Forget Greenland — securing Diego Garcia should come first

The focus and the fuss have been on Greenland. US President Donald Trump now says a framework is in place for a deal that suits US interests to control this piece of strategic territory.

Meanwhile, Trump is paying attention to a bigger disaster headed America’s way in the Indian Ocean – in a place even less known to Americans than is Greenland.

The British government is rushing through a treaty to transfer sovereignty, spelled ownership, over the Chagos archipelago to Mauritius, a small island nation on the western edge of the Indian Ocean.

Why does it matter? America’s only military base in the Indian Ocean sits on the island of Diego Garcia in the Chagos archipelago. The US military operates from Diego Garcia under a 1966 agreement with the United Kingdom.

Diego Garcia is indispensable for US naval and air operations in the Indian Ocean region and projecting power into the Middle East, Africa and into the Asian mainland. It also serves as a logistics base, supports space operations and is a “connector” for US movements from Europe to the Pacific.

Put simply, imagine the US military trying to operate in the Asia-Pacific region without it’s bases on Hawaii. It’s almost impossible; there is no decent alternative.

Such is Diego Garcia’s role in its part of the world and the US military’s entire global positioning scheme.

A dubious lease

His Majesty’s government is telling Washington not to worry. London, it says, will lease back Diego Garcia from Mauritius under a 99-year agreement that allows the Americans to keep using the base.

The British insist this ensures base access for “generations.” It does not. Trump’s skepticism about leases is well-known – and in this case, well founded.

As part of the deal, the UK will pay Mauritius between US$3.4 billion to $35 billion over 99 years. The Keir Starmer government cites the lower figure; the Conservative opposition cites the higher. The payments are heavily front-loaded.

Miss just one payment, however, and Mauritius can terminate the deal – and boot the Americans. One can easily imagine a future British government unwilling to spend money on Mauritius, or simply disinclined toward the United States.

There are other problems. Mauritius is a signatory to the Treaty of Pelindaba, signed by 51 African nations, which prohibits nuclear weapons on their territories.

US forces on Diego Garcia do sometimes have nuclear weapons. So once the deal is signed, this will become a point of contention. And expect debilitating “lawfare”, likely with Chinese encouragement, claiming the Americans are violating Mauritius’ sovereignty and law.

It is not hard to imagine a future US administration giving in to pressure and declaring its presence on Diego Garcia “untenable.” It gets worse. China is already deeply embedded in Mauritius and with its government.

Expect, one day, a Chinese company to get approval to build a “tourist resort” or “fishing port” on one of the other islands in the Chagos archipelago. With surveillance systems in place – and possibly a handful of “containerized missiles” hidden in shipping containers, Diego Garcia would face huge strategic risk.

Why is the UK doing this?

Britain claims it is simply getting ahead of potential legal challenges to its ownership of the Chagos Islands, citing a 2019 International Court of Justice ruling against it. But that ruling was “advisory”, and Britain rejected the court’s jurisdiction on such matters when it joined the ICJ.

The Starmer government also appears to hope the US won’t notice that the original UK-US agreement over Diego Garcia states that Britain will not transfer sovereignty and that the base agreement lasts for at least 50 plus 20 years, through 2036.

But there may be more at play here: Ask a simple question: Who benefits from imperiling Diego Garcia? Answer: China.

China has been steadily increasing its presence in the Indian Ocean region. It’s eyebrow-raising to see the British government ignore widespread public opposition and security concerns. So, too, was its approval of a huge new Chinese Embassy in London.

And the Starmer government talks of a new “Golden Era” with Beijing and of deepening economic ties. Starmer himself is on his way to Beijing.

Could the UK government be deliberately undercutting America’s strategic position? Taken together with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and French Prime Minister Emmanuel Macron’s similar cozying up to China and the question is not unreasonable.

It is also worth noting that the lawyer representing Mauritius in its potentially lucrative multibillion-dollar deal with Britain is an old friend of Starmer and has taken Mauritian citizenship. Draw your own conclusions.

What of the Chagossians?

The original inhabitants of the Chagos Islands, who were removed when Diego Garcia was constructed, are receiving short shrift from His Majesty’s Government.

Most oppose being made “Mauritian”, having no real ties with a country 1,300 miles away, and a seeming majority wish to remain British subjects.

Let them vote on the matter. Starmer seems keen to prevent it. As with Hong Kong, giving local populations a say isn’t always part of the British principles he talks about.

But all this isn’t just British officialdom’s naivete or bullheadedness. Rather, it has the makings of a deliberate betrayal. Trump is right when he calls the deal “great stupidity.”

Starmer has reportedly “paused” the treaty’s progress through parliament, but it will almost certainly resurface. Trump will do well to put a stop to it once and for all.

Grant Newsham is a retired US Marine officer and former US diplomat. He’s a fellow at the Center for Security Policy and the Yorktown Institute and is the author of“When China Attacks: A Warning to America.” Follow him on X at @NewshamGrant