Explanation please.

I’m assuming you’ve searched for information on this issue?

I don't think even Starmer could answer your question. He doesn't seem to know what he's doing.

The million dollar question!!!

I believe the EU is poised to move in and claim fishing rights, but whether that is coincidental or even true, I have no idea.
There is undoubtedly a sound reason which will benefit somebody, but who or why has not been revealed.

… why we are giving away the Chagos islands?

Because it was never “ours” to own.

This is all clearly explained in online resources. The Wiki page is a good place to start.

The United Kingdom, at the request of the United States, began expelling the inhabitants of the Chagos Archipelago in 1968, concluding its forced deportations on 27 April 1973 with the expulsion of the remaining Chagossians on the Peros Banhos atoll. The removals were carried out to make way for the establishment of a UK–United States military base on Diego Garcia, following bilateral defence agreements.The inhabitants, known at the time as the Ilois are today known as Chagos Islanders or Chagossians.

The British government separated the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius, creating a new colony in Africa, the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT).

To avoid accountability to the United Nations for its continued colonial rule, the UK falsely claimed that the Chagos had no permanent population.

Chagossians and human rights advocates have said that the Chagossian right of occupation was violated by the British Foreign Office as a result of the 1966 agreement between the British and American governments to provide an unpopulated island for a U.S. military base, and that additional compensation and a right of return be provided.

Read on:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_the_Chagossians#:~:text=The%20United%20Kingdom%2C%20at%20the%20request%20of,today%20known%20as%20Chagos%20Islanders%20or%20Chagossians.

www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/03/britain-to-return-chagos-islands-to-mauritius-ending-years-of-dispute

Because the Chagos islands do not belong to the UK. The sun set on the British Empire a long time ago but some still think we have a right to own someone else’s land.

mum2three

I don't think even Starmer could answer your question. He doesn't seem to know what he's doing.

He certainly knows what he’s doing in respect of the Iran conflict. His speech this morning was very clear.

I for one am very glad that the UK has a sensible, level headed leader at this worrying time.

Oh and, btw , OP. Because the Islands are not rightfully ours. HTH.

Agree absolutely Basgetti. When the USA is led by someone who behaves like a child, I am relieved to have a grown up in Downing Street.
And yes, if course, these islands are not ours, and never were.

Fallingstar

Because the Chagos islands do not belong to the UK. The sun set on the British Empire a long time ago but some still think we have a right to own someone else’s land.

👍👏

mum2three

I don't think even Starmer could answer your question. He doesn't seem to know what he's doing.

Baloney!

He’s proving his worth in everything currently, pitted against a dangerous, yet stupid, warmonger.

The answer to the OP’s question is quite simple, we do not “own” these Islands

Mauritius is a poor country which relies on tourists and little else. Our colonial past is not all glorious. Time we gave something back.

Good research posted on this thread. No idea why the OP couldn’t search but instead put something with an inference of government stupidity thus encouraging the usual facile attacks on the difficult task of international diplomacy. So many in this thread are knowledgeable or curious to learn and yet so many are experts on government. They really should take over the country 🥴🙄

Personally, I think the Chagossian people should have been balloted as to what they want.

Marjgran

Good research posted on this thread. No idea why the OP couldn’t search but instead put something with an inference of government stupidity thus encouraging the usual facile attacks on the difficult task of international diplomacy. So many in this thread are knowledgeable or curious to learn and yet so many are experts on government. They really should take over the country 🥴🙄

A lot of quite patronising answers on here. Wikipedia is unverified research, The Guardian hardly unbiased ." Inference of government stupidity,encouraging the usual facile attacks", very defensive it was just a simple question!

The Wikipedia entry is unverified research, is it?

References from High Court Judgements, the International Court of Justice, Constitutional Law, the BIOT treaty, numerous press articles from across the globe and political spectrum. 84 references altogether and five books on the subject, all of which you are are at liberty to read …. and yet you claim the page is unverified.

I linked to the Guardian piece because it gives a clear summary and is not behind a paywall.

You asked for “Explanation please”. What is it that you want?

Graphite Exactly!

You mean why did we steal it in the first place, lied about it's population so we could lay claim to it because America told us too and then annexed it from its original country? Well it's about time we returned it, a bit like we did with the rest of the British empire we stole.
It was never ours, the island has always belonged to Mauritius.

Yes he could answer, as can many people. It's simple, we stole the land and Starmer decided it was, about time we gave it back.

Anyone can write on WIKI. I certainly did when treatment options for my rare cancer were misrepresented.
The Guardian is no better than the Mail. Just a place for certain people to swallow their nonsense whole.
The Islanders wanted to stay with the UK but Starmer has his eye firmly on a place on the EU gravy train along with his greedy cabinet members and Milligan’s the nutcase who wants to go back to the dark ages.

Some seem to have attend Harry Windsors lectures and are unaware that the British Empire no longer exists and is now the Commonwealth!

That replaced Miliband and substituted Mulligan.

petra

I’m assuming you’ve searched for information on this issue?

She’s asking for opinions rather than what Google tells her

Dreadwitch

Yes he could answer, as can many people. It's simple, we stole the land and Starmer decided it was, about time we gave it back.

Starmer had no choice in the matter.

In On 25 February 2019, the judges of the International Court of Justice by thirteen votes to one stated that the United Kingdom is under an obligation to bring to an end its administration of the Chagos Archipelago as rapidly as possible.

Years before Starmer became PM

Dreadwitch I don't believe Starmer 'decided' to give it back. There was a ruling from the International Court of Justice in the Hague decided the archipeligo should be returned to Mauritius on 25/03/2019. In 2021, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) confirmed this ruling, stating the UK has no sovereignty over the islands.
However, neither of these bodies can enforce the ruling. The UN can but the 5 founding bodies, of which the UK is one, can veto the decision.

betterworldcampaign.org/un-explained/understanding-international-court-of-justice#:~:text=Does%20the%20ICJ%20enforce%20its,the%20power%20to%20veto%20enforcement - ICJ/ITOLS

I still believe the Chagossian people should be asked what they want.