Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Chagossians Fight for a Home in Paradise
The British Indian Ocean Territory, as it is officially known, is the ancestral home of the Chagossians, the 2,000 people and their descendents that Britain removed forcibly from the islands in the Seventies to make way for a US air and naval base on the main island, Diego Garcia. Despite Britain repeatedly overruling court judgments in their favour, the exiled Chagossians have continued their struggle. This summer their case will be heard at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. By then, however — if David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, gets his way — the Chagos will have been designated a marine protected area (MPA), where activities such as fishing and construction are banned, denying them any legal means to sustain their lives.
Diego Garcia (Chagos Archipelago) British Indian Ocean Territory. “To say that a small group of Chagossians could have a greater impact than the base is just crazy,” Dr Spalding said. (photo by flickr user Drew Avery)
It is, depending on your view, a sinister trick to prevent the Chagossians
returning; an easy piece of environmental legacy building by a Government
about to lose power; or an act of arrogant imperialism to rob the
territory’s true owners of any say in its future.
Perhaps the most compelling case against the plan, however, is made by the swelling cadre of environmentalists opposing the project in the belief that — far from protecting this pristine paradise — it could hasten its destruction. “Even if I didn’t care about human rights, I would say this is a terrible mistake,” said Dr Mark Spalding, one of the world’s foremost experts on reef conservation.
“The world of conservation is littered with failures where the people involved were not consulted. If the Chagossians win the right to return, why should they want to co-operate with the conservation groups running roughshod over them?”
The Government’s proposal acknowledges that the entire plan may have to be scrapped if the Chagossians are allowed to return. “That would make it the shortest-lived protection area in the world,” Dr Spalding said. “So you have to ask: what’s the rush to get this done before [the Strasbourg ruling and] a general election?”
Mr Miliband will begin to examine the cases for and against the reserve next week, after public consultations ended yesterday. A decision is expected within weeks, but the Foreign Secretary already sounds convinced. “This is a remarkable opportunity for the UK to create one of the world’s largest marine protected areas, and double the global coverage of the world’s oceans benefiting from full protection,” he wrote.
Many of the world’s leading conservation groups have thrown their weight behind the proposal, which emphasises the advantage of the islands being “uninhabited”. They are not: the original islanders were removed from Diego Garcia to make way for a military base that houses 1,500 US service personnel, 1,700 civilian contractors and 50 British sailors. The island, which constitutes 90 per cent of the landmass of the Chagos, is, in effect, to be exempt from the protection order.
Peter Sand, a British environmental lawyer who has investigated the US base’s impact, has documented four jet fuel spills totalling 1.3 million gallons since it was built and has lobbied unsuccessfully for information on radiation leakage from nuclear-powered vessels there. “To say that a small group of Chagossians could have a greater impact than the base is just crazy,” Dr Spalding said.
The plan has also sparked a diplomatic row with Mauritius and the Seychelles, from whom the Chagos Islands were taken and to whom Britain has agreed to cede them when they are no longer needed by the US military. Britain faces further embarrassment over allegations that Diego Garcia was used to moor US prison ships where “ghost” prisoners were tortured.
The Prime Minister of Mauritius said last week that he was “appalled” by the decision to press ahead with plans for the reserve, “It is unacceptable that the British claim to protect marine fauna and flora when they insist on denying Chagos-born Mauritians the right to return to their islands all the while,” Navin Chandra Ramgoolam said at the inauguration of a building for Chagossian refugees in the Mauritian capital. “How can you say you will protect coral and fish when you continue to violate the rights of Chagos’s former inhabitants?”
Britain originally offered the US the Aldabra atoll for its base but backed down after uproar from environmentalists. Aldabra, now a World Heritage Site, was uninhabited by humans but home to hundreds of thousands of giant tortoises. “The British had refused to create a base on Aldabra in the Seychelles not to harm its tortoise population,” marvelled Olivier Bancoult, head of the Chagos Refugees Group. “Now they are trying to create a protected area to prevent Chagossians from returning to their native islands.”
Shifting sands
1960s The Chagos archipelago, originally part of Mauritius, is secretly leased to Britain. Together with the Aldabra archipelago, taken from the Seychelles, they become the British Indian Ocean Territory
1970 Britain and the US agree to set up a military base on Diego Garcia, and Britain begins deporting the 2,000 Chagossians to Seychelles and Mauritius
1983 £1m compensation is paid to the refugees on Mauritius
2000 British High Court rules in favour of Chagossians demanding the right to return
2004 Government issues a royal prerogative striking down the court’s decision
2006 The Court of Appeal dismisses the Government’s appeal, saying its methods are unlawful and “an abuse of power”; 102 Chagossians are permitted to visit Diego Garcia for a day to tend relatives’ graves
2008 Law lords vote 3-2 in favour of Government, overruling High Court
2009 Foreign Office launches public consultation on the creation of a protected marine area
2010 The European Court of Human Rights is set to hear the Chagossians’ petition to return this summer
Source: Times database



11 Comments so far
Show AllHow does a lease become a territory?
When it's a f**&%$g brit signing the lease. They can be more despicable than the yanks.
I don't buy the British Government’s sudden concern for "marine conservation". This is clearly "a sinister trick to prevent the Chagossians returning" AND "an act of arrogant imperialism to rob the territory’s true owners of any say in its future". It's also a likely case of doing the dirty work for one's imperial master.
For some excellent journalistic account, you can read an extract from "Web of Deceit: Britain’s Real Role in the World" by Mark Curtis here:
The depopulation of the Chagos Islands, 1965-73
http://markcurtis.wordpress.com/2007/02/12/the-depopulation-of-the-chagos-islands-1965-73/
(or)
http://tinyurl.com/britain-chagos-depopulation
There's also this great, must-watch video -
Stealing a Nation, a Special Report by John Pilger
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-3667764379758632511&hl=en
(or)
http://tinyurl.com/stealing-a-nation
Aircraft refuelling bases are not generally considered to be eco-friendly, and you have to wonder how keen they are at marine conservation when they have spilled 1.3 million gallons of jet fuel since the facility was built. And that is apart from radiation leaks from nuclear powered vessels.
"“This is a remarkable opportunity for the UK to create one of the world’s largest marine protected areas, and double the global coverage of the world’s oceans benefiting from full protection,” he (Mr Miliband) wrote."
Wrote it did he? I presume that is because even he wouldn't be able to stand up and tell such a lie.
Oh well, they'll probably be underwater soon. Then Britain might give them back.
Haha, good point about Miliband "writing" it. I'm not sure what to make of this story, even though it does mention the fact that the Chagossians were forcibly removed. But the timeline calls it "deported". The article says "Miliband will begin to examine the cases for and against the reserve". But it's damned clear that the British government has no intention of letting the islanders return - as seen by their blatant flouting of their own court orders, and invoking the "royal prerogative striking down the court’s decision". It's also clear where the establishment stands - as shown by the "Law lords vote 3-2 in favour of Government, overruling High Court". So, yeah, Miliband is going to "begin to examine the cases" and we are supposed to wait for the outcome. We'll see.
This all to show that for all that pontificating on the World Stage about the need to rein in "Rogue Nations" , the need to address "Global Warming" and to regulate banks and promote growth with the IMF , Great Britain remains an Imperialist State still running rough shod over the worlds poor.
Discover oil in those waters as they suspect there is off the Falklands and the urgency to protect this "pristine area" will suddenly become less important.
I guess the Military base on Diego Garcia will be needed to patrol the waters to ensure they remain "Pristine">
The Chago Islanders lived there for some thousands of years and they remained PRISTINE.
If they truly want to preserve the Chagos Archipelago and let the Chagossians back in, let them in along with Planned Parenthood or re-establish legal infanticide, else suffer the consequences. See Jared Diamond's "Collapse" for more info. on successful and unsuccessful (extinct) island societies. (Needless to say, these lessons have larger applications)
Ez -- Your post makes me sad.
I don't condone infanticide.
Your assumption is that the Chagossians will act like Americans and certain third-world countries, stretching past the carrying capacity of a ecology. For all we know the Chagossians are all environmentalists who understand the limits to growth, after all they survived for several thousand years on Diego Garcia without affecting adversely the environment.
Gary
“Freedom is the greatest fruit of self-sufficiency”
-- Epicurus
Really it's too late, they have been "contaminated" already so it really makes no difference whether they return or not. They won't have any sovereignty. Who did the british "lease" the islands from in the first place? The french? "Formerly a French colony it was ceded to Britain in 1814"
See not one person on here made the point that neither the french nor the british ever "owned" it, unless one thinks taking things that are not yours is o.k. It seems it's "normal" for most europeans, it's part of their world view that things as they exist now just need "tweaking," not changing. The "high court"..oh my god!
That's the irony of living on this planet where the european has instilled their world views, how can you keep those black and brown folk down on the farm once they've seen paris? And paris has a lot of shinny lights and great toys all in a row, most in order and under "control"...
As an aside, but related, what is the "common dream" between europeans and africans? that we can live together or that one idea/world view must dominate?