked and seldom spoken of, a lingering shadow of colonialism persists in the form of non-self-governing territories (NSGTs). These remnants of imperial ambitions present a complex legal and ethical quandary that challenges our understanding of sovereignty, human rights and international law. Delving into this contentious issue, it becomes clear that the debate surrounding NSGTs is far from settled, meriting attention and action from the global community.

Despite the United Nations’ efforts to promote decolonization through initiatives like Resolution 1514 (XV) that affirms the rights of NSGTs to self-determination, the reality on the ground often tells a different story. Many NSGTs continue to operate under administrative structures that bear a striking resemblance to colonial-era governance. The legal and practical realities often reflect persistent patterns of control reminiscent of their colonial past. Continuity of these governance structures raises questions about the true extent of progress in achieving self-determination and autonomy for these territories.

The presence of military bases in NSGTs creates a stark dichotomy between global strategic interests and local Indigenous rights. The case of Diego Garcia, part of the Chagos Islands, exemplifies this tension. Despite the agreement to return the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, Diego Garcia will remain under British control due to its strategic importance as a joint U.K.-U.S. military base.

Take, for instance, the case of Guam, an unincorporated territory of the U.S. The island hosts significant U.S. military assets, including Andersen Air Force Base and Naval Base Guam. While these installations serve strategic purposes, they also raise questions about the autonomy of the local Chamorro people and their ability to determine their own future. They offer a constant reminder of the unresolved tensions between military necessity and the fundamental principles of self-governance and human rights.

One of the most troubling aspects is the disconnect between international legal frameworks and the lived experiences of people in these territories. The U.N. Charter and various human rights conventions ostensibly protect the rights of all peoples to self-determination and sovereignty. However, the reality often falls short of these ideals for the NSGT.

The Chagos Islands provide the stark example of the forced displacement of Indigenous Chagossians by the British government in the 1960s and 1970s to make way for a U.S. military base. While the agreement to return the islands to Mauritius is a step toward addressing this historical injustice, the exclusion of Diego Garcia and the lack of direct involvement of Chagossians in the negotiations highlight the ongoing challenges in fully rectifying past wrongs.

This enduring military footprint often results in a blurring of lines between strategic necessity and de facto colonial control, raising serious questions about the true intentions and long-term implications of such arrangements. Despite geographical distance, these overseeing nations maintain a tight grip on key aspects of governance, economic policy and security matters. The subtle nature of this influence can make it challenging to address, as it operates within seemingly legitimate administrative frameworks while preserving many of the fundamental imbalances that are characteristic of colonial relationships.

Military bases in NSGTs significantly impact global geopolitics. While presented as mutually beneficial, these arrangements often favor the administering states due to power imbalances. This jeopardizes true consent and negotiation equality, potentially compromising the host territories’ sovereignty and interests in favor of broader geopolitical influence. Guantanamo Bay stands as perhaps the most controversial example of a military base in an NSGT. America’s continued presence there, despite Cuba’s objections, exemplifies how historical agreements can perpetuate colonial-like arrangements long after the formal end of colonialism.

Djibouti’s situation encapsulates the complex interplay between national sovereignty and international military presence in the modern world. As a sovereign nation, Djibouti hosts bases from multiple countries, including the U.S., France, China, Japan and Italy, through bilateral agreements that ostensibly respect its autonomy. However, this arrangement has profound implications on the nature of independence in a globalized context. While these partnerships bring economic benefits and elevate Djibouti’s geopolitical significance, they also introduce challenges to its political sovereignty.

The concentration of power within President Ismail Omar Guelleh’s inner circle, coupled with the extensive foreign military presence, has led to concerns about the East African nation’s ability to maintain true autonomy and effectively uphold its international obligations. This delicate balancing act between leveraging strategic partnerships and preserving national interests illustrates the blurred lines between mutually beneficial relationships and potentially compromised sovereignty.

The complexity of the situation calls for a nuanced approach that considers historical context, legal frameworks and aspirations of local populations. It is crucial to engage in an open and honest dialogue about the legacy of colonialism and its modern manifestations. This debate must involve not only policymakers and legal experts but also, crucially, the voices of those living in NSGTs. Only through such inclusive discourse can the legal conundrums and ethical dilemmas posed by these territories be addressed.

Confronting the realities of these territories and working toward genuine self-determination for the inhabitants must remain a priority. The debate is far from over, but by raising these difficult questions, we take an important step towards addressing the lingering shadows of colonialism in the modern era.