The government’s iron determination to surrender the Chagos Islands to Mauritius is puzzling. Why are ministers so keen to hand over territory that has been British since 1814, which is home to a critical UK-US military base, to a country thousands of miles away? And why does Britain need to pay Mauritius a reported £9 billion for the privilege of giving up its own territory?
Initially, the government stuck to making vague noises about international law. The deal with Mauritius was necessary, parliament and the public were told, because the International Court of Justice (ICJ) had said that the UK had to hand over the islands, never mind that the ICJ opinion in question was an advisory one which is not legally binding on Britain or on anyone else.
Now, under immense public pressure to justify a deal that seems to combine national humiliation with very significant financial costs, the government has advanced a new set of rationales.
Get Britain's best politics newsletters
Register to get The Spectator's insight and opinion straight to your inbox. You can then read two free articles each week.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in