By: Sandhya Sharma
As Britain decided to relinquish its sovereignty over the Chagos Islands and transfer control to Mauritius, one might question whether the former ‘Great’ Britain should also grant Argentina “full sovereignty” over the Falkland Islands.
In a strategic and historically unprecedented decision, Britain transferred its imperial control over sixty islands in the Chagos Archipelago to Mauritius while keeping the strategically important UK-US military base at Diego Garcia. The arrangement represents a financial gain for Mauritius and a strategic advantage for the US and UK in controlling the Diego Garcia military base.
Unlike Mauritius, Argentina fought a war with Britain in 1982 over the Falkland Islands and vowed to regain full sovereignty over British-controlled Islands.
Sources in Mauritian and UK establishments maintain that the history of the two locations is quite distinct. One source emphasized, “The UK has never contested Chagos Island; it is a former colony that rightfully belongs to Mauritius.”
Conversely, Britain has argued, “Through this agreement, the UK has preserved the military base, having faced pressure from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to relinquish sovereignty over the entire island.”
The source pointed out towards Falklands Islands and said the “UK has maintained that it is their legitimate sovereign territory and fought with Argentina in the 1980s to counter their aggression.”
Admiral Karambir Singh, the 24th Chief of the Naval Staff (CNS) of the Indian Navy, highlights the intricate aspects of the region’s history in an exclusive conversation.
He elucidates that, first, the earliest colony on these islands was established by France (that’s how they got the Spanish name Malvinas, which is a translation of the name that the French gave the islands—Îles Malouines—derived from the French port of Saint-Malo). So, historically, France had the first claim.
Second, he notes the issue of continuous possession. In this instance, the British hold an advantage, as they have occupied the islands for the longest period despite periodic changes in sovereignty among Argentines, Spaniards, and Americans.
Third, after the war of 1982, Argentina no longer holds control of these islands.
“This is what we must support. Because any other argument which leads to the British handing over the islands back to the Argentines can open the floodgates of claims and counterclaims,“ Admiral Singh warns the diplomatic community.
Fourth is the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) resolution that calls on both parties to resolve the issue. It must be noted that the resolution is non-binding and was adopted on December 16, 1965, before the war.
It acknowledged the sovereignty dispute between the United Kingdom and Argentina regarding the Falkland Islands—the resolution called on both parties to seek a peaceful solution. As per the resolution, there can be no third-party mediation.
“If we read a current UN document on Special Committee on Decolonization Adopts Resolution Requesting Negotiations Resume to Resolve Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Question, we find that the dispute is alive with several countries voicing their opinion. Many countries, mostly South America, including China, have supported Argentina’s claims. Africans have remained non-aligned. India has not made any statement,” Admiral Singh points out.
“Our approach should be to let both parties decide on their own. Lastly, the islanders themselves overwhelmingly support joining the UK. This principle of self-determination by people of disputed territories is fraught with risk (especially so in our context),” Admiral Singh concludes.
“Mauritius was a former colony. So, decolonization was long overdue. There was strong international opinion in Mauritius’ favor. The inhabitants had been deported by forces; there was a human rights issue; there were no British subjects residing on the islands…” According to Admiral Singh, all this goes in favor of Mauritius but not Argentina.
Amo Kalar, a former UK diplomat now working for EY as an Advisor on International Affairs, points out that the UK will never cede the Falkland Islands.
Explaining the entire issue in detail, Kalar says – “The Chagos and Falklands Islands feel like qualitatively different issues. The former because international pressure led by African and Asian nations had peaked, despite five years having passed since the UN and ICJ opinion interventions. But more importantly, there were many Chagossians who had been displaced for far too long.”
Experts believe that relinquishing the Falkland Islands is unlikely due to the lasting impact of the Falklands War, which many current residents either personally experienced or have heard extensively about. Moreover, a sizable UK population still lives in the Falklands. The Chagos issue had to be immediately fixed for a range of migration, regional security, and even conservation-led reasons.
“In terms of regional security, the UK retains Diego Garcia, which is important. They will, I’m sure, push Mauritius around different, for example, conservation objectives. The latter, the Falklands Islands, had a war that is still well remembered by many in the UK who fought over them.” Kalar, however, believes and is hopeful that the sovereignty debate appears to have dissipated, at least for now, given significant improvements in the UK-Argentina relationship.
Chagos Vs Falkland Debate
The Falkland Islands are considered as British Overseas territory, though Buenos Aires has long claimed sovereignty over Malvina (or the Falkland) Island.
The UK has been continuously pressured by various parties, including the International Court of Justice, to hand over the Chagos Islands to Mauritius. In 2019, the court deemed the British administration of Chagos unlawful.
Since the early 1970s, the US-UK military base in Diego Garcia has been a crucial factor in the US’s strategic presence in the Indian Ocean and Gulf region. This has contributed significantly to the UK’s long-standing reluctance to transfer sovereignty of the Archipelago to Mauritius.
New Delhi, with the United States, has played a critical role in the backdrop. Sources point out how India played a “quiet but important role” in the background. “It firmly backed the principled Mauritian position, supporting its stance on the need to do away with the last vestiges of colonization. At the same time, it consistently encouraged both sides to negotiate with an open mind to achieve mutually beneficial outcomes.”
“It is believed that the outcome is a win for all sides involved and will reinforce long-term security in the Indian Ocean region,” sources added.
Dr. Kate O’Shaughnessy, Research Director at the Perth USAsia Centre and a former Australian diplomat who served as Australia’s High Commissioner to Mauritius and Seychelles, wrote in the Interpreter, “Regionally, the African Union and India have come out strongly in favor of the deal. Still, it’s worth remaining attuned to the possibility that over time, some countries (especially China) may paint the deal as just another example of Western countries gaming the system to suit themselves.”
In contrast, the issue of the Falkland Islands has never been brought before the ICJ, even though the UK proposed taking the case to the Court in 1947, 1948, and 1955, with Argentina declining each offer.
In 1995, Argentina withdrew a joint declaration signed with the UK for the joint exploration of hydrocarbons in the Falkland Islands. The islands have several oil deposits, including those in the North Falkland Basins.
Falkland History
The Falklands War was a ten-week battle between Argentina and the United Kingdom in 1982. The Conservative Party, led by Margaret Thatcher, achieved a decisive victory over belligerent Argentina. However, the cost of defending those islands was substantial for the British people.
The British claim to sovereignty over the Falkland Islands is based on the argument that with the “exception of two months of illegal occupation in 1982”, Britain “continuously, peacefully and effectively inhabited and administered” the Islands since 1833. The United Kingdom further supports its position by invoking the principle of self-determination, which asserts that the inhabitants of regions like the Falklands possess the right to determine their future and status.
In contrast, the Argentinian government’s claim is based on Spain’s possessory title and the concept of territorial continuity. However, Britain argues that possessory title is not accepted as a general principle of international law.
If we go back to recorded history, in 1764, French colonists established the settlement of Port Louis on East Falkland. The following year, 1765, a British expedition reached West Falkland and took formal possession of it and all neighboring islands in the name of the British crown.
A British settlement was established on West Falkland in 1766. The same year, the French colony was sold to the Spanish, who named it Puerto de la Soledad. In 1774, the British settlement was withdrawn, but British sovereignty was not abandoned. In 1816, Argentina declared its independence from Spain and asserted its authority over the Falklands as the successor state to Spain.
The British Army and the Royal Navy have a deployment of approximately 1,500 military personnel stationed on the Falkland Islands at any time. In addition, the UK armed forces consistently maintain a presence in South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, located near the Falklands.
The Chagos Islands, including Diego Garcia, were governed as part of Mauritius or as a dependency of Mauritius until 1968, the same year that Britain granted Mauritius independence.
The news of handing over Chagos Island has taken the lid off a tinderbox of sovereignty claims by Spain and Argentina over Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands, respectively.
Nevertheless, a spokesperson for the British Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, dismissed any speculation. He reiterated that the UK government is not considering negotiations over Gibraltar, which Spain claims, or the Falkland Islands, which Argentina claims.
British Foreign Secretary David Lammy insisted that the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands, Gibraltar, and the sovereign base areas was “not up for negotiation.” Lammy said the “situations are not comparable” to the Chagos Islands.
Although the United Kingdom is firmly opposed to drawing comparisons between the sovereignty issues of the Falkland Islands and Chagos Islands and does not wish to jeopardize its claims in other overseas territories, the recent agreement with Mauritius has created a host of complications regarding its relationship with Argentina and Spain. Only time will tell if Britain can wriggle out of the diplomatic pressure that may arise in the future.
- By: Sandhya Sharma
- The author has been covering strategic affairs for over a decade. She has also worked on foreign affairs and defense with NDTV, The Pioneer, Economic Times, and ANI/Reuters.
- Mail EurAsian Times at editor (at) eurasiantimes.com
