In October, the UK government revealed that it had reached a final agreement to cede sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, sparking debate in both the UK and the US.

Nevertheless, with a new government in Mauritius appearing to oppose the agreement and the incoming Trump administration in the US firmly against the proposal, it seems probable that the UK government may need to reevaluate its position.

The deal has prompted concerns on both sides of the Atlantic since the Chagos Islands, a remote archipelago in the Indian Ocean claimed by Mauritius for years, possess considerable strategic importance. They are home to a joint US-UK military base at Diego Garcia, essential for countering Chinese influence in the area.

According to the deal announced in early October, the UK consented to relinquish complete sovereignty of the islands to Mauritius, including Diego Garcia, and committed to providing Mauritius with a financial support package. However, the agreement stipulated that the UK would be allowed to continue operating its military base at Diego Garcia for an initial 99-year period.

New Mauritian government expresses skepticism

After elections in Mauritius in November that led to a change in government, newly elected Prime Minister Navinchandra Ramgoolam has expressed doubts regarding the transfer, stating he needs “more time to review the details with a panel of legal advisors.”

While Ramgoolam has not divulged his reasons, he suggested that finalizing such a major agreement so close to an election, which his predecessor was likely to lose, was inappropriate. During his campaign, he accused his predecessor of “high treason” for agreeing to a “sell-out” deal that allowed Britain to maintain control of the Diego Garcia base for another century.

However, a British foreign policy expert specializing in African issues, who prefers to remain anonymous due to past roles in the UK government, suspects that Mauritius may be rethinking the deal to avoid becoming embroiled in geopolitical conflicts.

“The deal was rushed without appropriate consultation with the Chagossians, who evidently prefer not to have their islands governed by Mauritius. Now faced with the actual costs and responsibilities of managing the Chagos Islands, the Mauritian government seems hesitant to get caught up in US-Chinese tensions,” they elaborated.

UK’s rationale for the deal is scrutinized

Supporters of the agreement viewed it as a means to conclude the remnants of British colonialism in Africa, with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer stating it would “address historical injustices and demonstrate a commitment from both parties to support the welfare of Chagossians.”

The British government also saw the move as a way to “reset” its relationships with African nations and boost broader African support for British foreign policy initiatives, such as assisting Ukraine in its conflict with Russia.

Nonetheless, many analysts question whether the Chagos Islands deal would fulfill this aim. Alex Vines, who heads the Africa program at the Chatham House think tank in London, argues that “the Chagos Islands do not significantly affect the UK’s bilateral relations beyond the western Indian Ocean, particularly with Mauritius.”

The decision has also incited anger in some circles, with Edward Howell, a geopolitics lecturer at the University of Oxford, telling African Business that “the choice to hand over the Chagos Islands to Mauritius is beneath contempt and represents a disaster for the UK’s foreign policy.”

The former UK government source argues that the Chagos Islands agreement exemplifies a flawed approach by the new UK government in handling African matters.

“From an African viewpoint, there is little interest in culturally insensitive identity politics or naive gestures that diminish the UK’s effectiveness or influence as a cornerstone of security and liberal democracy,” they assert to African Business.

“The emerging educated youth and growing middle class in Africa seek relationships based on mutual respect, investment, and opportunities—not empty apologies stemming from post-colonial guilt or indicators of geopolitical fragility.”

The source notes that, from a British perspective, “reversing the Chagos Islands decision would be a favorable outcome.”

Incoming Trump administration displays opposition

Meanwhile, the incoming US administration under President Donald Trump, anticipated to adopt a strongly anti-China stance, is against the deal.

Critics fear that these strategically vital islands could become a platform for Chinese influence in the Indian Ocean after the expiration of the lease for the US-UK military base, particularly in light of Mauritius’ amicable relations with China.

Nigel Farage, a British MP closely linked with the Trump administration, recently informed the House of Commons that the Chagos Islands deal would likely meet “outright hostility” from the incoming president. Marco Rubio, Trump’s selection for Secretary of State, has also asserted that the deal undermines US security.

The former UK government source is highly critical.

“The incoming US Republican administration views this as a strategic blunder from a UK ally that has already faltered in Iraq and Afghanistan, overstepping its boundaries and recklessly dismantling some of the world’s most capable armed forces amid escalating global risks.”