MalcSB
Well-Known Member
Why did the government sign the Chagos deal now?
A deal to hand Mauritius the Chagos Islands and lease back a key military base has been months in the making.
www.bbc.co.uk
Kier stands up for the UK. Chagos. (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter MalcSB
- Start date
www.bbc.co.uk
SIR ERNIE
Well-Known Member
Starmer’s Chagos surrender is a national disgrace
This deal is an act of political and strategic vandalism that will live on in memories long after this wretched Government has passed
www.telegraph.co.uk
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
You’re missing the Tories losing an election and it driving 60% of the country insane.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
It’s hardly a huge issue but the UN can’t order a nation to do anything
Grendel
Well-Known Member
I don’t see Tories losing an election has meant MPs within Starmers party and even the cabinet objected to the deal
MalcSB
Well-Known Member
That the UN does not have jurisdiction to order the UK to do anything relating to a country which was part of the commonwealth. Starmer et al have just rolled over.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Why did we start negotiations in 22 then?
mmttww
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I get that, but when the wheels were in motion for this to happen since 2022 and the US will cover running costs for the base, I'm trying to get my head around how this is being held against Starmer in the way that it is. Is there a going rate for leasing an island for military use that we've decided to pay in excess of? Don't get it.
MalcSB
Well-Known Member
On what basis are they due any payment for land they have never owned? It’s effectively fear of blackmail leading to payment of a significant annual ransom. Who knows how long those in government in 2022 might have dragged things out with no intention of making such payments.
If the US pay the running costs, how long before they take the view that whoever pays the piper calls the tune? Or decides to recover costs through, say, tariffs? Do you truly trust them?
Starmer showing his fundamental weakness.
Last edited:
MalcSB
Well-Known Member
How can Labour winning an election leave the majority of the country insane?
Or do they not have the mandate they like to suggest they have?
Last edited:
MalcSB
Well-Known Member
It is a relatively large issue in this context
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
No issue with the return of the islands but surely we could have negotiated that we retain the area of the military base or at least only pay a peppercorn rent.
Comes across as very weak.
Comes across as very weak.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Are you sure about that?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
The UK leases land at huge costs all around the world and mainly in former colonies for military bases. The Chagos was an unusual case because we basically annexed it like a dictatorship and then because of the legal process we actually know what this is costing unlike other leases which aren’t disclosed due to national security. For all we know this might be the going rate for leasing land for military bases around the world.
Interestingly as one Labour MP pointed out that aside from Russia, China and Iran the only people who oppose the deal are the Tories and Reform. Seems to me that Labour are on the right side of history on this. An injustice has been reversed and we’ve maintained a crucial military presence in an important part of the world for the security of our country and former colonies. That’s strength not weakness, diplomacy over dictatorship. The right people don’t like it either because they’re dictators or chances try to make a mountain out of a molehill.
mmttww
Well-Known Member
Don't know. It's a shaky argument to say it's our land in the first place with it being something we probably just took by force and forced people to leave etc. but I don't know enough to have an informed opinion on that bit of the fine print.
If people's issue is how much we're paying and there's precedent(s) that show we're paying more than we should, fair enough. Doesn't seem like that's the issue people are making, though.
Badenoch and co. are saying vague things about Mauritian ties to China which seems to ignore that we're doing this with the US and there's a bunch of detail in the deal that covers security concerns, at least as far as I can see.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Half the insane people voted Labour.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Labour MPs oppose it
MalcSB
Well-Known Member
Do they fit in to the dictators or chancers categories?
MalcSB
Well-Known Member
If they havent got mental capacity, should their votes be disallowed?
It would be interesting to see how big the "black hole" has increased to already.
MalcSB
Well-Known Member
Thank goodness we have an international security consultant among the forum membership.
mmttww
Well-Known Member
or just someone who read some articles about it before having an opinion instead of getting frothy based on Badenoch or Farage saying things. If you've got details of the deal that support their positions or yours, feel free to share them.
MalcSB
Well-Known Member
Im well aware the sun never set on the Empire, which included America at one point.
I think the key term in your post is how much land we GAVE back, not how much land we needed, gave back and then leased back for £3.5bn - at whoever's expense. Pretty well painted in to a corner post two world wars when much of the empire had been occupied by different sets of imperialistic countries.
MalcSB
Well-Known Member
Last edited: